OCR Text |
Show 5 community fiiuL Gply comments... Contrasting headlines crossing my exchange desk this week were sad commentary on events in Washington over the weekend that will have an astounding effect on the western states. The Cortez Sentinel, published on Saturday, chronicled a long-awaited event with inch-high headlines reading, "Dolores Project Work Near." The next day's Durango Herald headlined that day's biggest story, "Carter Cuts Dolores Funds." Residents of Southwestern Colorado have waited for ten years for the start of construction on the big Dolores River Project a participating Upper Colorado River Basin project which would have greatly increased the agricultural potential of a rich farming axea dependent too many year's on dfy-farming and fluctuating streamflows for successful farming. They had already pledged through bond elections to pay their share of the project's costs. It was set to start in fiscal 1978. The Dolores Project was axed by the new president, along with the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project---much larger in size and if the funding is not restored by an angry Congress, much work that has already been done will be of little value. The cuts by Carter came at an unfortunate time. The west is now going through the most devastating drought in history, and we've only seen the beginning. The water conservation projects have been on the drawing boards for half a century. They were conceived by people who believed that at some future time we would have years like the one which is now unfolding. And they necessarily surmounted all the obstacles placed in front of them including massive funding requirements, environmental studies and approvals and the constant need of education for eastern congressmen and agency officials who know little about the public land west and its problems. President Carter and new Secretary of Interior Cecil Andrus are going to have a hard time convincing many of us that the cut was more than simply more time for review. It smacks too much of political retaliation against a geographic section of the nation that just happened to support Mr. Carter's opponent in recent elections. sjt The Utah Foundation, the non-profit taxpayer watchdog which studies state activities and makes projections and recommendations, is calling for total equalization of state property tax assessments in a study published in this issue. And despite the fact that the recommendation if followed by the legislature would almost entirely eliminate the need for local tax assessment and thus dillute the authority of local government, the recommendation makes a lot of sense. Utah's school finance package now is determined almost entirely by the state legislature, with very little authority loft with local boards of education, and each session of the legislature further strengthens the theory of equalized educational benefits for Utah's school children. Unless, however, the State Tax Commission can do a better, faster and more efficient job of valuing properties around the state than it has the past few ye;irs, the theory of tax assessment equalization is a lot of hovosh. Grand County was revalued by the State a couple of years ago, and we all went through the pains of higher property taxes. But we're already slipping a little from the "20 per cent of market value" limits set by Ktiitute, and counties that were revalued five or nix years ago ore in n bod a shape as they were to begin with. A le tter idea might be to eliminate the property t;ix i;t:r !y. It's one of the nastiest taxes we face anyway, hi-iiiuse it is so inequitable among income groups, age groups, etc. Surely there has to bo a bettor way of raising money. sjt I :,ii ii'i ( the Tuesday night meeting of the City (,.,,,, I ;i;,d (iiand County Commission this week, ciill' il i.'i lii'n 'uri the city dump, and felt kind of like an jlligiiimat.e son at a family reunion after my comments last veek about the lack of action and defiance of stiito dirts . I rim 'I. s.iv that nothing positive happened nt the ,,,,,),,,,, iivi t us tiilc-ri to cull another meeting next M.,lll.l. , |