The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1892-05-24
Eyeryone's Property Rated
Too High, and Every
one E1Se'S Too
Low.
WORK OF THE REVlsIONISTs
McArdle's Complaint Mr.. Nugent's
Grievance and Mrs. Allerd's
Wail-NO Decisions Yet.

The Commissioners of Appeals in Cases
of Taxation met at five O'Clock yesterday
in the Office of the Tax Commissioners in
the City Hall. All of the members were
present and so were President German
and Clerk Connolly. of the Tax Commis-
sion. The most important matter con-
sidered by the Board was taxation of the
property owned by p. H. Nugent at Nos.
81 and 20 Newark avenue.
The ground floor of this building is
used for store purposes and the upper
floors for an armory. This property was
assessed in 1891 for $4,000, an increase of
IS. 900 over the year 1890, when it was as
sessed at $4,000. The upper part of the
building is not partitioned off and finished
Cooper's Hall, which adjoins Mr.Nugent's
property. has eight feet more frontage on
Newark avenue, and besides is on a COR
ner, and the upperspart of the house is
finished. Nugent's property is assessed
5000 more than Cooper's Hall,
Tax Commissioner German was asked
why. He explained that the assessmen mt
in his opiuion was proper one. He did
not think Cooper's Hall was assessed
enough and said that it would have been
assessed higher had not the building been
empty and undergoing repairs when he
assessed 1t last May. MIR. Nugent pro-
duced Mr.. Broderick, the tenant, who in
formed the commissioners that Mr.. Cor
man was mistaken about repairs being
made in the building last May when the
assessment was made for no repairs were
undertaken until October.
Mr.. German said that his recollection
was different, and that had Cooper's Hall
been In the condition when assessed that
1t now Is, 1T would have been rated much
higher. He repeated that he did not
think Mr.. Nugent's property was assessed
at too great value.
MRS. ALLERD's VAIL.
Mrs. Elizabeth Allerd complained that
her property at No. 155 Newark avenue,
was assessed too much. The assessed
value was $4,000, but the Tax Commits
sioners as a Board of Appeals had re-
duced this to 1900. which Mrs. Allerd
claimed was still entirely too much. She
asked the Appeal Board to make further
reduction.
DR.. Sullivan owns property at No. 247
Old Bergen road and No. sS6 Garfield ave-
nue.. The first lot was assessed at $70O
and the Garfield avenue lot. with house
on it, at 81 200. Sullivan complained that
the city had opfiscated" his property
over and over by unjust taxation. He
said lots on Old Bergen road had depreci-
ated 80 per cent. in value during the last
ten years.
SAME OLD HUMBUG.
Patrick McArdle asked the Commits
sloners to review his assessment for
$4,000 Un the property at No. z Exchange
place. He said his only reason for believ-
ing that he had been unjustly assessed
was that the balance of the prop
erty on that block was more val
liable than his, and it was
assessed the same as his property was
Mr.. McArdle said that the upper stories
of his building were unfinished. and it
would cost him from $4,000 to 5000
to place his house in the same con-
dition as the adjoining one. For that
reason he thought he shou Id be assessed
at lower figure or the others at greater
sum.
Tax Commissioner German explained
that the difference in the buildings might
exist. but in his opinion Mr.. McArdie was
not assessed too much. If the valuations
on the neighboring property were not
great enough that would be remedied in
the next tax levy.
L. II. Towar. attorney for the estate of
Peter Bentley, asked the Commissioners
to reduce the valuation of property No. SIS
Montgomery street. which was assessed
at $4,000. William O'Keefe. of No. 70
Glendenny avenue, also asked for re-
duction of valuation, and Catherine
Nolan, representing William Nolan,
made like request for property No. $50
Fourth street.
Mrs. Rosetta Rohr showed the Commits.
sioners power of attorney from Mrs. G.
Metzler and asked that the valuation of
Mrs. Metzler's property at No 48 Newark
avenue be reduced. This property was
assessed for $4,000, and Mrs. Rohr said
she believed 1t should not be valued
above S22, 900.
The Board adjourned to meet Wednes-