The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1893-08-17
State Board OF Equalization Puts
Back Real Estate
Values.
Claim That the County Board Did
Not Make the Reduction
Legally.
Lewis and Clarke Com m Iss Ioners Contend
That They Did Not EHceed Their
Powers and Will Fight 1t Out.

The state board OF equalization at its
neetinR yesterday made ruling which. II
IL stands. will make the year 1894 an inter-
ssttng one to tho Taxpayers of this and some
other counties in Montana. When the
board OF county commissioners of Lewis
and Clarke sat ~ a board Of equalization
in July. after souaiizing assessments In in
divdual oases. they made general 25 pes
cent reduction in real estate values. A few
days ago the board Of county commission
ers met and made the tax levy on the basis
of this 25 per oent reduction in zeal estate.
This levy wils have 10 stand and il the ac-
tion of the state board Of equalization 10
upheld by the courts where IL will go, in
stead Of the tax ayes of Lewis and Clarke
paying less they will pay three and half
mills more on about the same valuation
than they did last year.
Lewis and Clarke. Silver Bow and Deer
Lodge are among tho counties that made q
general reduction in real estate asssssm ents
this year. The olerk Of the state board was
directed to notify the county boards that
they had not acted legally In the judgment
of the state board. in the cd they adopt
ed TO reduce the real estate assessment, and
that the state board had put 10 back whore 10
was before the general reduction was made.
he state board bases its action on sections
62, 63 and GA OF the revenue laws. % fol-
lows:
mo reduction must be made in the valu-
alton of property unless the party affected
thereby, or his agent. makes aud hles with
the board written Application therefor.
verified bv his oath, showing the facts upon
which IL is claimed such reduction should
be made.
Before the board grants the application.
or makes any reduction applied for. il must
examine, on oath, the pc son o, the agent
making application, touching the value Of
the property of such person. No reduction
must be made unless such person. or the
agent making the application, attends and
answers all questions pertinent TO the in
quiry.
Upon the hearing Of the application the
board may subpoena such witness. hear and
take such evidence in relation 10 tho cub
jeot pending. - In ito discretion II nay
deem proper"
Secretary Of state Roswit.. . member Of
the state board, referring to tho action Of
the board, said the county boards had made
horizontal reductions and according TO the
state boards view of the matter, In view of
the sections above quoted, this they could
not do; that the only why county boards
could reduce assessments was in the manner
presented in the above sections Of the rsvs-
nue. law. pa ssed in 1891.
County Com missionets Knight and Ed
Rerton were noti6e d late In the afternoon
OF the action of the state board. Mr..
knight said tho county board Of equalixa-
tion had not mnde horizontal reduction,
as alleged by the state board. but had
equalized tho value Of the real estate with
the Improvements and other personal prop
erty. Commissioner EdQerton said the
board had been guided in it's action BY ths
provisions Of section 81. OF the revenue law
OF 1884, and had not exceeded thtir power
under that section. That part Of the SEQ
tion under which the commissioners sosed
reads as follows:
''Said board Of county comm ssioners 10
vested with full power to make any changes
in the valuation of property, whether such
change Ielates to an entire elass or to par
ticular items Of property. zeal or personal.
and they shall make such changes ~ will
result in a fair valuation Of property within
the meaning Of this act; provided. how
ever, that nothing in this section contained
shall confer authority upon said board TO
change or alter in any way any assessment
made by the state board of equalization Of
any railroad, or the property OF the same.
or of any person"
ut is a we'll known principle of law"
said Mr.. EdRerton, that in constituting an
ordinance, ii must be taken AZ whole, and
such construction placed on it as will give
effect to every section. Under section 81 in
our opinion boards of county commissioners
have full power to make changes in the
valuation of property as class. This 10
what we did in regard TO Ieat estate. The
sections OF the law quohsd by The
state board refer TO individual
changes in individual cases. and require
that those affected must appear before the
board PEI sonally or by agent. II tho view
OF the state board 10 correct in order for
county bond to make . reduction in the
assessment value of any class of property,
every individual taxpayer would have TO
aprear before the board. or at least
make written application. We had .
petition before Us requesting The re-
duction, but OF course this petition
did not include all The real estate owners
in tho county. To follow the view held BY
the state board 10 an in,possibility. and I
have no doubt that the county boards will
be upheld by whatever tribunal shS matter
may 60 before for adjudication. We oan-
not change the levy now. and ii is NOT tight
That the p ople of this county should suffer
as they would under the interpretation
given the revenue law by the state board"
In the absence Of County Attorney Nolan
the county commissioners have retained
eX-Gov. j. X. Ioole to take charge Of their
case. What tho h,st move 10 DO made by
she county commissioners has not been de-
aid Hon