Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000133 78

Image

File
Download upr000133-078.tif (image/tiff; 26.59 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000133-078
Details

Rights

This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

Digital Provenance

Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

Publisher

University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

Los Angeles, April 30, 1927 Dear Walter: I have yours of the 28th and note that Mr. De Vinney, the County Assessor, requested to see our hook values of Las Vegas Land & Water Company. You have Form 141 Las Vegas Land & Water Company General Balance Sheet -Assets, March 31, 1927, and under the first item real estate unimproved and the second item improved real estate and miscellaneous property, is reflected all of the property of Las Vegas Land & Water Company situate in Clark County, Nevada, with its hook valuation as shown hy the’company*s records here. From the total investments, as shown on this sheet* you can de­duct the investments in physical property in California, includ­ing the water system at Yerrao and other investments, -Anaheim Union Water Company^ stock and Liberty Loan bonds. I took the matter up with Mr. Charles Adams, our Tax Agent,and also with Mr. Halsted, who suggested that I go over the situation with Mr. Barry, and there is no reason why you should not show Mr. DeVinney this balance sheet, and I ad­vise that you do so, and inform him that it is the book value of the company*s holdings. The valuations, of course, in Las Vegas and vicinity must be uniform and the land and other holdings of the company cannot be valued higher than similar property in the same locality for assessment purposes. I understand that there is a general move to raise valuations in Las Vegas City as well as in Clark County, but I am inclined to think that Mr. DeVinney will be fair with us if we do not withhold any information and disclose the situation fully as it is. FRM: I F. R, McNamee