|
language plays directly into the hands of
the speculators by permitting the specula-
tor to use it for agricultural purposes, get
the agricultural treatment, and yet hold
land which is valuable many multiples of
times for speculative purposes and not pay
the taxes on it. By not putting this lan-
guage into the Constitution, we permit the
legislature to have flexibility to deal with
the problem. That, I submit, is the way it
ought to be.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Roger.
DELEGATE ROGER: Mr. Chairman, I
would like to oppose this amendment. I be-
lieve that we should extend to the real
legitimate farmer a helping hand at this
time. As Delegate Adkins stated, there has
been a shift from the rural areas to the
cities and sometimes this is something we
should dread and perhaps it may be be-
cause the farmer has not received the con-
sideration he should have received.
I do believe there are real farmers who
are small farmers who should be assisted
in this matter. I do believe that the Gen-
eral Assembly in its great wisdom will be
able to work out and determine some meas-
ure for weighing the value of farm lands
and determine the people who are supposed
to be farmers.
I do not think this Convention would go
wrong to not in this particular instance
look out for the people who use agricul-
tural uses and I do hope you will defeat
this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: I do not know
anything- about the problems of specula-
tion in Montgomery County. I do not hold
myself out to be an expert on taxes. Heaven
knows I have enough trouble paying my
own. I do not pretend to be an expert on
agriculture. I do know that I do not look
forward to the time when those of us in
the urban areas, Delegate Malkus said here
several weeks ago, would have it eat bricks
and cement. But it seems to me that it is
just basically wrong to put into the Consti-
tution a special tax break for any taxpayer
or any class of taxpayers. I submit that
this is something which ought to be left to
the General Assembly to determine as a
part of the overall tax policy of the State
and that we should not foreclose the issue
here and now in a Constitutional Con-
vention.
|
Delegate Case and Delegate Sherbow
both alluded to the constitutional amend-
ment which passed in I960 but as I under-
stand that constitutional amendment, it did
not compel this tax advantage for the
farmer in the Constitution. All it did was
to remove a pre-existing roadblock and al-
low the legislature to act in this area. If
you adopt this amendment as Delegate Case
and his presentation admitted, the legisla-
ture would have that authority, would have
the authority to do what he seeks to do in
this Report in the Constitution.
I say we ought not to go farther than
that constitutional amendment of I960 and
compel something which it did not compel
in the Constitution.
I urge you to support the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Fox.
DELEGATE FOX: Mr. Chairman, la-
dies and gentlemen of the Committee, I
suppose this debate this afternoon proves
that no one is changed by argument be-
cause I heard what Delegate Case said and
Delegate Sherbow and I thought Delegate
Case made a very clear explanation and
said exactly the opposite from what Dele-
gate Scanlan evidently understood and ex-
actly the opposite from what Delegate Cha-
bot and Delegate Hardwicke understood.
If I understood his language and if I un-
derstand this proposition, this will now en-
able the General Assembly to prescribe by
law what are lands devoted to agriculture,
which is exactly what the Alsop decision
said they could not do. This enables the
General Assembly to distinguish between
the farmer and the speculator.
This is an important matter. In Virginia
they do not have this same assessment
proposition with regard to farm land and
if I may be permitted to refer to a govern-
mental publication, perhaps prepared by
Mr. Hanson's associate also, Virginia's
County is somewhat similarly situated.
Fairfax County on the other side of Wash-
ington, they do not have the benefit of the
farm land assessment Maryland has. Just
reading a paragraph from this publication,
Taxes of the Rural-Urban Fringe, a case
study of Fairfax County:
"In relation to farm income, taxes on
farms in Fairfax County appear high.
1959 Census of Agriculture reported the
average farm in Fairfax County pro-
duced $7,000 worth of farm products or
about «$55 per acre. This does not suggest
a rich farming community. The average
farmer would probably have difficulty
|
