Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1922-02-08
Dyrl's Plan VS.. the Constitution

n OSSIBLI the explanation OF tho fact that
L the newspapers with probably single
exception) OF the Virginia cities employing
Richard Evelyn Byrd to write n tax bill
that would relieve them and few counties
of obvious determinations. are now on rec
ord as opposing the bill prepared by him and
sponsored in the House OF Delegates by
Mayo c. Brown. is to be found in the cities
own negligence. They delayed action until
shortly before the session Of the General
Assembly, and It Is too much to expect
even OF Mr.. Byrd's brilliant mind that a
subject so vast should be solved In mere
few weeks of study.
In Mr.. Byrd's published defense Of his
bill. he gives as one Of the benefits of COM
plete segregation under Ills plan:
Great economies can be instituted. The
tve-year land assessors, costing about $780,
600, will be done away with"
Mr.. Byrd can hardly have overlooked the
fact that the quinquennial assessment OF
land can only be done away with by amend
ing the Constitution. which provides (sec-
ton I'D:
THE General Assembly shall provide
for reassessment of real estate in the year
1905. and every NTH year thereafter"
SO far, therefore, as this feature OF his
proposed reform is concerned, it cannot
possibly be effective prior to 1926, even IL
the necessary constitutional amendment is
in the meantime adopted by two sessions
of the Legislature and then by the people
at the polls.
Again, the Constitution (section 1927 de-
crees that the General Assembly shall pro
vide for the special and separate assess
ment OF mineral lands" This is now done
by the State Corporation Commission Sec
ton 176 states that the State Corporation
Commission shall annually assess the value
OF all roadhed and other roal estate all
personal property and all real estate of
steam railroads and boats OF steamboat and
canal corporations. 1t appears the Consti-
tuition must be changed before local deccn-
tralization and diffusion Of assessing author
ity as desired by Mr. Byrd can be accom-
plished If this is DONE we will have the
anomalous situation Of Il local body assess
ing privately owned real estate and person
al property, and q State body ascertaining
the taxable value of the property Of pub
lie service corporations How then, cain
the localities" as stated by Mr.. Byrd, "have
complete control of their own assessing and
collecting officers? And how can the State
Corporation Commission in DISCHARGE OF the
duties imposed upon it by the Constitution
value separately the railway properties in
about eighty counties in the State so rs to
preserve any sort OF uniformity with the
rislues on other property arrived at by
eighty different assessing officials working
only under their local boards of supervisors?
There Is manifestly no one in Virginia
better qualified to deal with this question
than Mr. Byrd. 1t Is evident that he needs
two years to do it, especially when new
Governor. under the weird section of our
Constitution which forbds an executive sue
cceding himself. should not be hammered
Mt the outset by tax law which Mt ono
blow reduces the revenues OF the State by
nearly two millions OF dollars