The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1911-03-24
THE NEW MODE OF ASSESSING


The Idaho statute provides that all
property shall be assessed at its full
value, but it has been customary for
assessors to assess it at 40 percent
of it's true value as nearly as possible,
but though strife among the counties
to protect themselves from paying
more than their share in view of diff
ferent conditions or scaling down by
the assessors or boards of equaliza-
ton, the average valuation placed
upon the property constituting the
commonwealth has reached very
low point of 2O.2 percent, each county
trying to get low enough to escape
some of the burden payable to the
state.
The present state administration
has decided to enforce the intent as
well as the letter of the law, and it
makes an intricate problem, though
not more so than the way it has been
done in the past.
Looking at it specifically it would
appear to be a simple matter, but if
A, B, and each own city block
in the residence district, A builds a
house worth $40, 100000, B builds one
worth 100000 and C, who owns
the ground between them, leaves his
block in sage brush, question arises
as to the fairness of taxing each one
alike for his grounds and then adding
to the valuation of A and for their
respective improvements without any
relation to C's property. When the
two houses are completed, C's block
is worth more by reason of the other
mems investments in their own, yet
following the letter of the law would
compel A and B to pay every year
for the privilege of making C's prop
erty worth more money.
Then, again, If A and B grade their
grounds and plant them to grass,
flowers and shrubs, C's property takes
another rise in value without his
having invested cent, though each
of the others has expended perhaps
fifty percent of the original cost of
the grounds and the property looks
just alike on the assessors roll The
work done by A and B also affects
the property all about them in every
direction, but perhaps in lesser
degree.
Carrying the observations farther,
C's grounds may grow up with Rus
sian thistles, and it may cost A $50
year additional to keep these this
les down in consequence of their
blowing over on him from C's ground,
and it would seem only fair to pro-
vide some protection for him, though
1t may not come within the legal
powers of the assessor to do it,
What applies to residence property
will apply to business houses but not
cessarily in the same degree C
may own lot between those of A
and B, and when they erect buildings
on their lots, they will naturally fix
the price of rental sufficient to cover
the investment, and it would seem the
part of justice to assess them accord
ing to the investment and the sup
posed income, but if it were done
strictly on that line, and the ground
assessed alike, C's property would
increase in value by reason of their
Investments, and it would be unfair
to add some of the valuation to his
lot, though technically, C will have
grounds for complaint if the valua-
ton of the grounds is not alike.
Applying it to the farm lands the
principle holds good in about the
same way as with business property,
the money spent getting the lands in
condition to yield an nome affecting
not only the lands improved, but the
adjacent lands.
BY the time the assessor runs the
gauntlet of complications in real
estate, live stock, stocks of goods
on shelves and in warehouses, he
will have had troubles of his own,
and everybody cannot hope to be
accommodated.