The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1910-07-06


property, taxable, should be taxed ac-
cordng to its true value in money.
This was amended Nov. 7, 1905. and
amendment went into effect on Jan
1, 1906, by yea vote of 655,5OS
against nay vote of 139,062. Under
the law of 1851, to the present time,
appraisements or valuations for tax
alton have not been uniform nor ac-
cordng to the true value in money of
the property subject to taxation
These valuations have varied all the
way from Sito 40 per cent. Some pro-
perties under pull influences, have
only been valued at per cent. of
their true value in money, these, of
course. are In the minority, but lots
of other properties have been valued
only at IL 1-2 per cent. and 33 1-3
per cent. and on up to 40 per cent
If you don't believe this, examine the
duplicate values. And in the country,
same way This has been going on
In this way for SO years at least and
some have been paying taxes for
themselves and others, and these 9th.
ers have thus had part of their taxes
paid by others, who had also their
own taxes to pay. In plain language,
these people (who only had their
property appraised or valued for tax
alton at these low prices, and knew
that II was only s to 20 per cent. of
the true value thereof in money and
knew their property was thus ap
praised and knew that other peoples
property of about the same value as
theirs, was appraised at 16 to 40 per
cent. or double) these people were
stealing just that much money from
the taxpayer who paid twice as much
as he ought and they knew 1t and
| hence 1t was stealing. This is the
unequal and wrong condition Of
things today and for SO years past
| What has been done under the
amendment? Boards of appraisers
have been appointed. How were they
sworn to value our taxable property?
Why, uniformly and also according
to its true value in money" What has
our board done? "Thcy have done
the best they could" But what have
they done? First. they had an eX-
pert from out of town" to put a
very, very, exceedingly very low val.
uation on the business buildings of
the city. We don't need out-Of-town
experts to value our property What
our board permitted by having eX.
pcrts value for them, what they were
sworn to value themselves, was IL
legal. Experts were not sworn to
value by uniform rule and also ac-
cording to its true value in money.
And | doubt, II there is a member of
that board, that will spear today
(however much they may feel like
swcaring) that their appraiscment or
valuation Is uniform and according
to its true value In money. The
board did not, as members have in
formed me, see even all of the pro-
perty that was valued and will be
taxed, and 1t did not even follow the
true and usual rule and way of ar
riving at uniform and true value
in money of the properties they did
see. What Is the legal rule of ap-
praislng property? At executors, ad-
minlstrators' and sheriifs' sales APP
praiscmcnts are made, upon actual
view, which means the appraisers
must go upon the lot, value 1t, ana
go into the buildings and value them
they must be thorough, go from cellar
to gaIrct In the dwelling and all
through the business and other build
ms and take particular note of all the
facts about them that go to make up
their value. The appraisers for taxes
have not done this, but should have
They have not even viewed actually
or otherwise some of the property IN
the city, but they have got It's value
reported. How did they do it, guess
at or take somebody elsc's appraise-
mcnt of it, not their own? The eX-
pert has put 20 per cent. value on
business buildings. The appraisers
have put an eXorbitant value on busi-
ness lots. The appraisers have cut
the land or lot appraisement down
from their first value in money 20
per cent. of that value. They have
cut the first business building value
the expert made down 20 per cent.
from that value. AS an example,
where are we now at. My lot was
valued at first at $4,000. | under
stand IL has had a horizontal reduc-
ton of IA or 20 per cent. which
would leave 1t $1,650. They valued
the Albertson business building whicn
is 16 1-2x165 feet, at S15,675; 25 per
cent. off leaves 1t at $l1.756. | am
only asking $4,000 for this entire
property. There are others just like
and worse than this. The most non
uniform and unequal appraisement Is
between the dwelling buildings, that
don't bring in any rents and the busl-
ness buildings that do bring In rents;
If any partially therefore should be
shown between our homes and busi-
ness buildings, II should be In favor
of our home buildings, for every own
er of business building Is also own
er of home building; but no partl-
ality should In fact be shown. My
residence building is valued for tax
alton by this board at 5000, l find
no fault or complaint, think 1t pretty
near right, might have been little
higher and been according to its true
value in money. But the Culbertson
business building, in which j. C..
Markert has his china store, was first
appraised or valued by the expert of
Cleveland at $S25 This is a brick
building 16 II feet wire, 124 feet
deep and two stories high in the CEN
ter of the city, Under this final horl-
zontal reduction of the board they
have cut it down 20 per cent. so now
it stands appraised at $3.50, Can you