The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1948-12-03
MEA On Citizens Education Committee

matter of property assessments. The
Finance Bill provides that every
county shall make a uniform tax eff
fort on a countrywide basis before
getting any state aid. This uniform
tax will be levied on real and per-
sonal property of each county. Now,
we know, that the law specifies that
the county assessor is to assess prop
erty in his county. We have Sc coun-
ty assessors, and as there is no law
requiring them to do this together,
we find that property of the same
kind in the various counties is asses
sed at different values. If the state
is going to first require, say, 30
mill tax on the property of each coun-
ty before giving aid, this will mean
that those counties that assess their
property low, will get more state aid,
and those that have their assessments
more in line with market values, will
receive more from the countrywide
levy, and therefore from the state.
Several states have tried various
methods to equalize this assessment
and uniform levy. If it were just
matter of each county for itself, it
would make no difference, as then,
if they assess their property low,
their millage would be that much
more to raise the funds they need.
1t is when we have state aid after
statewide levy as our University
Millage Levy, that the difficulty
comes. One of the plans used is a
ratio between the market value of
property and its assessment. Every
time piece of property is sold they
must attach federal stamps to it, By
counting the value of these stamps
one can determine what the property
was sold for. Then, the assessed val
ue of the same piece of property is
found in the assessors book. BY
putting the two together, you can
get ratio between the true market
value and the assessed value This
is done in every county, and then a
state average found. If the uniform
levy for schools is to be 80 mills, and
one county has ratio between mar
ket value and assessed value below
the state average, that county may
have its 80 mills boosted to 35, ac-
cording to a schedule to be worked
out.
Index of Economic Capacity I.
Another plan used is worked indie
pendently of the property tax. This
is to find an index of economic cap
acity, or ability to pay taxes. Sever
al factors of economic wealth are
first selected, and in the case here
in Montana the following were taken:
income payments, retail sales, net
farm dollars, taxable valuations of
public utilities (these are assessed on
4 statewide basis, and non-agricul-
5ural wages. Every county is figur-
I'd out on the basis of per cent of
5hese items that it has. 1t was found
Beaverhead county had 1887 of the
income payments; 1850 of the re-
all sales of the state, 1850 of the
net farm dollars of the state, 1870
If the taxable value Of public utili- !
les of the state, and $50 of the non
agricultural wages of the state. Since
t was thought that income payments
we're more important than some of s
he other factors, that per cent was
Weighted by 5, retail sales by 8, and
he others by one. Therefore we {
ound the following weighted index:
times 1853, plus times 1.55, plus
..55, plus 154, plus SO, or a total ,
index of 17.47. Since the !
Weights were plus 8, plus 1, plus 1, {
'lus I, or eleven, we divide by elev- 4
n and get an average index of 1.59.
his is then Beaverhead's economic
apacity, or ability to pay taxes.
If then it is decided that the state
nd counties will share the cost of :
he foundation program, it may mean
hat the state will pay $11,O0O,O00 q
nd the counties $11, 100000. If
county has an economic
1dex or ability to pay of 1899, then
county will pay 1890 of h
he $11,000,000, or $174,90O as it's d
hare. Since Beaverhead county has !,
taxable valuation of $5,782,000, it n
ill take 80 mills to raise this ;