Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-02-05

purpose Of this hypothesis Is not to
provide for the actual taxation OF Uncle
Sam, but to ascertain with approximate
accuracy the loss of revenue which
these vast exemptions of property cause
to the remaining taxpayers, and for this
purpose the loss of revenue from the
exempted intangibles of those. who
would own Washington's great indus
| trial plants, If Uncle Sam did not. must,
of course, enter into the calculation.
The Bureau of Efficiency's figures
| concerning Uncle Sam as an exempt
taxpayer demonstrate convincingly the
very great losses, which the actual tax
PAYERS of the District must make good,
that result from these extraordinary
and excessive tax exemptions. caused
solely by the fact that washington Is
the National Capital.
(2l Cost of excess park acquisition
and maintenance.
Table | of the Bureau of Efficiency
Report compares Ia cities and wash
ington in park area (acres) and in pop
ulation to one acre Of park.
The bureaus figures OF Table l pic
ture wildly the excess of park area in
washington when compared with similar
areas in the IA cities. Washington
Minneapolis alone surprising 1t. Wash
ington park area, 1888 acres; Cleveland,
2.975: st. Louis, 2,945: Baltimore, 3,440:
Boston. 2.647; Pittsburgh. 1887; Buffalo,
1865; Milwaukee, 1887; Newark, 1875;
Minneapolis, 4,771; New Orleans, 1885 !;
Cincinnati, 2,307; indianapolis, 2,723;
Rochester, 1,777; Jersey City, 289. The
showing is even more striking when the
population of the cities is taken into
account and the population to one acre
of park is figured Thus washington
has an acre of park to every l4O OF
uopulation. Cleveland one acre to every
$40. st. Louis 286, Baltimore 24l, Boston
302. Pittsburgh 357. Buffalo 1872, Mil
waukee 433. Newark 500, Minneapolis
90. New Orleans 228, Cincinnati lat,
Indianapolis 140, Rochester 1875, Jersey
City 1,125. -,
Thus Washington in comparison with
Cleveland has 778 more acres OF PARK
and has one acre Of park to every l4o
of population, whereas Cleveland mas
only one acre to every $40 persons. II
Cleveland had park area in proportion
to its population on the washington
ratio its park area would be 1914 acres,
or 3.461 acres of park area more than
Washington instead of 778 acres less.
The same kind of showing is made in
comparison with other cities; for exam
ple. St. Louis on Washington's ratio
would have 2.261 acres OF park more
than washington instead OF 8O3 acres
less. and Baltimore would have 2,lf6
acres more instead of 313 acres less.
The Bureau of Efficiency figures
demonstrate that washington is already
supplied with q great excess OF park
area over that with which the largest
and richest of our great self-developing.
self-sustaining, commercial cities have
supplied themselves. This excess OF park
area. representing millions of expend-
iture In acquisition and maintenance, Is
due solely to the fact that Washington
is the National Capital, the Nations
CITY.
The pending grand projects of future
park development, which thrill the
Washingtonian and all Americans VINO
take pride in the Nations city, are
Enthusiastically national in scope and
cost and are entirely outside OF what
according to the precedents, a self
controlled, Self-Sustaining city would
undertake at its own expense.
Unjust Financing Of Park Development.
The Bureaus report thus exposes the
gross Injustice of the present plan OF
financing park development at the
Capital. which throws nearly all OF the
expense of this development upon the
local taxpayers, thus using local tax
revenue against the will of the tax
payers to pay for condemning areas now
taxable and revenue producing and to
convert them forever into park land
exempt from taxation. This financing
does the local taxpayer a double injury
in that it deprives him OF his tax
money, sorely needed for municipal pur-
poses, and spends it on a national
project, and in doing so adds millions
to the future tax-burden OF the local
taxpayer by removing forever from
taxation the increasingly valuable areas
which by condemnation are converted
into tax-exempt park land. j.
A separate and distinct increase OF
the basic nine millions should be
made to prevent Congress from vio-
Iating its own statutory provisions that
the Nation shall contribute In large
and definite proportion to the apprO-
priations for certain great National
or semi National projects. as for
example the appropriation for expendi-
lures under the jurisdiction OF the
National Capital Park and Planning
Commission. The law provides in re-
spect to appropriations for this con-
fessedIy National project that the Ma
ton shall pay its definite proportion
OF total expenditure. IL Congress
makes appropriations for this National
project without providing for National
participation i'm the cost on the sixty
forty basis, which is the existing
statutory ratio Of substantive law, or
by making a specific lump-sum in
crease of the basic lump-sum apprO-
priation I'm lieu of the definite proper
ton which the law directs, both the
letter and the spirit Of the law will be
violated and the inequity will result Of
exacting entirely from the local tax
payers funds for a National project,
which may, in the discretion of the
commission, be expended outside Of
the District in Maryland and Virginia.
The thoughtful WashingtOnian. eager
for the quick development to perfection
of the Capital as the "City Beautiful"
is ready to bear his full share Of the
OUTLAWS, losses, and additional burdens
involved in the immediate condemna-
ton of areas needed in the future for
parks or the sites of public buildings.
At the same time he petitions urgently
that the equities be observed in appor-
)PERTY VALUATIONS, 1928.