The Washington times., 1894-08-13
SPECULATIVE HOLDINGS EXEMPTED.
C. B. Hemingway Thinks the Assessment
System Is Full of Errors.

C. b. Hemingway Thinks the Assessment
System Is Full of Errors.
Mr. C. B. Hemingway has addressed letter
to the President on the subject of assessments
in the District which reads in part as follows:
To the President
sir: have the honor to invite your atten-
tion 10 certain facts in connection with the
bill lately passed by both Houses III X. 64l3l
''To provide an immediate revision and equal
ization of real estate values in the District
of Columbia, etc, for purposes OF taxation,
with a view 10 supplying you Information on
which TO base your action in the exercise of
your constitutional prerosative.
consist of the so-called 'oyerassessment" OF
some property, about which we have heard so
much in public aud which is but trifing, but IL
consists OF the fact that the most valuable busi-
ness lands and the speculative lands business
lots are assessed al but a small percentage OF
market value as compared with the assessments
OF home or residence lands, and thereby great
burden of taxation is imposed on home owners
and tenants, while the wealthy property owners
and land owners are comparatively exempt
and pay but a small proportion of the taxes
they should in justice be required to pay.
The following is, believe, fair summary OF
the situation as il is Mt Resent: Very valuable
improvements are assessed At from 40 to 60 per
cent Of their value whiio medium and small
residences are assessed al 10 and 30 per cent.
OF their value.
The most valuable business lots are assessed
at from Is to - per cent OF their value; resi-
dence lots at from 40 TO 15 per cent. of their
value: most vacant lots or speculative lands at
8 to 20 per cent OF their value, and farms out
side of the speculative at 50 10 l25 per cent
of their value.
As result lands comprising three-quarters of
the land value OF the District pay but one
quarter of the real estate tax, and the remain
ing lands, comprising one-qusrter of the land
value OF the District, pay three-I uarters of the
real estate tax. The lands which are applied to
TO their best use and which are, therefore, OF
the benefit TO community
PEELED to endure an assessment from nve TO
twenty times great ION the basis OF actual
market valuel as that imposed on lands applied
to poor or no use at all
The defects in the law under which the in
equality has resulted may be classified as fol-
lows:
/ Indefiniteness as to what value shall be
assessed. The term value has been construed
in practice TO mean practically nothing. There
has been no standard
=. Latitude of opinion is allowed instead of
being required 10 return assessments in con-
formity with facts
J. Divided responsibility No particular per-
son can be held responsible for an assessment
l. Inadequate penalty clause. 1t cannot be
enforced owing 10 indeterminate responsibility.
) Secrecy with which appeals consid-
cred. The board of equalization excludes the
public from its sessions
6. Responsibility of beard of equalization.
:. The practice of determining q value from
actual View as the most important part of the
function of the assessors, and the absolute Ig-
norance by them of the ''other source OF infor-
nation within reach"
s. The public are not given opportunity TO
criticise the returns and are prevented access
thereto. and the assessment lists are not kept in
such shape as 10 be Ineligible to an ordinary
citizen.
o No provision requiring the board of equali-
zation 10 consider complaints of undue assess
ments DIT has been decided that the law does
not require itl
arated to keep pace with rapidly increasing
value. The whole system is so adjusted as TO
encourage the assessment of certain properties
at but small fraction OF the value contem-
plated by the law. The assessors are selected
in the first place on the recommendation OF the
wealthy property owners and land spectators.
They hold their place at the pleasure of such.
Therefore, they desire 10 be liberal in return
ing assessments on their property Further, II
is profitable for one who owns valuable piece
of property to secure n reduction of assessment.
and every expedieut that ingenuity could de-
wise and every specious argument that could be
presented has been used to that end. 1t pays
when the result of n reduction means hundreds or
thousands OF dollars But when 1t means Dut a
few cents or dollars (the case with small houses)
1t dees not pay to take the trouble Ihe Dill
which has Just passed does not correct any OF
these defects II Is no more definite than the
old law as to what value shall be assessed. and
tho term will likewise be construed to mean
nothing or anything,
The same latitude .of opinion" is allowed.
The same divided responsibility exists The
penalty clause is even more Inadequate, and
the punishment of the grossest favoritism
ceedings will be maintained, and the public
will be excluded from knowledge Of the facts
before Protests against the under assessment
of property will not be considered. And not
withstandng the fact that permanent board
of assessors is provided, assessments are to be
returned only once in three years. a condition
favoring land speculation and detrimental 10
the interests of all others; and also, leaving the
assessors with practically nothing to do for two
years out OF every three except drawing large
salaries In my humble opinion this bill should
be vetoed on the ground that it will only serve
TO perpotuate the existing evil and would Z ob-
ably make it greater, and the suggestion made
to Congress that it pass a bill that will correct
the known defects o. the law.
measure to do this should provide for
nual assessment; also that property be assessed
at the highest current market value. As this
would greatly increase the aggregate return,
the Commissioners should be empowered to an
nually fix the rate of tax and thus prevent the
collection of excessive revenue. Certain mini
NUNS below which assessments should not be
returned should also be provided
If a law containing such provisions as these
should be made we would have an equal assess
ment. With the responsibility for the ASSESS
ment fixed on one person and held within GER
tain clearly defined lines the assessor could not
return an assessment in violation OF law. Every
largo property owner would realize the useless
ness Of an attempt to secure q reduction
c. B. HEMINGWAY.
Death of n Prominent Mason.