Show PROVO HIKES TAX LEVY 37 MILLS OVER 1933 Commission Votes Raise Rather Than Continue Continue Continue Con Con- Debt Refunding ing County Up Also PROVo Nineteen en n mn nullS mills an Increase of 37 31 mills over the previous year ear W was fixed as the tax levy In Provo Prove City Oily b by the city commission commis comm sian sion following an all day all day discussion of ot city finances Monday A At the same sama time the county commissioners fixed the Utah county levy Jevy at 9 mills an increase of or 4 4 mill over the 1933 levy Provos Provo's 1933 levy was mills while Utah county's tax was 80 86 mills U jo F Following owing action by the c city ty commission com corn ml mission ion in advancing this years year's levy Mayor A. A O 0 Of Smoot explained that the he commission h. h lad had d voted the advance advance ad ad- vance rather than continue the practice tic Lice tice of refunding the city debts from year pear to year ear as h has been a custom in the past M Mayor Smoot Issued the following statement in explanation of the increase in increase 1 crease No guarantee fund lev levy to take ake care of default payments on special cial Improvement bonds has been provided by the city for several years cars and nd as a result at the beginning of ot this year oar was compelled t to pay more than thi from th the general fund contingent account for this his rather than from a fund that should have been set aside according to o law Jaw to care fo for fop such accounts Cause Heavy Drain F E ERA H R A projects which are u un UT undoubtedly proving of great benefit to the he city and providing work for it its unemployed h however cause a heavy drain on city finances and arc are responsible responsible responsible re re- re- re for other increases Workmen's compensation and ma ma- for the m L must t be provided provided pro pro- vided by the city cHy s said Mayor Smoot and no provision w was vas made spade for these unanticipated Items Henu when the budget W was S drawn Necessity of ot raising funds to pur chase a site for Provos Provo's proposed new federal building accounts for a por tion ion of the raise raises said Mayor Smoot The Tho drouth relief relict program has hu also cost the city a considerable sum um but commissioners are of the opinion that it t is work that cannot be alighted or dropped he said A comparison of he the ne pew new v levy with that hat of the past three years follows Department 1031 1931 1032 1832 1933 1033 1934 Inc Mills Mills Mills MiUs Mills Contingent pr r operating expanse 50 50 50 50 Streets and public improvements 20 20 20 Library 08 oa o 08 08 10 02 Bonds and erest interest 30 40 40 45 5 05 Water supply and irrigation 40 30 30 Sewer vcr drain and extensions 05 05 05 15 10 City han ball 05 05 Special improvement guaranty sinking fund n-d. n 10 10 Totals H 3 37 County Action cUon The county commission determined that hat it would be necessary to r raise ise the 1934 levy 4 of a mill mm to Insure sufficient revenue revenue to meet necessary expenses expense of the county If per cent collection were assured as they said approximately ir in tax revenue would be real rea- realized rea from the tho which ha has been jeen et ct as the county vali However only approximately or collection of 75 or 80 per percent cent is e expected The levy of the Alpine school district dis dis- dis was increased ased from 15 mills in 1933 to mills for 1934 1 the only school district of the county cO to show how howan an Increase Provo school district remains remains re reo re- re mains the same at mills and the Nebo school also the same as last year with 82 mU mills Other Communities Comparison of the 1933 and 1934 tax levi levies s for each community of Utah county follows Community 1933 1934 I Mills Mills Alpine S Cit City 10 19 19 Lehl Lehi ehl 21 American Fork 15 15 15 Pleasant Grove ve 16 16 Men Linden 85 85 Orem 10 10 12 Springville 14 14 18 Spanish Fork 17 17 17 Payson 14 15 Mapleton I 10 10 11 ii Salem 8 a 8 Santaquin 7 7 Goshen 17 17 |