Kenosha tribune & telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1856-1859, 1859-01-13
ts r -

Fl tues IN Cno assessment made by TN
8 State Board Of Equalization, ask leave
to report the following as some of tai
facts which fully justify the statemen
made in former report that such asses
ment is unequal, unjust and oppres
sive.
1t appears from the proceedings 0
the Board as published, that the equal
zation was made and completed at ont
session of the Board, not exceeding one
day. Five ofthe members of the Boart
having been present on the 29th 0
September, 1858, and hastily, as is be
lieved by your committee on that day
made the statement and assessment
which is the subject of our present in
vestigation.
When it is considered that the equal
ization of the County of Kenosha cos
the equalizing Board of that County ,
session of four days, and that of the
City of Kenosha a week OF ten days
the hurry and carelessness with which
the important work Of equalizing the
State assessment, and of setting off tc
each County the sum to be raised, is
apparent to the least discerning, anC
compels the belief that the State Officers
were derelict III duty; or else did mo-
properly appreciate the difficulty anC
Importance of the work which they at
tempted to perform.
The Committee would call the attention
of the Board of Super yisors to the fact
that the inequalities of the Assessment
are not confined exclusively to any one
portion of the State; although the greater
injustice may be done, (as is the fact
to some portions of the State, than to
others. To illustrate; Take the two
Counties of Waupacca and Waushara.
The county of Waupacca returned H.
OH acres of land valued at So per acre
making with the valuation of City and
Village lots, and the personal property
$l5,825 added, total valuation OF
Sl87, o97.
The County of Waushara returned
368, 120 acres of land valued at So per
acre, which with City lots and personal
property added, made total aggregate
valuation Of $725, 929 as set forth in the
printed statement; thus preserving very
nearly In their own estimate of value a
relation of four to one or thereabouts rs
to quantity with an equal valuation as to
quality. Yet what did the State Board
OF Equalization They raised Wau-
pacca from Sls7 ,O97 TO 81 ,835 900, and
Waushara from 1925, 929 to 81 900, 900:
making a difference of only Sos, 900 in
valuation against County having four
times the area of land returned as of
equal value per acre with the other :;
thus making the actual tax assessed on
the larger county only $3.50 greater than
that assessed upon the smaller.
Again, the counties of Dodge and
Jefferson illustrate the same prominent
and glazing inequality. With nearly
the same area being adjoining coun-
ties-returned at the same price per
acre according to their own estimate :;
with the City Of W atertown in Jefferson
Co., and other advantages and the
additional fact that while Jefferson Co.
returned total aggregate valuation of
S3,066,951, and Dodge Co., but
81, 1902 1888; the State Board raised the
former in suck ratio as to make the
lands worth but Sl3,66 per acre, while
the latter are worth S23,l7!!
But the climax Of absurdity is reach
ed in the case of the county of Dunn,
In the northwestern portion of the State.
Dunn returned 119,848 acres of land,
valued at 81 per acre, which with vii
lage lots and personal property added,
made according to the printed state
ment total aggregate valuation of
S664,ls5. The Board in the exercise
of the power conferred upon it, reduced
the sum to 5000, 900; reduction of two
thirds; on which basis if the personal
property returned be deducted, the re-
suit is that the lands of that county are
worth village lots and all included but
SO cents per acre !! Compare this with
Clarke county equalized at 1904 per
acre adopting the same basis of esti-
mate, or with Pierce county at $3.50;
all in the same portion of the State, and
for that reason just subjects of compar-
ison.
But to come nearer home, as time
would fail in pointing out the many err
rors in Judgment with which the state
ment abounds. The county of Kenosha
returned 1915 acres of land valued
at $l0,42 per acre, which with personal
property to amount Of $685. added
made total aggregate valuation of 81
061,613. The county of Walworth re-
turned 347,Os4 acres of land valued at
1920 per acre, which with $366,412 of
personal property added, made total
aggregate valuation of $3,24e,311; an
excess by their own showing of 81, 1885,
69S in the aggregate valuation of the
two counties.
That the assessment as returned, does
not truly represent the comparative val
ne of the two counties, every candid
and intelligent person will admit
Lands in Walworth are as high in price,
and as valuable or more so, than lands
in Kenosha, and the returned valuation
of the former county to be on a par with
that of the latter, should have been at
least 100000.
That the county of Walworth, with
more than double the area of Kenosha, |
with at least an equal amount of city or
village property within its limits; with
a superior average quality of lands and
extensive water power is worth at this
time more than double the value of Ke-
nosha county, is plain beyond question;
yet the State Board equalize up the
county Of Walworth the sum of $2,551,-
$50; and Kenosha the sum of $685.
1871! making the equalized value of Ke-
nosha county 800, 900 more than Wal
worth, despite the relative size of the
two counties, and making the value of
lands in the former county, after de-
Quoting the personal property, 32,7o |
per acre! while the latter is only SIS, 65!
The Soma diS,1sr;41, =, -, (oc4 =, IL - |