Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1921-03-13
Not Legal, Says ScharnikoW.

Not Legal, Says Scharnikow.
| Mr.. Schanikow maintained that 81
B. 6 contained the same objectionabl,
features which were carried In H. B
8 of the regular session, and that b,
believed it was admittedly an uncon
stitutional measure
The matter was brought up shortly
after the convening of the house wher
the Judiciary committe made it known
that it had been unable to agree upon
report and majority of the commit.
tee had signed report recommending
a substitute bill.
X. A. OHara, chairman of the COM
mittee, said Mr.. Skulason had declined
to bring in the majority report at this
time and he moved that the committee
be requested to report both the ma
jority and the minority reports at this
time.
Adopt O'Hara Motion.
Mr.. Skulason said the majority was
not declining to report but that it had
prepared a substitute bill and wanted
to have it printed and passed on by the
appropriations committee. He said the
majority had the right of way and as
it had had the bill but two or three
days he felt it was still within his time
and could not be compelled to report.
He said he was not resisting the prop
osition but wanted to wait until Mon
day to put in the bill After some
added discussion the O'Hara motion
was adopted and the reports were sent
up to the clerks desk.
The majority report, signed by John
son of Silver Bow, Skulason, Silver,
Rodgers, Allen, Wallace, Scharnikow,
Gies and Austin, recommended that
II. B. 8 do not pass but that substi-
tute for H. B. 6. presented with the
report, be printed and referred to the
appropriations committee.
The minority report, signed by
O'Hara, Macdonald of Flathead, Cav
anaugh, Dillavou, Black, Kenyon and
recommended that H. 3. be
passed after being amended so as to
strike out of the bill the provision for
the payment of expenses of county as
SCISSORS in attending meetings of county
assessors held at the capitol pursuant
othe orders of the state board of
. The substitute measure, presented
by the majority report, was very
short bill which merely makes an ap-
of $685. for the 2S
months commencing March /, 1921, to
oay the salary and expenses Of the
state board of equalization and it's tax
experts and other employees in the Sc
'urlng Of an equitable and just valu-
ltlon of the taxable property within
he state.
Skulason moved adoption of the
moved adoption of the minority.
Present Law Adequate.
In support of his motion Skulason |
aid the substitute bill proposes to
cave in operation the laws of the |
sixteenth legislative assembly relating
Q the powers and duties of the board
t equalization but to provide an ap-
ropriation of $35,5OO, in addition to
he appropriation made by the recent
egular session, for the uses Of the
oard.
He said with the present laws in
,rce the board Of equalization has all !
1e powers necessary to employ what
yer tax experts and assistants 1t needs
carry ont the tax laws and the sub
Eitute bill merely provides 1t with
loney to carry those laws into effect.
In opening his assault, upon the
riginal bill. Mr.. Scharnikow said he
esiIdIe0 TO repeat 6tateHeHt A6 nad
card after the house IN the regular
.ssion had passed II. =. 8, that any
ne who opposed the bill did SO from
q interested motive.
Governors Hand Seen. I
"When I opposed H. b. 3, did so
n the same reasons I now give in
,posing IT. b. 6. This has exactly
le same Objectionable features as Fl. i
5. I believe III. B. 9 II admittedly
for tho reason that It
,es nothing more than delegate the ,
,wer Of the board Of equalization to a :
,ard of tax experts. Section 3 re-
owes from tho board of equalization !
|, powers and delegates them to q
lCantfnnAA sA 1Aes Twas