Evening star., 1914-03-13

ueCeSSdlE- Assessor ItlCHdEuS tSStAhOu
before the George committee that
under the full valuation law Of 1888. as
construed by the assessors. very low
and uneven. assessments were made,
here one-tenth, and there one-sixth.
and hardly anywhere over two-thirds.
and that the direction that the val
uation should be not less than two
thirds was intended to produce uni
formity and an actual increase OF as
sessment The question whether Con-
| gress in saying that valuations should
not be less than two-thirds was cor
ruptly conspiring with Washington
4 tax-dodgers to rob the government by
cutting down the local tax revenue, or
| on the other hand intended by its mini
mum requirement to raise the actual
| basis of assessment. Is answered by the
| results on the volume of actual local
tax revenue of the nominal full and the
| two thirds valuations. respectively.
Washington's triennial realty assess
ments since 1897 have been: 1897. $780,
| $685. sos. 1900. s176. 567 $40: 1908. S2Gs 3d..
! 436; 1905 s239 461 ,9s5; 1909. S276, $50 17i;
1912, 1856, so 4S7.
l. The figures sustain Mr.. Richards eN-
PLANTATION and completely refute Mr..
Prouty's contention Of conspiracy to
swindle. After the change from nominal
full valuation to the two-thirds basis in
1902 the assessment increased materially.
whereas before 1t had been decreasing In
the triennial assessments. Thus the tri-
ennial assessment in 1897 was $1SO.3I69Os;
in 1900 S176, 567,543. a reduction, both be-
ing nominal full valuations. Thus. ac-
cording to Representative Prouty, the or
ganic act was smashed and the basis re-
duced a third in order that not so much
money should be raised by the District
of Columbia and that the United states
might be swindled into continuing the
half-and-haH arrangement, with the eX-
traordinary result of an increase OF the
assessment to SOS. .o19, ,4SG, an increase
over 1900 of thirty-two millions, and the
assessment has gone on increasing under
the two-thirds basis ever since. There ap-
pears an increase of thirty-one millions
in 1905. of thirty-seven millions in 1900,
and of fifty-four millions in 1912. all on
the two-thirds nominal assessment. EvI-
IDENTIFY property was assessed at hlgher
percentage under the two-third minimum
basis than under nominal full valuation
And so today Washington realty at the
nominal two-thirds valuation is assessed,
as comparisons of figures conclus1vely
demonstrates, at higher percentage than
many nominal full valuation cities.
8. BY giving full credit to the reports
in the census bulletin of the relation OF
assessed to true valuc-reports which the
census itself surs and discredits and de-
prives of all value-Mr. Prouty figures
that the average rate of taxation in cities
over 100000 in population is is mills
on actual full value, while the Washing
ton rate is 10 mills, practically one-half
of the rate elsewhere, and the lowest In
the United States. In editorial corre-
spcndence of March the absolute worth
lessness of these reports and of all cal
culations based upon them was demon
strated by the census comments and by
comparisons of the census figures. There
is a fatal flaw in the foundation of the
imposing superstructure which Represent
ative Prouty has built
Reasoning from his false premises Mr..
Prouty figures that Washington. as the
weaithiest and the lightest taxed commu-
nifty in the country. can with ease raise
sl3, ,T91, ,a9l 10 each year in property taxes,
sustain and develop the carital on a
magnificent national scale. and lend
money, IL necessary, 10 iiuPeSuiiiouS SuS'S
Sam.
The per capita tax levy proposed for
the Washingtonian on Representative
Prouty's figures is s39.O5. Compare this
proposed burden with that Of Boston, the
highest in the United States, $31.3l. and
New York, s3O.7o; Chicago. $3.50; Phila-
deIphia, S143O; st. Louis. $17.S5; Cleve-
land, s167s; Baltimore. s15.53, and with
Des Moines, Iowa, S16.7S; Louisville, KY,
$500, and Atlanta, Ga, $11j0.
Representative Prouty proposes to raise
Sl3, 797, ,291.75 from the small taxed frac-
ton of Washington that remains after
deductin2 the vast area of streets, parks
and exempted government workshops,
the citys great industrial plants. Com
pare this sl3, ,797 291. .75 levy with the total
property tax levies in the whole of far
larger and richer cities: st. Louis, $12.-
534, ,91s; Cleveland, $1OO1e. .s07; Baltimore,
S., S43, COS; Detroit, $9,6II557; Buffalo,
50. 40, ,731: Milwaukee, s6,s59. 113; New
Orleans, So, 1S2, 421. and with Kansas City,
81, liz, ,595: Indianapolis, So, 1856 965; Louis
vile s3,i44.:a6; Atlanta, sl.9S5,344; Des
Mones. 81 773?.
Washington's t912) property tax
levy to compare with the above
figures was s5,39S,3s4. Shall this
burden be increased to more than
thirteen millions? Washington's act
greater than that of New Orleans.
Shall it be made greater than that of st.
Louis or Cleveland or Baltimore?