Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-01-19


Valuation Wa NOt ssOut of All
Reason"-Endeavored to Equalize
the Burden of Taxation, to Make
it Fall Proportionately Upon the
Rich and Poor Alike.
The reply. which was promised by
Assessor Helmbright, was furnished to
the Register yesterday. Mr.. Helm
bright assigns his reason for raising
the valuation of business property and
replies to some direct charges made.
His card in full is as follows.
To the Editor of the Register.
Sir:-In justice to myself I ask the
use of your columns to reply to what I
consider unjust charges made against
me as assessor, in making the re-as-
sessment of the city district of Ohio
county. No doubt l made mistakes
that deserve criticism, but such mis-
takes are liable to occur no matter
who did the work; but I will say,
where any error appears and I am
made acquainted with it, I will be ev-
er ready to appear before the proper
persons and admit my mistake and
ask a correction.
In making this assessment I was
governed by the law, and treated all
persons alike as. near as | knew how.
The law says all property must be as
sessed at a fair cash value. What is
a fair cash value or what is generally
considered a fair cash value? My I'M
derstanding has always been, and the
opinion of the majority of the property
owners is that about t%wo-thirds is a
fair cash value; the price a piece Of
property would bring if sold under the
hammer. That would be about &c per
cent of the actual value. Now, when
l proceeded to make this assessment
| found tWo-thirds value was the as
Sessment on some property, in fact the
majority, but what property was this?
lit was not the valuable and high
priced property in the business por-
ton of the city, property that COM
manded enormous rents and paid big
dividends every year to its owners.
No, it was not that kind. 1t was the
nlOolO CAdoo dlI0 WI hlu6 1uCll plOP-
erty, the property Of men who had
toiled all their lives to get a small
home to shelter them in their old age.
That is the property that / found as
sessed at about two-thirds.
What was this business property as
sessed at? Not &c per cent but about
20 per cent. Why did this inequality
exist? l will tell you. The poor work.
ingman has no Chamber of Commerce
to look after his interest or bring in
fiuenceS to bear. They are too modest
to go before the proper boards and ask
for a reduction, but go or and pay
their taxes without complaint. That
was the condition. / found matters in.
I at one made up my mind that all
property should be assessed equally,
the rich and the poor alike. What was
the consequences? Some Of this valu-
able property, property that had been
assessed at $500 to 5000 per foot l rails
ed to $500. This very property is be-
ing held and sold at $1,000 to $1,000
per foot. Property that is being sold
at $500 or $500 per foot was raised to
$500 or $500 per foot. Should I be
criticized? I leave it to the public to
judge whether l made an assessment
that is out of reason.
To su~bstantiate my statement I will
give a few figures of property that l
raised, and see if it is out of all rea-
son. We will take Market street from
Eleventh to Twelfth street. Take the
Peabody building. 1t was assessed in
the old assessment at $34, $50. raised
it to $42,500. This property sold
twice in a few months for 5000 0 Is
this out of all reason? Take the
Potts building. The old assessment was
$4,000. l raised it to $31, 900. This
building alone cost $33, 900. I have
MIR. Potts own statement for this.
Take the McLain block, raised from
$44,170 to Z 4,600. Does any person
think this property could be bought
for any price neal what 1 assessed it
at? If they do, let them try and see
what Is asked for it. Take the Ger
man Bank, raised from $780, 40 to $685.
700. This property was purchased by
the bank for $102, 900, not counting the
Improvements that were placed on it.
Then go to the block below and see
how matters stood. Take the John
Rinehart property where the 5 and 10
cent store is located. 1t was raised
from $3.50 to s19,250. Take the prop
erty where Charles Held has his res
taurant. He paid s15,2 200 for it. 1t was
assessed at $4,000. l raised it to 3d.
900. Take the Wiedebusch property
where Ziegenfelder and Nicols are
located. 1t was assessed at the enor-
nous price of s13,770. 1 raised it to
S27,S Go offer them $4,000 for it
and see If they will accept your Cffer.
If they do they have changed their
minds lately, for they refused an Of
fer of this kind. Take the Opera
House property. The old assessment
was $29,540. / raised it to S57, 900.
They refused, 1 am told, $1,000 per
foot. They have Ga feet front on Mar
ket street including the entrance TO
the theatre. Take the property where
Quimby and the news stands are To-
Gated on Market street, east side. IT
was assessed at $4,000. l raised it TO
s23,S 800; they refused $4,000, wanted
s36, 900. Take the property adjoining