OCR Text |
Show V' - Amendment Would Create More New Tax Problems Analysis of proposed Amendment No. 5 by the Committee of Nine, appointed by the government, and the public Officials Educational Committee reveal ' that the passage of the proposed Amendment would create new tax problems for taxpayers, tax-payers, and create a serious short; age of funds necessary to city, county .and school administrations. From findings of the two investigating investi-gating committees the ' following facts are $aken: , ... -.V.;,..,V 1.' There way be an annual loss in revenue to us, as follows: ! To our city $ 3,890 To our county . 289,674 v, To our schools , 54,816 Tqtainoss to us ... . . . . $348,186 . If we are obliged to sustain these Josses,, we may do one of the following, follow-ing, three things: a. .Lower the efficiency and re- duce the services in our county, . city and school governments, unless and until, of course, we shall be able to make up these losses by some other method not yet determined. b. We can increase the levy on all our taxable property, which levies would be increased something some-thing like the following: For city purposes 2.1 mills increase For county purp. 1.6 mills increase For school purp. 2.0 mills increase TOTAL 5.7 mills increase c. We can make up this loss by having our assessor tax our property at full value, as required re-quired by the Constitution Instead In-stead of taxing it as at present at from 50 to 60 per cent of its real value. So when we vote on Amendment No. 5, we are virtually deciding the following questions: 1. Do we desire to have the same kind of service in our city, county and schools, or 2- Are willing to accept, without complaint, less service in our city, county and schools, made necessary by the loss of revenues reve-nues amounting to $348,186.00. or 3. Do we feel confident that we can get that same money from some other sources, without disturbing dis-turbing our economic welfare? 4. Are we willing to reduce the amount of taxable properey In cur community with the understanding under-standing that the remaining property pro-perty will have to be taxed at a higher rate? 5. Will we support our county assessor if he taxes our property prop-erty at full value as required by the Constitution, in order to make up for these losses, or 6. Are we satisfied with the present pres-ent assessed valuation and the present levy and the present kind of service we are receiving receiv-ing in our city, county and school governments? 7. Do we realize that we can pro- ceed to make savings and economies econ-omies in the conduct of our city, county and school affairs, without changing or tampering with the State Constitution? These are the questions embodied in Amendment No. 5 which we, your public servants, submit to yon for jour careful study and consideration, consider-ation, before you go to the polls on November 3rd to Indicate by your vote, whether you think, in view of these facts, that the proposal embodied em-bodied in Amendment No. 5, will promote the interests of this community com-munity or whether it may add nothing noth-ing to the solution of our tax problem, prob-lem, but may only be destructive of all good ends. It is significant that the Committee Commit-tee of Nine, even after two years, investigation, has npt seen fit to recommend this Exemption. Also , (Continued on page fourteen) (Continued from page one) that platforms of both political parties are silent on this Question. On account of the far-reaching importance of this question, we urge you when you go into the booth on November 3rd, that you look for Amendment No. 5 on the ballot, and vote No on this proposal. pro-posal. Respectfully submitted, JOHN E. DAHLSTROM, .Mayor. B. F. QUINN, Chairman, County Commissioners. " , |