Semi-weekly herald., 1913-09-11
Taxes, Assessments
and Tax Commission

uoWH lHe WOIu lnuepeHutnt anu Noush
for everything Democratic if they are
to receive national patronage, come toI
the rescue of every Democratic piece
Of legislation of recent years in the
face of severe criticism of a few short
months ago. They are defending IN
creased taxation for state purposes
or any other purpose so long as fest
cred by Democrats. We are forcibly
reminded of these facts by the dis
cussion now going on among state
papers, especially Denver publica-
tions, regarding the increased assess
ments placed on property under the
full valuation law.
The Herald has kept tab on taxes
and assessments for great many
years and we have held for long
time that the general taxing system
should be revised. For fifteen years
we favored a state tax commission
to equalize assessments. The tax
commission is for the purpose of fair
and equal assessments throughout the
state. The discrepancy in valuations
placed on property by assessors of
the various counties was so notice
able that it became matter of COM
ment by the newspapers of the state.
The new law has not been in force
long enough to ascertain if it will
fill the bill. There is one apparent
defect. The law should empower the
tax commission to visit all counties
where assessments are not up to what
they should be. We do not know if
the commission compares land values
as returned by the assessors along
with valuations placed on other prop
erty. There is only one way for men,
bers of the commission to know if
assessors perform their duties ac-
cording to lay, and that is to per-
sonally visit the counties. In La
Plata county Assessor Chubb started
out to comply with the law and the
abstract recently published indicates
that he did his duty well, based on
former assessments. Under the law,
if former valuations were made on
one-third value, the assessed valua-
ton of the county should be three
times as great as last year, or even
greater, providing there is increased
acreage and general improvements.
This rule should prevail in every
county in the state, providing of
course, former assessments were
made on the one-third valuation
clause. But here is the sticker. 1t
is fact beyond disputing that in La
Plata county Sn years gone by higher
valuations were placed on similar
property than in many of the other
counties. If we remember correctly
this county was one of three in which
the Denver and Rio Grande entered
no protest against payment of taxes.
In other counties, noticeably Delta
and Mesa, the company refused to
pay its taxes on the ground that gen
eral valuations were not high enough
compared to the railroad valuation.
and only recently the Mesa county
commissioners settled with the rail
road on the basis of 95 cents on the
dollar and remitting accumulated in
terest. This proves Herald conten-
tions of the past that La Plata coun-
ty valuations were too high or many
other counties were too low. So far
as local taxes are concerned it does
not matter as tax levy is made ac-
cording to estimated revenue required
the only difference being in the
amount of state tax and the Herald
has protested against this county pay
ing more than its share of state
taxes. Now, how are we to know if
the valuations in this county in the
past were too high-only by person.
al investigation of values throughout
the state by an equalizing body such
as the state tax commission. As
stated above. with competent and
economical administrations only a
certain sum of money is necessary to
conduct county, city and school af-
fairs. With three times the valua-
tlon the levy should be only one-third
as much as last year, but in regard
to state taxes if this county in the
past was paying more than its share
compared with other counties on the
one-third value clause, then it will
pay still higher per centage under
the increase of Is per cent this year
with an additional per cent increase
until the state tax will be doubled.
We quote as follows, taken from the
Democrat organ:
This act provides that the state
tax for 1918 shall not exceed that
levied in 1912, plus Is per cent,
and for each year after 1918
maximum increase of 8 per cent
over the preceding year is per-
mitted. Statutory tax rates for
state institutions and other pur-
poses are limited in the same
manner; namely, for 1918 max