Amarillo daily news. [volume] (Amarillo, Tex.) 19??-current, 1921-01-07
ShelbyCounty Judge
Against Any Changes

An organized effort h being made O.
have tne coming session Of the Icgisla.
ture pass a Law taking nom the Com.
missioners Courts authority o. fx
values Of property IN their respective
counties fVf tax purposes. and place
such authority with State Board al
Austin.
For many reasons. am opposed a.
this change Thusa who advocate this
law openly avow that more than onr
hundred agricultural counties II tho
irate. one 81 which IL my own. ar.
by reason Of low values fixed hy their
l,.cai Soards. not paying as much taxes
as they should. and a State Boari Do
advocated. In order a. increase values
and compel these Stacker" couuuc1
ns they call them. 90 contribute NOR
In taxes toward the support 81 the
Etnte government.
This I'M ist charge il being cifcg
lated Nv m organization financed by
0 few iarge tax payers in cities II thu
state who have BEEN lci O. believe that
they are paying more than their Just
proportion NJ state taxes and that. un
der the operation Il q State Hoard 81
Equalization. their own taxes viii d.
reduced by compiling their less fariu
nate ncighhors 20 make larger contr..
button. Speaking Cor my own county.
j have no fear ~ q comparison of yll.
ucs at whish property l. placed un ths
tar rolls with any u the countries from
which this complaint H. made n pr0n.
erty IL escaping taxation in this state.
II T. not IN the land and liv, stock sr.
implements II the farmer Thi, ,h1r.
after Il i.rup,rty can nos De- hid.n from
the Tax Assessor. aud il always PLACED
upon the tax No.
II these gentlemen are r.sIiy inter
estod In discovering and placing upnn
the tar rolls. property that De, h,l
tnfore escaped taxation ! would sug
gest that n fruitful field fur their ln.
vestigations would he "a tho maitr ~
bank deposits notes. bonds. and other
securities. When they hay, succeeded
IN having this character ~ prupeftyI
pay even In proportion 20 property r
the hundred o. more Stacker" com.
ties. about which they seem so d.apiv
interested. the funds 81 the state vii
BE- largely increased. and their yearn.
ines for tax revision. IN all probability
fuzzy and completely satisfied.
In my opinion. the people % tho nate
have n right 90 expect a tightening
--tAe- than an Increase oi their taxes
Our farmers and siockmsh ar, facing
isnsruni"y. and all classes - business
have suffered severe ~ai.hack On ac
~"sint 81 the urics panic through which
we are passing. and. II there was over
a tisne that demanded strict economy In
both public and private expenditure.
that time II now
submit that the present system ~
local control over values comm.nds
itself on account q it, conyenien~e to|
the small as well as the large tax paw.
er: the Equalization Board h. compu~
~ q local citizens. who are familiar
with values; lis holds it, sessions NJ
the county court house. aud the hum.
bicst taxpayer may. with small irouhls
and expense. meet and set relief u biz
taxes are excessive. on the other
hand. n We abolish our Local Isoartis
and place these matters IN N, hands n
= HAAA' AHAAAAA ~ aNMNNANlI ANNW N&NHaIE
would b. too great Tor the average
Taxpayer 90 protest the values Nxei
by this State Board. In order 10 prop.
cry present such protest. trip Z
Austin or tie employment Il an az
torney would be necessary. and the cs.
pens In either CASE. would likely q.
~ great that the taxpayer would SUI
fer injustice rather than incIr n.
I make no claim that the wurk Of
our Local Boards Is perfect: that the
sometimes make mistakes N vaiulrg
property Is well known - al % ~
bu'. ! do contend that five g. d. ~
izens arr vastly better qua ifled 80 80
this work for their own iunty ti,ln
arr three strangers 20 do u To- two
A.. hundred and flfty.three az tent c0ln.
tics.
The amount % our state ara county
taxes II controlled In two wsS.' by the
tax rate and the valuation PLACED cl
the property. Authority over values In
the hands ~ local citizens and the
power 20 fix the tax rate. within the
limits Of the Constitution. con;rnlied hy
state authorities. as Il The Case under
our present system. would SEEM o. hc
a fair division between local and s'ate
authorities over the tax payer In Dc.
terininlng The amount % .aXes hc
should h. called upon 90 pay under
this arrangement the staie. through
It's authority over the tax rate l. A.
sured Of stifsicieni reyense Tor 90 iegi
iimaie purposes: and the taxpayer.
with authority over values In the hands
Of five u his nclghbors. may reason.
ably expect that he win not H. cailfd
upon fer more IN taxes than il nee.
exnry 90 maintain the government
upon an economical basis.
Personally, think We have gone far
enough toward Capitalization 81 au-
thorliy az Austin and Washington.
Certainly. government; by bureaus
boards. and commissions. has not PROV.
en- 10 attractive as 10 justify the PEG
pie az Texas In surrendering o. a boari
~ Austin their present local coltrl
1ver this important matter u taxation.
Very truly yours
JOHN ~ BURNS.
County Judge Shelby County. Tex
Injunction Granted.
srs.rfaf 80 The N.sta