New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1915-03-31
CONTINUED from first page.)

lation in city real estate by itself selling
land at moderate prices and to give the
general public the advantage OF the IN
crements in land values"
Ulm has long been and is still a great
fortress, and it was forcseen by Mayor
Won Wagner that when the old walls
were removed and the military authori-
ties extended the area upon which land
within the Notifications buildings could
be contructed this new urban ground
would greatly increase in value. The
first thouth OF the city government
was to make the owners OF the land
pay a portion of the so-called uneraned
increment for the purchase Of theis
land from the military owner, which
was the German Empire. This would
have been easy enough in Wisconsin
or Maryland and many another Ameri-
can state under curl system Of special
assessments in proportion to benefits;
but Ulm has never been able to gain the
authority to do this. InWuertem-
berg, as also in Bavaria, urban land
must be assessed for purposes Of tax
alton at its estimated annual Yield
for agricultural purposes.
The impossibility Of making the
landowners, who would derive great
benefits from the removal outward
of the Notifications, share a part of
th1 of &ha f0
pay share of what was in this case
certainly a clear-cut unearned incre-
ment, was one of the motives which led
the mayor and city council to favor
large purchases before the increase
in value took place. Thus Ulm gained
in the case of the lands purchased
not only part but the whole of the in
cremental values, save as they may
have been anticipated by the owners
of private lands purchased and by the
imperial government in it's sales. A
further advantage accruing to the city
has already been mentioned namely,
the possibility of complete control of
improvements from the point of view
of beauty and good housing conditions.
Mayor vonWagner delivered an address in
Dusseldorf October 20, 1906, on the
benefits to the landowner of this out
word extension of the Qualifications
which freed large area from the build
ing prohibition. As already inti1nated,
in a certain area no building was al
lowed. To illustrate such benefits, he
said that branch of the state admin
istration had recently bought a piece
of land for 100000 marks which ten
years previously would have been val
ued at $4,000 marks at the most.
AS result of its landownership the
city has built houses for laborers and
for it's own employees and sold these
houses to them outright; it has assisted
building associations by selling or leas-
ing them land; it has also leased lands
to individuals for agricultural purposes,
especially family gardens, and to manu-
featuring companies for long periods to
encourage industrial development. Con-
sequently, private activity has been
stimulated instead of repressed.
The density of population as meas
ured by the average number of persons
occupying house is relatively small in
Ulm. The ideal Of the administration
has been one family to one house, a
policy very rare in Germany. Further
more, the ideal has been ownership of
this house by the family occupying it,
with little plat in front and garden
in the rear. This has required a good
deal of effort, many thoughtful provi-
sions and some experimenting to get the
right clauses in the deeds. All may be
summed up by saying that the city has
reserved for one hundred years the right
of repurchasing property at an ap-
praised valuation whenever use is made
OF it contrary to the general aim of the
city.
Municipality as Landlord.
Moreover, this right of repurchase
never expires, as the contract, with the
hundred year clause, is renewed when
ever the house passes over to an heir.
Though the city can repurchase if the
purchaser fails to make his payments as
they fall due, every possible considera-
ton is shown the honest man who is
doing his best, and he is helped by loans.
The city can repurchase, furthermore,
whenever the owner wishes to sell
the house; if the owner rents rooms
or dwellings at higher figure than
the maximum fixed by the Council:
if without permission the owner places a
second mortgage on the property; if
the owner in spite of repeated demands
does not occupy the house himself;
if he shamefully neglects to keep up