The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-07-23
FOUR APPEALS.
County Board Of Equaliza-
ton of Taxes at Last
Has Petitions to
Consider.
ENTERTAINMENTS ASSESSMENT
Counsel ]. NJ. Noonan Files
An Opinion in Regard to
Reduction By State
Board
INEEHAWKEN'S ASSESSMENT.

ing of the County Board for the Eqhah-
zation of Taxes, sitting as Commission
ers of Appeals, yesterday afternoon
Three from Bayonne were referred to the
assessor from that district; the fourth,
that of Barbara Pepper of Weehawken'
was dismissed. as Mrs. Peppers husband
who represented her, could not or would
not tell the value of the property.
Joseph NJ Noonan, counsel for the
board, reported that the assessors naa
no legal right to charge property owners
for notices of assessments of real prop
erty. but that charges could be made Tor
assessment notices on personal property.
He also filed an opinion with the board
in regard to the reduction by the State
Board of Taxation, which reduced the
Weehawken assessment S155,o0o, which was
ordered spread upon the minutes, and is
as follows:-
Jersey City, N. j., July %, 1901
To the County Board for the Equalization
of Taxes and Commissioners of Appeal
in Cases of Taxation
Gentlemen-The State Board of Tax
alton having reduced by the sum of sl55,-
600 the assessment on certain realty in
the town of Weehawken, I was requested
at your last meeting, held on the goth
instant, to furnish you with an opinion
as to whether, in view of said reduction,
you should make a corresponding reduc-
tion, or any reduction, in the total value
contained in the assessment abstract of
that town as adjusted and corrected by
you on the Sth instant.
In the fourth section of the Act Great
ing your Board you are vested with the
to I'M irt all aSGpSSmPntS
turned to you by the assessors for the
purpose of equalizing the same between
the several assessment districts of the
county, and if it shall appear to you that
the value of the property contained in
any duplicate is relatively less than the
value of other property in the county,
you may, for the purpose of fixing and
adjusting the said proportion or quota
and for that purpose only, add thereto
such percentage as shall appear to you
Just and proper The sixth section of the
same Act provides that on the second
Wednesday of June. or as soon thereafter
as you can, you shall return to each as
SCISSOR his assessment abstract as adjust
ed and corrected by you.
The Town of Weehawken constitutes
one assessment district. I am informed,
and your minutes show, that the total
value of tie property contained in the du-
plicate of the assessor of that town as
presented by him to you amounted to 3d.
1850. On the Sth instant, as the result OF
a careful personal inspection and examl-
nation of properties and values in each
of the several assessment districts of tue
county you adopted a series of resoiu-
tions in conformity with the fourth sec
zion of the act above mentioned, which
included the following
s.Whereas. 1t appears to the satisfaction
OF this Board that the value of the prop
ertv contained in the duplicate of John M.
Hannah, the assessor from the taxing dis
trict of Weehawken, is relatively less
than the value of the other property in
the county, as such property is returned
to this board, and valued by the other as
SCISSORS except the values returned by the
assessors from the taxing districts OF
Nearny, Bayonne, North Bergen, West
Hoboken, Town of West New York and
Town of Union for the property therein
it is in the judg-
merit Of this Board just and proper to add
to the duplicate of ratables returned from
the taxing district of Weehawken 20 per
cent. of the amount of Weehawken, to
wit: the additional sum of $743,930;
..Resolved, That the value of all the
nroperty. real and personal contained in
the duplicate of ratables returned to this
Board from the taxing district of Wee
hawlsen be and the same are hereby in-
creased 20 per cent. to wit: from the i'm
of So, 71ee50, to the sum of $4,46S5S0."
/ am also informed ana your minutes
show that on the Sth instant, in COM
pIiance with the sixth section of the said
act. you returned to the Assessor of Wee
i1awlsen his assessment abstract as ad-
iusted and corrected by you. Since then
the reduction to which have referred,
has been made by the State Board of
Taxation.
on these facts am clearly of the opin-
ion that the action taken by you in your
j resolution of the Sth instant in regard to
values in Weehawken should not be dis
turbed. That resolution did not confirm,
reduce or affect the assessment of any
nartieular piece of property. 1t was
simply an adjudication by you, under the
nower committed to you by law, that the
total valuation in Weehawken as a whole,
without regard to any individual assess
msnt. was relatively less than the vaiua-
ton of other property in the county ana
that 1t should be increased by adolng
thereto 20 per cent. thereon. Ihe Juus-
ment which you exercised in this of1clal
act was based and conditioned upon your
personal inquiry, inspection ana lhVesti-
CATION of properties and values as wen
in Weehawken as in each of the other
assessment districts of the county ana
the soundness of that Judgment, unoer
the circumstances, cannot now be ques-
toned The situation presents no reai
hardship so far as Weehawken is con-
cerned for it is only fair to assume that
if the assessors return when presented to
you had shown the reduction that has
since been made by the State Board you
would have increased the added percent
age SO as to make up the amount of such
reduction. If an assessor assesses par
ticular piece Of property in excess Of its
true value and the assessment is reduced
by competent legal authority, It Is not
perceived how, in such an event, the
true total value Of az assessaple 2.
property il his taxing district Is di-
81