The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1911-08-24
REDUCTIONS HELD TO Be
VOID BY TAX COMMISSION

of the o. Torrison Co. and Schuettt
Bros. Co. $1,000 each from the valua
tion made by the assessor, withou
sworn testimony, is held to be void b!
the tax commission. The letter from
the commission on the subject to Mr.
Connell, supervisor of assessments, is
as follows:
"Your letter of the 18th instant en-
closing proceedings before the boart
of review in the city of Manitowoc, re
lating to the assessment of the stock
of Schuette Brothers Company and oi
the O. Torrison Company, and certi.
fed statement Of aggregate property
in the city of Manitowoc came to hand
by due course of mail and the same
have been duly considered. The re.
duction Of the valuation in the above
cases by the board of review without
sworn testimony to support it was in
our judgment wholly unauthorized and
is therefore void The rule that valu-
ations made by the assessor cannot be
changed except in accordance with
sworn testimony is well settled in this
state. Section 1861 of statutes provides
that:
| 1t it appear that any property has
been valued by the assessor too high
or too low, they shall increase or lessen
the same to the true valuation accord
| ing to the rules for valuing property
prescribed in this chapter"
In the case of State v. Lawler, 103
Wis. AGO, the supreme court declared
that:
The clear intent of that language is
to place it beyond the power of the
board of review to change the valua-
! tion of real estate without evidence
and to require them to change such
valuation in accordance with evidence.
The same rule applies to valuations
of personal property. See Shove ".
Manitowoc, 81 Wis. 5; State v. Lien,
l0S Wis. 3l6; State v. Fauldner, 109
Wis. So; State V. Williams, 1913 Wis.
65; State v. Hobe, 124 Wis. 8; and State
V. Fisher, 124 Wis. 271.
In the case of State V. Faulkner,
supra, the court held that in the alb
sence of evidence under oath, the board
has no power to reduce valuations, and
| the other cases cited are to the same
effect.
Under these repeated rulings it is
clear that boards of review have no
power to change valuations under the
| general statute except in accordance
with legal evidence. Our attention
has been called to section SO of the
charter of the city of Manitowoc as
authority for changing valuations with
out such testimony, but we do not con-
cur in that view The section contains
among other provisions the statement
| that the board of review "shall ex-
| anime all parties under oath who wish
to be heard" This sentence taken in
connection with other provisions of the
section brings it in substantial accord
with the general statute on the SUBJ
ject AS we read the Manitowoc char
ter it does not change the general rule
of law prohibiting change in valua-
| tions made by the assessor without
evidence. We are therefore of opinion
that the reduction of the two assess
ments above referred to by the board
of review was unauthorized, and that
the city clerk, Icing member of such
board and having knowledge of the
facts, may safely disregard their ac-
| tion. In our opinion the clerk should
retain the assessors valuation in each
of these cases.
Should the clerk fail to follow these
| instructions we have no power to
coerce him, but attention is called to
the provisions of sections l059a to
1059d, providing among other things
for removal of members of boards of
review for violation of their duties.
Also to sections 454Sa to 4548f prescri-
bing penalty and civil liability in the
case Of an assessor or member of a
board of review who shall willfully
violate any provision of law. Prosecu-
tion under these sections comes with
in the general duty of the district at
torney of each county and it may be
worth while to bring the matter to his
attention.
The simplest and most direct remedy
for violation of law by boards of re-
view is by certiorari of the record on
relation of the city or other municipal
ity or some person interested in the as
sessment. The only other remedy
available is by application for reassess-
ment under section 10S7-45, where the
irregularity is of sufficient moment to
warrant that course. You will under
stand that the power of this commits
sion over assessors and boards of re-
view is advisory only and that If the
advice is disregarded, proceedings
should be instituted by the municipality
or some person adversely affected, un-
der some one OF the statutes above re-
ferred to-"
1t looks nevertheless that the city ad-
ministration will stand pat on the
valuation as fixed by the Board OF
Review. Mayor Stolze at the council
meeting Monday night declared that
under section 80 Of the city charter the
board of review had right to lower
the assessment without sworn teeti.
mony and read portion Of said section
in support of his contention from the