Henderson daily dispatch., 1936-10-29
Amendment To Threaten
Local Government Taxes
Healy Warns of Financial riss TO Follow If Property
Exemptions Are Voted In Next Tuesday; Would
Remove Half of Prop erty in Some Cases

Raleigh, Oct. 29.-In a radio address
here last night, Patrick Healy, Jr.,
executive secretary of the North Car
DINA League of municipalities, warn
ed of a crisis in local government fl
nances if the homestead exemption
amendment to the State Constitution
is adopted in Tuesdays election.
DO the people of North Carolina
want to pay higher rents on their
homes and farms or their business
property" he asked. do they want
local government tax rates to be rails
ed? Do they want the cost of admin
istration of local government to be
increased? My guess is that they do
not. If you who are listening do not
desire these things, then you will lis
ten carefully to what I am going to
say. I would like to talk for 10 or II
minutes this evening On a subject of
vital interest to every citizen in this
state. I am not taking part in any
political campaign to elect anyone to
office. What have to say does not
involve any partisan issue. That may
sound peculiar when I state that the
subject upon which I am addressing
you this evening concerns a question
which will be before the voters of
North Carolina on election day, next
Tuesday. That is the question of
whether there is to be an amendment
to the State Constitution allowing the
exemption from taxation of homes
occupied by their owners up to ST.
900 in value
Il am employed by the official as
ISOLATION of towns and cities in this
Municipalities. One hundred forty-six
towns and cities make up the men,
bership of this organization at the
present time. This association has
gone on record opposing the propos-
ed homestead exemption amendment,
not for any selfish reasons. but be-
cause it is believed that the defeat
of this amendment is necessary for
the best interests of the people of
North Carolina.
"A total Of five amendments to the
State Constitution will be before the
voters next Tuesday, including the
one with which we are concerned this
evening. We are especially concerned
with the tax exemption amendment
at this time because of the mislead-
ing wording On the ballot The word
ing is plainly an attempt to deceive
the voters of this state. Although the
language of the proposed amendment
itself is very clear in specifying that
only homes actually occupied by their
owners are eligible to he exempt from
taxation up to $1,000 in value, never
theless, the wording on the ballot
would lead up to believe that all
homes would be eligible, not only
those occupied by their owners, but
also those who are rented. Those ia
voring the adoption of the amend
ment will vote ballots on which will
be printed the words For exemption
from taxation of homes to the value
of $1,000" and those opposed to the
amendment will vote ballots on which
will be printed the words, Against
exemption from taxation of homes to
the value of $1,000" Tonight I want
to point out to you not only this at
tempt to deceive the voters, but also
the reasons why you should vote a.
| gainst this amendment.
Our friends who are advocating
it's passage, are doing so because OF
| professed idealism and desire tt
encourage home ownership. LET III
encourage the little man to own his
own home-the foundation of demo
cracy,' they say. Let us break up the
evils of farm tenancy by relieving the
little man from having to pay taxes
on his home. Pass this Constitutions,
amendment" they say, 80 that thu
legislature may exempt homes from
taxation to the value of $1,000"
! What do we mean by exemption