Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-01-24
THERE'S NO LET UP.
Kicking on the New Assess
ments Growing More Wig +.
orous Every Day.
DEFENDS THE ASSESSORS.
A Councilman Says They Are Not So
Much to Blame as the
KXTRAVAGANT CITY OFFICERS.
The Growth of the City Fot in Proportion
to Its Expenses.
DEFENDS THE ASSESSORS.
EXTRAVAGANT CITY OFFICERS.
The Growth of the City Not in Proportion
to Its Expenses.
THE WARDS THAT APPEALED YESTERDAY

There is no let up in business at the City
Assessors Office. The crowds that throngeG
the place yesterday were Just as large ant
as indignant as those of any day this week
The bulk of the people came from the Twen
tieth, Twenty-frst and Twenty-third wards
A few appeals came in from the Seven
teenth ward, but though this is one of the
largest wards in the city the increase there
has not been SO great as in other sections
and not so many appeals are expected
The proposed citizens meeting to de,
mand a reduction in the tax millage was
discussed everywhere, and the sentiment
expressed was strongly in favor of it. DR..
c. Evans, Select Councilman from the
Twenty-third ward, is in favor of the propo,
sition. In speaking of the new assessment
yesterday he said:
"While the assessors have put the valua-
tions outrageously high hardly think they
will attempt to maintain their ratings as a
rule, and when they make their revisions
they will get the values down to about the
actual cash values. 1 don't suppose for a
moment they viii make an even assessment
on all properties at their actual value, but
they will come as near or nearer than they
ever did before
City officials More to Blame.
"The trouble is not in the Assessors
Office, in my estimation, but should be
charged to the city oficials in extravagant
expenses. Take the expenses for ten years.
or begin at $780, Then the total valuation
was $50, al, 900 and the tax rate 81 mills
The total expenditures were s2,48o,00O, of
which 81, ,090, coo went to the sinking funds
and interest, sS5.o00 to the Poor Board ard
SS42. 900 to education, leaving only 1865, 900
for running expenses for the entire city.
I'm 1887, when the new charter went into
effect, the total valuation had been increased
10 Sis, 600, 000 The tax rate was Is mills
The total expenses had been increased to
50. .104. 600, but 81 ,624, 900 of this was for
operating the government and only 81 4S0,-
600 went for sinking funds, interest, poor
hoard. and education. OF course it was ex-
pected that the new form of government
would increase expenses but it is not fair or
reasonable to expect that it would in
crease expenses 300 per cent. or that the city's
growth from 1880 to 1892 would Justify an
increase of 800 per cent. The expenses of
this year compared with 1880 show more
than that much Of an increase. The yalua-
tion was $3.50. 000, 600, and with tax rate of
i mills, the total expenses were 81 49,, ,000
But you win a. serve the Poor Board onlv
gets $40, 600, or 5 per cent more than in
1880 Education only get about so per
cent more than in 1880, yet there is no
surer indication OF growth than that
shown by schools. If they show .oniv 80
per cent. increase, how can the city's growth
show 800 per cent. of growth. Our tax rate
this year could be kept down to II mills
without the least embarrassment or stoppage
of improvements, and it should be done"
Among the appeals filed yesterday were
the following:
Twentieth ward-on lot 155xl4l at Els
worth and Aiken avenues, Mary w. Rodd is
assessed SO 200. She appeals for SIS, ,000 and
says no sales have been made in that vicin-
ity at over 500 per front foot.
Thomas Achison, assessed SCI 463 for es6x
300, on Aiken avenue, and s, 400 on 45x2G3 lot
on Potter street. asks them reduced to Sl6-
$50 and 81. $50 respectively.
W. 4. Renshaw, asks for cut from So $50
to 81. $50 on 65X200 on Moorewood avenue Ed
ward Groei ginger, on the same street. as
sessed S25 050 for l64x200 feet appeals for Sl9-
$50.
The Riding School lot. I62x2sl, on Bayard
street is assessed al Sl6232. T. r. Hostetter
the owner, appeals for S12, 00o
George W. Baum, assessed sle5,00o for 5Il
acres, constituting part of Bauns Grove, at
Center and Roup streets, fixes the value at
$4,000.
John G. Holmes asks for a cut from $4,000
10 SO 900 on 3.s4 acres at Center avenue and
Rehecca street
Dr. W. H. Winslow asks cut from $40 600
to $3.50 Tor l00x200 at Aiken avenue and
Claybourne street, and offers to sell the va
cant 50 feet of the lot at that rate, SIS per
foot.
James W. Baum is assessed sl35 500 on $40
SEQ. - wv -' nv ioi 10
H. A. Laughlin makes the following ap-
peals: lot ll21293, Ellsworth and Bidwell as
sessed SIS AZ. sl6s09; lots lI9xls1 and 20ax2GO,
Bayard and Bidwell, ana lot i2sxlsi, Wslling-
ford and Bidwell, assessed S34490 s240
w. Z. Hamilton asks for a reduction from
Slo,375 to ss,S52 on an s0xSOO foot lot on
Nlneblddle avenue, which he says he paid
for it.
Joseph Breil, assessed $50 per front foot on |
4OxlOO feet on Ellsworth avenue, wants it |
made $50 per foot; on Two lots, 20xl00 each, |
on Cypress street, assessed p { S45 per foot b., |
fixes the value al $50 and makes tie same re-
ouctl0n on 45HlOO feet on O'Hnra street, as |
sessed at $40 per foot.
c. F. BinanRuian was assessed S. 500 on a lot
s4y24l, at Ellsworth and Anderson avenues, |
IN 1891 and Sl6,SO0 this year He appeals for |
W. L. King appeals as follows: Lot lO0z36S |
Center avenue and BiGwell, assessed s2O9s5
$4,000 Lot l00x363, rear of Center avenue,
assessed SIG 5S2; 81 ,920. Lot l5lxl72 waIline-
50 $50
II II. X. Porter's appeal on assessments of
Soi5tO on IA acres at Fifth and Anderson |
avenues and ll5XIO0 feet on Shakespeare |
street, 81 500, he asks for rural" elassifica-
non and the assessment made the same as |
his neighbors
II. L. Mason, assessed s2s, 400 on l37xo6e feet
on Ellsworth avenue and Bidwell street, ap-
Peals Tor cut to $50 per front foot which
ne says property near him is offered for.
B Ne@ley is assessed S26, ,759 on 234x2S0
feet IN rear OF Fifth avenue at the corner of
ANDERSON. He asks for ''1ural' rating and
the same valuation as his neighbors
T. ID. Messler, assessed S62 500 on aId acres
on Fltth avenue near Bidwell, appeals for
reductlon to $4,000 and says: This prop
IA &c imposed on the builtuD portions of the !
city as provided by law,
Judge Acheson, assessed So 100 on 65x9OO |
feet on Pitcairn and Dahlia stIeets anneaIS
for $500 rating as the strsetS are nn1
opened he accepts an assessment of sI7 600
on llOx2iO feet on his Amperson avenne
property.
W. M Mcfarland and J. G. Stevenson ask
for cut from S1O,.iO TO s, ,96S on 432xl2O feet |
on Haw keye street, claininn thar tho ,ro1 |
eIty mas no sbreet, water, gas or other inn |
provements and should be rated n Srnroi -
Jonn Ioa wilson, assessed $40 500 asks cut to
streets, and from s., GOO to 81 son on Go, 20 49,
on Walnut street. WA -o' ioe'
Robert Woods asks for a reduct,o, t.o,,, ,
50. az to 81, 500 on l35x2CO 1eet on Penn avn
nue..
Frank Mcknight paid S., 500 for a 5o1,.o,o.
on Center avenue, near RouD street snG
wants II so assessed, the assessors fi1nres
being s., 500.
his 5Oxl00 lot and $4,000 on his livery sto NJ
at Penn and Shady avenues His ysI~a ie |
$50 0oQ on the ground and $4,000 on the
'no
Twenty first ward-The assessors valued "a.
acres of Daniel heaters on Nelson street ~
tween Fifth avenue and Anderson street. a. | :
81 ,316. His value is "a, l25 and his enneaS
SAYS "S acres of it is on steep hillside and 81
most worthless for any purpose
Il frank H Sheer on 55rl35 fees on poS-s y