The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-16
The County'S Representatives
Asked to Explain Ger
tain Figures.
DISCREPANCIES POINTED OUT.
Numerous Instances Cited Wherein
Mortgages We're Larger Than
Assessments.

State Board OF Equalization had busy
day to-day listening to the arguments
from Alameda County in answer to the
summons asking its representatives to ap-
pear and show cause why its assessments
should not be raised. They did not want
their assessment raised, and the conse-
Quence was that the Assessor and deputies,
together with the Board of Supervisors,
appeared before the equalizers and argued
earnestly and long that they had been
fairly assessed, and that there was nothing
to justify the raise.
They were confronted with figures that
staggered them. but asserted that property
values had decreased since certain mort
cages had been made, and insisted that
many pieces of property mortgaged for
double the value of the assessment on the
same cut no figure in the case.
Equalizer Beamer was the main ques-
toner, and he came arrayed with facts
that neither the Alameda Assessor nor
his deputies were able to refute.
At frequent intervals Controller Colgan
interposed terse questions that confused
the Assessor and his deputies and led in
the end to Assessor Dalton saying that if
he had another chance he would make a
fairer assessment, and that Alameda's tax
roll would be raised considerably.
The Auditors report of Alameda
County's assessment for 1895 contains the
following figures: Real estate, $37, IA, 2S7;
improvements, $25, 712, 316; personal prop
erty, $8,328, $50; money, $484,782. Total,
$92, 272, 944
Assessor Dalton presented written re-
quest that the board delay action in the
matter of Alameda County's assessment
for 1895 until the end of the month, by
which time the Superior Court will have
decided the matter now before it as to cer-
tain reductions made by the local Board of
Equalization.
The request was unanimously granted,
and the board proceeded to hear the repre-
sentatives OF the county.
County Clerk Jordan of Alameda County
addressed the board and read figures to
show that the increase in the assessed
valuation of Alameda's property for 1895
over that of 1894 was in proportion to the
actual increase IN assessments made dur
ing the years since 1891, the total increase
since 1891 being SIS, 288, 900. The increase
since 1892 was $6,S10127.
Equalizer Arnold asked the Alameda
Board of Supervisors how it came about
that the Assessor found only $685., $50 in
money and solvent credits, while the Au-
ditor reported $484, 7S2, difference of
$102, 1872
Supervisor Johnson said he did not re-
member that the County Board of Equal
ization had changed the assessment on
money and solvent credits.
Another Supervisor said that the Board
of Equalization had not touched the mat
ter at all, and they could not tell how the
discrepancy came about.
Controller Colgan called attention to
another discrepancy between the total
assessed valuation as returned by the Au-
ditor to the visiting delegation and that as
furnished by him to the State Controller
and the State Board of Equalization. The
report to the Controller calls for $92, 272, ga,
while that to the Supervisors is for $751;
920,044, discrepancy of $685., 800.
1t was ascertaIned that one franchise.
valued at $250,0OO, had been put under the
head of personal property.
Equalizer Arnold asked Supervisor Tai
colt whether he thought that the increase
of $316, 900 in Brooklyn Township and that
to Oakland city of $61, 900 was fair esti-
mate and whether he did not think that
Oakland's proportion of increase was not
greater than that shown by the figures
Supervisor Talcott replied that he
thought his township had done as well as
any other.
Controller Colgan announced his discov-
cry that the discrepancy of 1852, 900 in the
Auditors report had been caused by the
insertion OF $685., 900 State University mort
cages, which are not subject to taxation
Supervisor Plouze of the city of Oakland
reported that the First Ward was not en-
titled to any share in the increase of SCI,
600 of the whole city. On the contrary,
valuations of property in that ward had
declined. There was no sale at all for zeal
estate in that ward. Real estate about
Oakland Point and in that vicinity had
deprecated in value since the railroad
strike of 1894. It was, however, only a
temporary depreciation, and he had faith
in the future. Property in West Berkeley
and close to the bay had also deprecated
in value, and the whole of Oakland west of
Center street, or to line half a mile up
from the waters edge.
Beamer remarked that property assessed
for $4,000 was mortgaged for $685.
and called attention to another piece
of land assessed at $3.50 and mort
gagged for $2771, also to piece of land as
sessed to Anspacher Brothers for $3925
and mortgaged for 1910, also to 3s5 acres
assessed for $4,000 and mortgaged for $4,000
The case of John Callahan was also cited
by Beamer. IL was assessed for $3.50 and
mortgaged for 1925. Then came the ranch
OF Pat CaIlad, assessed for $4,000 and mort
gagged for $500; the ranch of w. w. Cam
eron, assessed for $500 and mortgaged for
$500; Rosalio Clemisher, assessed for
$l4, 125 and mortgaged for $25, 600; A. Duval,
assessed for $4,000, the exact face of the
mortgage; George c. Edwards, assessed
for Sill 600 and mortgaged for $13, 600; Mrs
w. J. Fallon, assessed for $500O the face of
the mortgage; Rancho ell Vale, 22O0 acres
Ga portion of it belonging to Charles N.
FELTON,, assessed for 1888, 600 and mortgaged
for $4,000; John Galloway. assessed for
$1,000 and mortgaged for $1s,5o0; Hatch
G. Rohrer, orchard and vineyard, assessed
for SIS, 200 and mortgaged for S22, 800; 1.
Huler, assessed for SIS, 400 and mortgaged
for $15,sO0. Then Mr.. Beamer asked about
the six.y-aere orchard of J. P. Smith, as