The San Francisco call., 1897-08-19
EouaIizers Listen to the
Representatives of
the County.
Thew Claim Their Assessment
This Year Shows Too Great
an Increase.
Beartv Valuations Placed Too High
as Compared With Other
Communities.

SACRAMENTO, CAL, Aug. Is. San
Benito sent delegation four strong to
make its plea before the Board of Equali-
zatlon for reduction of Is per cent IN its
assessment. They were: D. F. McPhail,
the Assessor of the county; District At
torney John l.. Budner; William Palm
tag. chairman of the Hollister Board of
Trustees. and E. J. Sparkling, chairman OF
the San Benito Supervisors. San Benito' s
assessment last year was $6. 426, 005. This
year the roll of the Assessor shows
Sc, 523, 795.
McPhail opened the argument. He was
asked by Chairman Morehouse if he was
not the Assessor for San Benito County.
He re piled in the affirmative.
You made the assessments for the
county and now ask for a reduction of Is
per cent" commented Morehouse.
Yes, sir" responded McPhail, who
went on to explain his position. be de-
clared that on the first Monday in March,
wnen the assessments were made, the con-
duions were very faVora bic TO good crops.
Il had developed since then that many
did not get enough from their lands tC
feed their stock When the unfavorable
had proceeded too far to make any chan ge
in the assessment roll.
McPhaiI declared that while the assess
ment roll of San Benito had shown a
steady increase each year, her population
had remained virtually the same. Prop
erty was frequently offered for sale, he
added, at less than the amount for which
1t was assessed. In some cases the banks
had offered to take less than the face ot
,1a ha1A L.
and to lose a part of the interest.
But he relied principally he said, on
the fact that in comparison with other
counties his county had been assessed toe
high. Asked to mention some OF the
counties that he thought were not as
sessed up to the standard Of San Benito,
he named Fresno, Merced and Santa
Clara. He claimed that the banks of Hol-
lister were asse ed more nearly at their
true valuation than those OF any city in
the State, but on cross Examination by
6. l. Arnold, the Los Angeles mel mber oi
the board, this was shown not to be the
case, so far as Los Angeles was concerned.
Hudner reit rated the statement OF Nc
Phal to the effect that properly in San
Benito was assessed to its full cash value.
and that the value was higher than it
ought 10 be, as com mpared with other
counties in the State. He made no claim
cared that it was when comparison was
MI sde with other counties. He asserted
that the reports from other counties
showed an aggregate reduction of
S91, 600, 900, while San Benito showed an
increase, which under the circumstances
was not warranted.
Palmtag stated that he had always
thought the assessments were too high,
and had told McPhail so. The reason he,
as a member of the County Board of
Equalization, did not attempt TO reduce
them, he explained, was because it would
be TOO biz an undertaking; he preferred
to leave it to the State Board. He gave
several instances of land having been sold
for considerably less than the mortgage
on ii, and e ed one case where land as
sessed at $500 had been sold for $5000
Lands that formerly brought rental of
between $4,000 and $4,000 was now re-
turning but $40 0)0.
Sparling spoke for the southern end
OF the county. There, he said, lands that
bordered Fresno were assessed from 81 to
$6 an acre, while the adjoining land in
Fresno was taxed on vaIuation of only
81 25
The board took the application under
Amusement