The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-06
SANBERNARD|NOPROBLE
Remarkable Situation of the
Board of Supervisors Over
an Assessment.
Reduction Made Without Auth GRITTY
and the Taxpayer Refused to
Return His Receipt.

SAN BERNARDINO, CAL, Dec. s.
The most remarkable situation of affairs
growing out Of the over-assessment of a
large tract of land is Just now the whole
topic of interest at the courthouse and the
final developments may be sensational.
The matter will be presented to the Grand
Jury and action will wholly depend on the
extent to which it thinks an officer may
go to right a wrong when the time for
Fighting 1t is past.
George IL. Crofts is owner of SIS acres in
the Crofton Tract on which the Savings
Bank of Southern California has mort
gagged interest. Through an error in as
sessment it was valued at $50 and $50 per
acre when $40 would have been an extreme
valuation. The owners made no appear
aEce before the Board of Equalization to
ask for a reduction and the assessments
stood until time came for paying taxes.
The owners objected, as it made differ
ence of nearly $50, 600 in their assessment.
The SIS acres were assessed in 1894 for
$3.50. When land came up for assessment
this year several other pieces of land in
the same block were assessed at from $50
to $50 per acre, the land being of this
value. But 1t develops that while part of
the section has water and is in oranges,
this particular 515 acres has neither. But
this was unknown to the Assessor and
Judging it by the land adjoining, il was
assessed at $50 and so.
. The Board of Equalization met and ad-
iourned and the owners of the land put in
no objection to the assessment, nor did
Supervisor Ruggles, in whose district the
land is, note the mistake. The assessment
stood and the books went TO the Tax Col
lector, and from that moment there was
no legal way of applying a remedy. On
Monday Mr.. Woolwine, representing the
savings bank, came to the city again and
asked Assessor Kendall if he would go be-
fore the Board of Supervisors and see what
could be done. Mr.. Kendall and Mr.
WooIwine went before the board stated
their case, the Justice of Mr.. Woolwine's
plea, and ask ed relief
If the assessment shall be lowered it
would necessitate the Auditor giving the
Tax Collector credit for the amount and
this the Auditor would do only with the
consent of the board, although that would
not legaliZe it. The Supervisors agreed
to the credit, although no official action
was taken. Assessor Kendall and Deputy
Tax Collector Copeland at once went to
the Tax Collectors office and, lining out
the original figures and inserting others in
red INK, reduced the assessment from
$24. 800 to $3.50, rating the land at $40 per
which. upon that basis, was a little less
than 5000. and secured a receipt, which
otherwise would have cost him over $1100.
District Attorney Daley came before the
Board of Supervisors, learned what had
been done, Informed the board of the abso-
lutte illegality OF such thing and that step
would be nothing less than the changing
of 4 public record, something which could
not be thought of. The Supervisor. at
once decided to withdraw their consent
and dispatched word to the Auditor and
Tax Collector to that effect, but in the
meantime the deed had been done. Wool |
wine had his receipt and when Deputy
Tax Collector Copeland demanded its re-
turn Woolwine refused and a stormy in
terview followed, but Woolwine kept his
receipt.
What the outcome will oe is impossible |
TO say and the problem is the most diff |
cult that has ever been presented in this |
county. The facts will all be placed before
the Grand Jury and its action will be the
first thing 10 consider.