RURAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 117 



ing to 25 per cent, was given in Calgary during the years 1915 and 

 1916. An effort has been made to permit this relief to be given 

 permanently. The assessor is to be judge as to whether the lands 

 are used for agricultural purposes, and, if so used, he may, at his dis- 

 cretion, assess them at agricultural value. That an expedient such 

 as this is resorted to shows the extremities to which the present sys- 

 tem of taxation may lead. To give an assessor discretion of the 

 above kind is to open the door for the worst sort of abuses. More- 

 over, as soon as the present period of depression is over many areas 

 which have enjoyed relief will be placed on the market for building 

 purposes in competition with areas which have had no relief. The 

 whole system of assessment needs revision, and any attempts to bolster 

 up the present system by methods such as those referred to, will 

 make the remedy worse than the disease, and cause serious injustice. 

 The city assessor of Calgary is reported to have stated that claims 

 would be made to bring no less than 20,000 acres of land under the 

 heading of "lands used for agricultural purposes" in 1917. 



The time has come, 'not only for municipalities in Canada to 

 cease to be bankers for real estate operators, but for the municipali- 

 ties to make it obligatory that the local improvements necessary to 

 provide certain minimum standards of sanitation and convenience of 

 access should be provided before lots are put on the market for build- 

 ing purposes. In Cincinnati and a few other American cities, where 

 most local improvements are made by the real estate men before 

 building takes place, development is stimulated rather than ham- 

 pered by the practice. 



If the temporary speculating owners of real estate were com- 

 pelled to provide their own local improvements in advance of de- 

 velopment, they would contribute, in doing so, more to the public 

 revenue than they would be likely to contribute by a tax on the land, and 

 would, at the same time, ensure healthy and economic develop- 

 ment. The cost of such preliminary improvements might amount 

 to from $1,000 to $2,500 per acre. It would be paid by the developer, 

 and only . portion of it, based on the demand for the land, would be 

 recoverable from the purchaser on whom the subsequent taxes fall. 

 If it had to be paid by the developer he would not, as a rule, put 

 land on le market till it was ripe for building, and the public 

 would thuv get rid of one of the chief causes of speculation. It is 

 true that some speculators have lost large sums of money as a result of 

 making expensive improvements out of private capital, in order to 

 force land on the market before its time; but for every speculator 



