The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1920-04-21
SANTA FE in PLEA
Railway Believes State Assess
Is ment Is Too High.
G. G. Tunell Discusses General
Conditions in e. s.

The state tax commission last year
assessed Santa Fe railway property in
Kansas at $49,747 a mile, which is
too high, according to a statement
filed today with the commission by
George G. Tunell, tax commissioner
of the Santa Fe system, also repre-
senting the United States Railroad
administration.
Discussing the business situation
generally. Tunnel declares that rail-
roads and other public utilities and
persons who work on salary are the
only interests that did not make big
money during the war. 1T is a sub
ject of general knowledge" he says,
that from the time the war got well
under way our great national indus
tries engaged in the production and
distribution of war material, food.
| fuel, clothing and articles of luxury
have been enormously profitable WIZ
this prosperity and feeling of ease the
depressed and cramped, condition OF
| the public utilities and of the salaried
class has been in striking contrast.
The oil, gas. coal, salt. lead and zinc
producers and the farmers and stock
raisers of Kansas have had their full
share of the national prosperity. 1t is
unnecessary to dwell on the prosperity
| of the oil, gas and coal producers.
That is known of all men"
TuneIl contends that railroad prop
erty is assessed higher than other
property generally
Valuation by I. C. c.
| Tunell insists that the assessment of the
| Santa Fe's Kansas mileage at $49,I41 per
mile cannot be justified by any actual
| appraisal that has been made of the physf-
cal property, or by any showing of the cost
Of reproducing it
| the interstate commerce commission on the
Santa Fe lines in Kansas still is 1ncom-
1 plete," he said. but there are good rea-
sons for thinking that your assessment
coed the appraisal figures when completed.
| Earning Power.
Let us now consider your assessments
| from the standpoint of earning power,
Mr.. Tunell continues. Even il the earn
| ings of our best years justified your as
| sessments, war and nfter-war conditions
! changes of earning power that pre-war
revenues do not afford a sound basis for
| judging the present. 1t would be just as
| logical to assess the valley lands that were
| Quilted by the great Kaw river flood on the
| basis of their crop producing capacity be-
I fore the flood as TO assess the railroads in
/ power.
Last year I stated that the conditions
with which the railroads were then con-
fronted should not be passed over lightly
on the theory that the burdensome condi-
tons of operation were temporary and thai
| more prosperous days were just around the
! corner Time has shown that my gloomy
forecast of lastAyear was not too black
Today the outlook appears even darker
| than a year ago and again l feel con-
| strained to say that our situation is so
serious that it calls for a further reduc-
| tfon of our assessment.
The net operating results of the Santa
| Fe system after the deduction of all ex-
penses of operation and of all federal. state
! and local taxes fell from S49,954 2J1 in 1911
] to $40. $50 07 in 1915 and to $3s O3J, 651 in
1919.
| sFrom the informa ton just submitted II
| appears that the Santa Fe system as q
! whole could not be sold at any recent time
/ for the amount for which you apparently
would assess it even if $137,0Oo.0oo. worth
| of non-operatfve property consisting OF
railways. Gil lands. coal mines, timber
lands, the granted lands in Arizona and
! New Mexico. lands acquired for new ex.
tensions, S19.093 GOO of liberty bonds. cash
4 in New York. besides much other miscel-
| laneouS property
I'm concluding my statement am again
| going to express the hope that you will
This year take up the assessment of the
| Santa Fe lines as if you were assessing
them for the first time and that You wi:
make an assessment in accord with the
conditions confronting US today