New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-09-19
THE TAXATIONOF NETWORK
CHAIRMAN HEERMANCE. OF THE STATE
BOARD OF TAX COMMISSIONERS.
REPLIES TO Mr. FEITNER.
REPLIES TO MR.. +
- I-1t,o- 20 Tho Tribune

there appears an Interview with Thomas l.. fe'--
ner president Of the Tax Department OF New-lo'K
City which in substance was published In several
other papers OF about the same date and con
corning which desire 10 make puDhc s'i'eH'i'
through your columns
do not consider that public officers under criti-
cism are called upon as rule 20 rush INTO PRINT
I'm defence of their official acts, but when by rel-
son OF misrepresentation made and reiterated t'e
people of an entire community come TO believe trat
they are suffering from injustice AZ the hands u
! such officials something in the way OF refnta'ion
seems TO be called for.
Mr.. Feitner is represented as saving In suOs'ahe
that an outrage penetrated on the county 't
New York by act Of the State Board OF Equaiiz'
ton nj its recent meeting. 1t H. an attack upon
the honesty or intelligence or both. not only ci
the three members OF the State Board OF Tax
Commissioners. but also upon the Ideutenant-GoN-
ernor Of the State. the Speaker of the Aasembl!'
the Secretary Of State, the Controller. the At'''-
ney General. the State Treasurer ana the S'a,e
Engineer all OF whom cx-ofcio members 4
the State Board Of Equalization. and ell OF whoi'
with the exception of the Secretary Of State. were
present and participated I'm the unanimous action
Of the State Board CT Equalization on the dth
inst Moreover II il direct reflection on the -
dietary of this State. constituted and maintained
for the express purpose Of correcting just suci
outrages when committed.
II wrong was done TO the county OF New for'
the courts Of this state open for redress an
most assuredly the members Of the State Roari
of Tax Commissioners would welcome an invesi-
cation which would determine tina, question
Mr. Feitner states that the addition Of upward Z
slsS 900 900 the assessed valuation OF taxable
property in New-York County made in the
face OF the fact that an investigation OF the
Deputy Tax Commissioners Of NewYork proves
that assessments In New-York County are higher
than IN any other county I'm the State. | take O.
rect issue with Mr.. Fctner upon that siat"meti,
challenging the proofs to which he refers. and 20
emphaticay assert that the assessments OF real
property the county of New-Yor> are con-
slderably lower than In any other county Of the
State. with the exception OF Clinton County anl
Richmond County.
Referring to the statement in the report Of the
State Board of Tax Commissioners to the State
Board Of Equalization. that we had Invited NJ.
Feitner TO be present and present his proofs whoa
hearings were given to committees from various
counties he 4ays: The commissioners say the
notified US Of their meetings. and gave rs an o.
portuuity 70 attend their hearings, but that "" ok
not attend: what they did was TO send VA teIe-
gram the day before they met In Albany. and' 80
| was on n vacation. | did not get IT. Ihat VS.
probably the fact due oversight as regards oni
Of the later meetings. but several days before on'
OF the earlier hearings called AZ the Office Of th'
State Tax Commissioners. and. In the absence =
any OF them. LEFT a note 10 Mr. FeIthef f'a'h@
the date OF such hearing several days IA adV"h''
and asking him to BE present or 10 SEND "A T"pi'i-
sentative. and subsequently before such meeting
was held ! received an acknowledgment OF mat
| notihca ton and a statement that he was on M
| vacation and could not attend
SEEKING DATA FROM MIR. FEITNER.
| ON August 3 / wrote Nj. Fei,ner the following
letter: .,... = 1909
Hon Thomas l.. Feiincr. president Boafu OF Tax
Commlssloners No. 80 Broadway Ne"-hoiK
city .. -. 80, lima
OF our meeting with your Board on ne lSih W
! that YOU would furnish this Board with the IN
| counties OF the State presented by your Bori
was based We would De very glad 70 have h"' 81.
ngulrIer from officials OF the several countiea ~
,eres,ed. asking or the data upQn when 'h' pr
ceutagcs referred 10 was established.
scnd you by this mail COPY OF the brief on be
half Of Columbia County. filed last year. and my
OF the fact that this Is o. tho counties inv"s-
tisated by your board could send 70. f s,m 4,
year. but this happens 20 he Ne only one 81 VIM
We have duplicates We would be very gao, nov o',-
Board this once ~ any time and Invest,
gate similar data With reference TO tho several
MARTIN uEERMANCE, Chairman.
This was more than n month before the meeting
Of tho state Board Of Equalization. the date =
which is nxed by statute FOR tho FIRST Tuesday iH
| September. No response vas ever made 10 thht
| letter and whatever tho character OF the proof
Il
| either TO the State Board OF Tax Commissioners
! or 20 the State Board Il Equalization.
! Such Injustice ~ MIR. Feiner alleges was done
| 20 tho county OF New-York In the state equaIna-
ton might arise from either or both Of two cause
! Ney-York County might be credited with a pc
| centaqe OF assessment 20 actual value lower thHn
that 10 which II was entitled the other counties
! OF the state might be credited with percentages of
! assessment to fun value higher than th"y were
entitled 10. In this case, the latter CONDITION -
! the one which seems 10 be complained Of II may
| DE well IN this connection TO explain the method
! by which the State equalization Is made. "a I
! does not seem to be generally understood
From all sources OF Information available -
| the State Board OF Tax Commissioners they tx -
| certain percentage FOR each county which. as inc
result Of their Investigations. they IND tnat me
assessment Of real property bears 10 the fun value
| Of the property assessed. on ne basis 81 sH''
percentage they raise the assessment to full value
| For instance Albany County was credited with be
ing assessed at :. per Of full value the returned
! assessment for that county .as sn"b."I' Ihi'
being 7s per cent. the full value OF the zeal prop
| erty In the county would be SllG.i23'Ss. Tho r.
! turned assessment for New-York County "a'
| u 1877 059 0gi New-York County teing credited -
| assessed AZ G3 per cent Of actual value. the full
value would be 81 sG 6I2si2 This process of r'i''
ing the assessed values to fuli values on ;hf hsl'
| OF the percentages fl ed 10y the Board wn" applied
to every county. with n result that the aesrcgat
| ~ me state was shown 10 be s62ii s5i.2}i IRIS
divided into the aggregate OF the returned "Sse..
| ments for the sixty counties. to WIZ the sum
81 $40 sol 52G gives the average assessment 10 lu'
! value in each county. being ~ TINS case. d''
| NAL .es65il723. Tho raised v"iu" OF each coun'.
multiplied by this decimal gives the equalGc1 Naiu,
of chch county. For Instance the iul 'AIut ~
New York CITY the basis OF c3 per cent ~
sessment Is s. 1896 Gl2 81 which. multiplied by ",
above decimal. gives slD15.gl92G0. This process
applled TO each one Of the counties gives the SUI
total OF equnliZod assessments precisely IN" sam
as the sum total OF returned assessment aui NV
/ inn an .olia
| Inc from the returned assessment Of that coun
| by the amount of difference between the dec!mf
representing the average assessment for the entire
| State, and the percentage At which that county
was credited with b'rg ass"ssed