The evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1907-1908, 1907-09-20
Jersey City Boards Valua-
tiOnS Will Be Reduced
by a Big Sum.
STATE BOARDS OPINION
Gives Credence to Experts Intro
duced by Railroads and Says
Local Board Violated Law.
Franchises Must Be AS
sessed Separately.
Especial to the Evening starI

TRENTON, Sept. 2O,-Two opinions
were rendered today by the State
Board of Equalization of Taxes in the
appealed cases of railroads of New
Jersey from assessments made in Jer-
sey City in 1906 against railroad prop
erty there. One opinion is concurred
in by four of the members; the other
was made by Charles c. Black
The result of the main opinion will
make a reduction in the assessed valu-
ations. While it is known that the re-
duction will amount to large sum
none of the members would venture to
| give any figures. The exact amount,
the members say, win not be ascer-
tanned until comparison is made with
the local assessors returns. The total
amount of the present assessment Is
| $54, 100000. The main opinion Is as
follows:
Il That all franchise values reflected in
the real estate of the petitioners, and in
cluded in the assessment, must be elimi-
mated
80 That all assessments of main stem,
as defined by the Court of Errors and APP
peals and assessed by the assessors OF Jer-
sey City, must be cancelled.
| 49, That all assessments of ferry boats
must be cancelled, as these are assessed
under the law by the State Board of AS
SCISSORS.
"a. That the property OF the petitioners
can be assessed only at its true value, as
shoulN all other property in Jersey City.
1.-THE evidence presented to the board
consists of witnesses who testified orally
as TO the value of the various properties
and their improvements. Of assessments
made by the State Board of Assessors, of
the judgments of the former State Board
of Taxation, giving the value of some of
these properties. of maps and documentary
evidence throwing light on the value of
these properties, and of personal inspection
| by the board of the river-front properties.
1.-THE witnesses presented by the petit
toners were Mr.. p. Sanford Ross. a gedl-
tleman Of the highest standing both In
business and public affairs whose entire
business career has been spent in the I'M
provement and building up of the river
front properties; Mr. M. Cam, the City
Engineer of Hoboken whose official and
professional duties have made him familiar
with the values OF river front properties,
and Mr. Harrison, who is an acknowledged
expert as to the value of properties of this
kind
They also produced a number of witt
nesses Of unquestionable ability and integ-
rity, who testified as to the value of the
back lands of the petitioners. All these
witnesses. together with the judgments of
the former State Board of Taxation and
the assessments made by the State Board
of Assessors, show the value on a number
of the properties of the petitioners TO be
much less than the assessments made by
the assessors of Jersey City, while in
other instances they agreed, practically.
with the values on them placed by local
boards They also differed materially
among themselves in their testimony as to
values. from which it is to us apparent
that the testimony was given In good
faith and not prearranged, and Is entitled
to credit.
1.-THE assessments made by the assessors
of Jersey City were made in open viola
ton of the law and against the order of
this board in that they consolidate real
estate with Improvement values; they
should have assessed them separately
This makes the determination of these
valuations more complicated and difficult.
The assessments on the petitioners proper
ties were made by the assessors of Jersey
City upon the advice of Mr.. Ehrhardt,
New York expert who himself admitted
that he had included in these valuations
the franchise values, which, under the
law, must be eliminated the franchises
being assessed under different law by
the State Board of Assessors.
'In applying the evidence given before
this board to the different properties in
question, each property assessed must be
considered by itself, taking into considera-
tion the location and all other facts form
ing it's value. This is the manner In which
all properties whose valuations are adjudi-
Gated by this board are treated, and We
can find neither law nor facts which would
justify us In dividing the petitioners prop
critics into groups and considering their
value with regard to the groups to which
they belong.
1.-THE only evidence Offered by the city
as to the value Of the Improvements was
that of Mr.. Roberts, an architect OF Jer-
sey City. While Mr. Roberts is undoubted-
ly an able architect In the construction of
houses, he has had, as he himself testified
no experience In the erection of improve
ments of the character on the petitioners
properties
His estimate as to property with which
hew as professionally acquainted did not
differ materially from the railroad esti-
mate. This fact, and the testimony under
oath of the petitioners engineers, testify
Ing to the actual cost of these improve
ments, has caused the board unanimously
TO decide to accept as correct the valua-
tions placed on these improvements by the
petitioners engineers.
'The decision Of the Court of Errors and
Appeals dennlng main stem, the law re-
quiring ferry boats to be assessed by the
State Board Of Assessors and the law tax
ing franchise values by the State Board Of
Assessors have eliminated large amounts
Of values from the assessments made by
the assessor of jersey City.
Upon mature consideration Of the eu-
dences the board finds the value of the
petitionars' properties to be as appears by
the schedule here to annexed, and judg-
ment win be entered accordingly"