September 26, 1963 (22 pages)

. Page 9 . September 26, 1963.The Nugget. . Page ee generaltaxpayer inthe county. Often, too, the creation of a new city tended to hem in an existing one, and prevent area-wide planning for the orderly growth of urban areas. It is difficult to plan for our growing urban areas in California when we have a number of small indeperdent governments serving special interests, all going their own way, within an area, The new commission in each county, composed as it is of representatives of existing cities and the county, will undoubtedly look unfavorably on any proposal to _ create a new city or new district which will be of bene7 fit to the entire county. In the same way, annexation proposals which serve only special interests will probably be discouraged, Thus we are likely to see an end to “selective annexation" whereby existing cities carve out for themselves only valuable areas of high assessed valuation--and leave less fortunate areas to develop in squalor in the unincorporated “fringe” of the city. Perhaps the most valuable effect of the new law will ‘be that it will focus the attention of our local officials on this sloppy fringe area, and suggest to them that the development of this vital area is a county-wide responsibility. ---Alfred Heller WASHINGTON CALLING LOOK IN MIRROR BRINGS GLASS POLISH TO HAND WASHINGTON ---Lazy, indifferent, inefficient, venal, outdated -these are some of the epithets that with increasing frequency over the years are heaped on Congress. ; Sotarnished is the image that Congress itself has begun tonotice, With editorials and cartoons hitting hard at the slothful pace of the present session a first tentative step has been taken to determine what reforms might help. But this step is so hedged around with barriers protecting the worst abuses that its usefulness is questionable. The contempt for Congress and the state legislatures is such that it seems to reflect a distrust of representative government. Theinstitution, as a few members of Congress realize, is not sacred, The power to nullify and obstruct has in other lands proved to be also the power of self-destruction. The Senate Rules Committee ‘approved a concurrent resolution establishing a Senate-House committee to study the organization of Congress. But the resolution says that the 12-man committee -six from each body -is not (repeat not) to consider “rules, parliamentary procedures, practices or precedents". This is like a police chief telling a precinct captain to investigate a series of robberies in his district but not to inquire into the means that were used. Moreover, nothing could better illustrate the ringaround-the-rosy of Congressional proce dure than the probable fate of this resolution. To be effective it must be approved also by the House Rules Committee. The word from the House side of the Capitol, where 80-yearold Howard W. Smith(D., Va.) presides over rules, is nothing doing. Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D., Pa.), the most forthright Congressional critic of Congress, said he will try when his resolution comes up on the Senate floor to count the House out and make it a Senate operation. If he succeeds there will at least be an inquiry. ‘nis happened last in 1946. Two conscientious men, Sen. Mike Monroney (he was then in the House) and the late Sen. Robert M. LaFollette Jr., put through a reform bill which brought some changes. Clark and the co-sponsor of the present resolution, Sen. Clifford Case (R., an, 0W,ow Goes” 4 IE MTREPID MAIL NAW, THOUGH COUUTLESS SO") FULFULIWE , HIS QUT). a. ODD BODKINS. N.J.), point outthat the LaFollette-Monroney inquiry operated under a similar restriction excluding rules and procedures. So they hope for a net gain even though the frame of reference is Marrow. — SEAS The reforms that critics both in and out of Congress put forward match the abuses these same critics cite. First and foremost are unlimited debate -the filibuster -and the custom of seniority in the selection of committee chairmen. The first is written into Senate Rule 22, requiring a two-thirds vote to shut off discussion. This means the Southerners with a little help from conserva-~ tive Republicans can go on talking as long as they can muster enough voicestohold the floor indefinitely. That is the tactic they will try against the civil rights bill. Seniority is untouchable because this is'the means by which a few men go on year after year exercising the power to delay and obstruct. These committee chairmen, whose average age is nearly 66, would have to ap~ prove any substantial change in the system. They show no signs of voting themselves out of power. Senator Case in areform bill has proposed some modifications of the brassbound system. For example, he would set the time limit on committee consideration of legislation proposed by the executive. Within, say 30 days, measures sent from the White House would have to be either forwarded to the floor or rejected. That would put a restraint on the current custom which is simply to bottle up at least two-thirds of the proposals that go into the Congressional hopper. Clark attacks the Senate establishment itself in a book of that title, just published, comprised of his and other speeches on reform. This Philadelphian with an uppercase background hits the old club spirit which is the uftimate heresy. He proposes that an age limit be put on committee chairmen. He proposes a committee bill of rights providing that a majority of members be allowed toconvene meetings, call up bills for consideration and shut off debate of issues in executive session. These and other detailed proposals go to the heart of monopoly power. And that is why they seem to have little chance of acceptance. But Congress is feeling the hot breath of public opinion and a first small step has been taken. (Copyright 1963) LETTERS 10 THE EDITOR GRAZING LAND APPRAISED AT 597 AVERAGE To the Editor: Mr. Leake has shown me your issue of September 5 and called my attention to the lead article on the 18cent school tax. He asked me to write you about the $600 per acre grazing land which you accurately characterize as “local hearsay”. : Looking over our Nevada County sample, I found 24 parcels which the appraisers characterized as grazing ---Marquis Childs © isco by Deo O'ieill land. The total acreage in these parcels was 6,665, and the total appraised value was $644,700. The average appraised value per acre is just under $97. Several of these properties were currently used in whole or in part for grazing but either were believed by the appraisersto have a higher and better use that would soon displace the present use or were currently used for both grazing and other purposes. Grazing was said to be the only present use and the highest and best use for 10 of the 24 parcels. They contained 4, 111 acres and were appraised at $289,150, an average of $70.34 an acre. Only one of the 24 parcels was appraised:at as much as $600 an acre. This is a 30-acre portion of a holding of less than a quarter séction -hardly a big enough holding to constitute what we would call a grazing property. The appraiser considered the 30~-acre portion a rural homesite rather than-a-grazing property. There was. SARA STEE R only one other of the 24 parcels appraised at as much as $500 anacre. This is a parcel of less than a quarter of a section unassociated with any other parcel under the same ownership. This parcel, too, is too small for a grazing operation. There was one other of the 24 parcels appraised for as much as $400 an acte. It is a small parcel -less than 80 acres in size -~ that is not part of a larger holding and was considered homesite property rather than grazing property. Only one other of the 24 parcels was appraised for as much as $300 an acre. This was a small portion of a 40to 50-acre holding. From this recitation of facts, you will see that the “local hearsay” of $600 per acre grazing land is not well founded. We are grateful to you for having evidenced skepticism in your article. ; Sincerely yours, Ronald B. Welch Assistant Executive Secretary Ce , Property Taxes State Board of Equalization (Editor's Note: The Nugget, in its Sept. 12 issue, carried a story which quoted an official of the State Board of Equalization.to the effect that the $600 appraisal figure rumored locally was probably a misunderstanding on the part of those who were quoting it as part of the state appraisal. A copy of the Sept. 12 issue is being sent to Ronald B, Welch. ) EDITORIAL PRAISED To The Editor: "As the campaign for the Sierra College bond issue draws to a close, I would like to thank the editor and publisher of the Nevada County Nugget for the splendid news coverage of the issue during the past months, and totell youthat the Board of Trustees is extremely grateful for the splendid editorial in the issue of September 19. It élearly and concisely pointed out the role of the taxpayer and his responsibility to the college program. Whether the issue passes or falls short of the mark should have no effect on the desire of Sierra College to serve the district. Should you or your readers have any suggestions as to ways and means in which the college can better servethe people, please favor us with a communication. * : ae Sincerely, . Harold M, Weaver, President and District Superintendent UP UR OP GOES WWE /UTRE PID HAIL HAM, THROVEY COUMTLESS QVCERS, FULFILLING MS DUTY.-

. Page 9 . September 26, 1963..The Nugget. . Page ee generaltaxpayer inthe county. Often, too, the creation of a new city tended to hem in an existing one, and prevent area-wide planning for the orderly growth of urban areas. It is difficult to plan for our growing urban areas in California when we have a number of small indeperdent governments serving special interests, all going their own way, within an area, The new commission in each county, composed as it is of representatives of existing cities and the county, will undoubtedly look unfavorably on any proposal to _ create a new city or new district which will be of bene7 fit to the entire county. In the same way, annexation proposals which serve only special interests will probably be discouraged, Thus we are likely to see an end to “selective annexation" whereby existing cities carve out for themselves only valuable areas of high assessed valuation--and leave less fortunate areas to develop in squalor in the unincorporated “fringe” of the city. Perhaps the most valuable effect of the new law will ‘be that it will focus the attention of our local officials on this sloppy fringe area, and suggest to them that the development of this vital area is a county-wide responsibility. ---Alfred Heller WASHINGTON CALLING LOOK IN MIRROR BRINGS GLASS POLISH TO HAND WASHINGTON ---Lazy, indifferent, inefficient, venal, outdated -these are some of the epithets that with increasing frequency over the years are heaped on Congress. ; Sotarnished is the image that Congress itself has begun tonotice, With editorials and cartoons hitting hard at the slothful pace of the present session a first tentative step has been taken to determine what reforms might help. But this step is so hedged around with barriers protecting the worst abuses that its usefulness is questionable. The contempt for Congress and the state legislatures is such that it seems to reflect a distrust of representative government. Theinstitution, as a few members of Congress realize, is not sacred, The power to nullify and obstruct has in other lands proved to be also the power of self-destruction. The Senate Rules Committee ‘approved a concurrent resolution establishing a Senate-House committee to study the organization of Congress. But the resolution says that the 12-man committee -six from each body -is not (repeat not) to consider “rules, parliamentary procedures, practices or precedents". This is like a police chief telling a precinct captain to investigate a series of robberies in his district but not to inquire into the means that were used. Moreover, nothing could better illustrate the ringaround-the-rosy of Congressional proce dure than the probable fate of this resolution. To be effective it must be approved also by the House Rules Committee. The word from the House side of the Capitol, where 80-yearold Howard W. Smith(D., Va.) presides over rules, is nothing doing. Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D., Pa.), the most forthright Congressional critic of Congress, said he will try when his resolution comes up on the Senate floor to count the House out and make it a Senate operation. If he succeeds there will at least be an inquiry. ‘nis happened last in 1946. Two conscientious men, Sen. Mike Monroney (he was then in the House) and the late Sen. Robert M. LaFollette Jr., put through a reform bill which brought some changes. Clark and the co-sponsor of the present resolution, Sen. Clifford Case (R., an, 0W,ow Goes” 4 IE MTREPID MAIL NAW, THOUGH COUUTLESS SO") FULFULIWE , HIS QUT).. a. ODD BODKINS.. N.J.), point outthat the LaFollette-Monroney inquiry operated under a similar restriction excluding rules and procedures. So they hope for a net gain even though the frame of reference is Marrow. — SEAS The reforms that critics both in and out of Congress put forward match the abuses these same critics cite. First and foremost are unlimited debate -the filibuster -and the custom of seniority in the selection of committee chairmen. The first is written into Senate Rule 22, requiring a two-thirds vote to shut off discussion. This means the Southerners with a little help from conserva-~ tive Republicans can go on talking as long as they can muster enough voicestohold the floor indefinitely. That is the tactic they will try against the civil rights bill. Seniority is untouchable because this is'the means by which a few men go on year after year exercising the power to delay and obstruct. These committee chairmen, whose average age is nearly 66, would have to ap~ prove any substantial change in the system. They show no signs of voting themselves out of power. Senator Case in areform bill has proposed some modifications of the brassbound system. For example, he would set the time limit on committee consideration of legislation proposed by the executive. Within, say 30 days, measures sent from the White House would have to be either forwarded to the floor or rejected. That would put a restraint on the current custom which is

simply to bottle up at least two-thirds of the proposals that go into the Congressional hopper. Clark attacks the Senate establishment itself in a book of that title, just published, comprised of his and other speeches on reform. This Philadelphian with an uppercase background hits the old club spirit which is the uftimate heresy. He proposes that an age limit be put on committee chairmen. He proposes a committee bill of rights providing that a majority of members be allowed toconvene meetings, call up bills for consideration and shut off debate of issues in executive session. These and other detailed proposals go to the heart of monopoly power. And that is why they seem to have little chance of acceptance. But Congress is feeling the hot breath of public opinion and a first small step has been taken. (Copyright 1963) LETTERS 10 THE EDITOR GRAZING LAND APPRAISED AT 597 AVERAGE To the Editor: Mr. Leake has shown me your issue of September 5 and called my attention to the lead article on the 18cent school tax. He asked me to write you about the $600 per acre grazing land which you accurately characterize as “local hearsay”. : Looking over our Nevada County sample, I found 24 parcels which the appraisers characterized as grazing ---Marquis Childs © isco by Deo O'ieill land. The total acreage in these parcels was 6,665, and the total appraised value was $644,700. The average appraised value per acre is just under $97. Several of these properties were currently used in whole or in part for grazing but either were believed by the appraisersto have a higher and better use that would soon displace the present use or were currently used for both grazing and other purposes. Grazing was said to be the only present use and the highest and best use for 10 of the 24 parcels. They contained 4, 111 acres and were appraised at $289,150, an average of $70.34 an acre. Only one of the 24 parcels was appraised:at as much as $600 an acre. This is a 30-acre portion of a holding of less than a quarter séction -hardly a big enough holding to constitute what we would call a grazing property. The appraiser considered the 30~-acre portion a rural homesite rather than-a-grazing property. There was. SARA STEE R only one other of the 24 parcels appraised at as much as $500 anacre. This is a parcel of less than a quarter of a section unassociated with any other parcel under the same ownership. This parcel, too, is too small for a grazing operation. There was one other of the 24 parcels appraised for as much as $400 an acte. It is a small parcel -less than 80 acres in size -~ that is not part of a larger holding and was considered homesite property rather than grazing property. Only one other of the 24 parcels was appraised for as much as $300 an acre. This was a small portion of a 40to 50-acre holding. From this recitation of facts, you will see that the “local hearsay” of $600 per acre grazing land is not well founded. We are grateful to you for having evidenced skepticism in your article. ; Sincerely yours, Ronald B. Welch Assistant Executive Secretary Ce , Property Taxes State Board of Equalization (Editor's Note: The Nugget, in its Sept. 12 issue, carried a story which quoted an official of the State Board of Equalization.to the effect that the $600 appraisal figure rumored locally was probably a misunderstanding on the part of those who were quoting it as part of the state appraisal. A copy of the Sept. 12 issue is being sent to Ronald B, Welch. ) EDITORIAL PRAISED To The Editor: "As the campaign for the Sierra College bond issue draws to a close, I would like to thank the editor and publisher of the Nevada County Nugget for the splendid news coverage of the issue during the past months, and totell youthat the Board of Trustees is extremely grateful for the splendid editorial in the issue of September 19. It élearly and concisely pointed out the role of the taxpayer and his responsibility to the college program. Whether the issue passes or falls short of the mark should have no effect on the desire of Sierra College to serve the district. Should you or your readers have any suggestions as to ways and means in which the college can better servethe people, please favor us with a communication. * : ae Sincerely, . Harold M, Weaver, President and District Superintendent UP UR OP GOES WWE /UTRE PID HAIL HAM, THROVEY COUMTLESS QVCERS, FULFILLING MS DUTY.-