New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1919-08-06
ton On the river and therefore declined
to appropriate any money for this pur-

pose.
On Taxation:
Mr.. Armson before entering upon the
discussion Of the questions before the
meeting briefly explained the purpose
and source of public revenues, the
reason why taxes are necessary and for
what purpose they are levied. In ex-
planning the stand Of the Minnesota
Tax Commission in regard to some:
measure of relief looked for by the.
owners Of property rendered non-pro-
ductive this year because Of the overflow
I.of the bottom lands he read letter.
recently written BY the commission to
the county auditor Of Carver county
This letter states that it cannot be
Justly claimed that bottom lands have
no value whatever and that they, there
fore, are taxable on the basis Of their
real value. The letter then continues:
AS to what such value may be is
q question Of judgment to be exercised
in the first instance by the assessing
officials, and in the case Of abatement
applications, by the county board.
Perhaps reasonable rule for ascer-
tanning what such value would be is to
determine what such lands would sell
for if they were not subject to overflow.
Having determined their selling value
| if not subject to overflow, then determine
what effect an overflow once in four or
FIVE years, or other periods, would
have on such value and reduce accord
lingly.
| To illustrate the above statement;
| let us assume that lands, if not subject
Ito overflow would be worth $1OO per
acre, but from the experience of the past
fifteen or twenty years it is found that
the lands overflow on an average once
1. in four years to such extent as to render
them practically non pro uctive for the
year overlooked, it would probably be
reasonable to say that the liability TO
an overflow once in four years reduced
the value Of the land rs per cent, or from
i 500 to SIS per acre. OF course it is
possible that the periodical overflow
4 would reduce the value in a greater
percentage than that herein stated, but
that is a matter Of judgment to be
exercised, as already stated, by assessing
officials and county boards.
Now, as to the legal status Of the ques-
Etion, the law provides that all property
!. of value, not expressly exempted by the
state constitution shall be subject to
taxation. The taxable value Of land
is based on stated percentage of its
true value, according to the class in which
lit falls. The law defines the term
true and full value" to mean the price
for which the property would sell at a
private, and not at a forced or auction
sale. See subdivision 5 Of Section 1875,
General Statutes Of 1919. The final
/ test, therefore, K, what would these
lands sell for at private sale? Having
fairly determined this their taxable
value, if unplatted, would be one third
Of their selling value. If they are
assessed on higher percentage than
] this, then the owners would be entitled
/ to a reduction in assessed value in such
amount as would make the taxable value
one third of full value. Legally, then,
unless the periodical overflow Of these
lands renders them entirely valueless,
they are not entitled to total tax exemp-
ton during the years overfloWed, but
must bear their proportionate share
Eof the public tax burden, such share
to be determined by the legal test above
ioutlined. =
In conclusion, Mr.. Armson promised
serious and impartial consideration to.
help relieve the situation, within the
requirements Of the law.
Organize.
The committee on permanent organ.
iization made the following recommen-l
dalton: That the following named rep
resentatives:
E. j. Dresser, Brown county,
M. B. Monsell, Redwood county,
James A. Brown, Hennepin county,
{ en-. Coswell, lie sueur county,
w. H. Lehman, Sibley county,
Fred Pfeifer, Renville county,
Markus Larson, Blue Earth county,
Alex, Russell, Nicollet county be the
executive committee Of the organization
and elect from among them a presi-