The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1913-01-11
TAX COMMISSION
ANSWERS CHARGES
Explains Why Parcels Of Property in Iron
Were Heavily Taxed

were Hfashf akeu.
Relative to charges against the state
tax commission. printed in the Crystal
Falls Diamond Drill. weekly paper
OF which ex-senator Moriartv is part
owner. the following reply is made at
the Office of the tax commission here
The charges are set iorth IN these
three paragraphs of the article:
"A change has come to light in Mas
todon township Iron county, that is
causing great deal of comment. The
change is in the assessment on Section
l3-42-33 besides the iorties included in
the big J M. Longyear company. The
valuations were fixed upon this proper
ty ny the Longyear people before the
Mastodon board of review. The fee
owners were represented at the hearing
by Mr.. Rose. of the Porter Office at
] Chicago. who stated that he was salts
fed with the assessment. notwithstand-
ing that the tax commission has lower
ed this piece of property.
Tine original assessments on the
descriptions, all in section 1898.
were $33. 500. $50. 500 and $i44, 600.
Tbs tax commission reduced the valu-
atoms on these three descriptions to
$3.50 each. /"
The records in the state tax depart.
ment show that the three descriptions
mentioned were assessed by the super
visors of Mastodon, township mt the
hRures named in the Diamond Drill.
The two descriptions were each assess-
eel by the supervisors at $33, 500. The
tax commission when they reviewed
the assessment placed the assessment of
$l35, 600 on that part of the two de-
scripitons described as west nalf Of
northeast quarter and placed the rest
OF the land in the two descriptions on
the rolls at the land value, which was
nominal, probably not more than $40
an acre.
The reason this was done is that the
descriptions, being in the iron ore zone,
explorations by experts have so far de-
termined that the only iron deposits
are in the west half of northeast quar-.
ter. Therefore. the state tax depart.
ment ordered that the assessment on
the west half of northeast quarter
should DO Sl35, 900, and on the rest of
the two descriptions but few hun
dred dollars. 80. while the local assess
ors placed the two descriptions on the
rolls at $33. 500 each, the state tax com
mission review increased the valuation
of the two descriptions from $G7, 600 TO
$l35. GOO. The commission agreed that
~ qua-ter eection OF 100 acres was
proven to have valuable iron ore, aud
the explorations located are on 40 acres
only, the 40 acres alone should be- taxed
for the ore deposits and not the entire
100 acres.
The same kind of an explanation an.
swSa the charge as 20 northeast of
northwest section i3-42-33. and north.
east OF northeast, same section These
two descriptions were assessed by tho
local supervisors at St44. 600 each. The
state tax commission reviewed the a.
sessment and placed an assessment OF
$3Ua 40D ON the northeast of northwest
description only, and reduced the as
sess nent OF the other description to nc
tual alnd value. To sum mp. the local
supervisor assessed all four descriptions |
for total of 1856. 00O The state tax
commission review raised the total |
valuation 10 $43y.0O0. although, as
stated. the si39 600 was placed by the
Tax commission on two parcels of the |
four descriptions instead of being |
spread over all the land In the tour de-
scriptions.
Explorations are under wav Ia other
parts of the four descriptions II, |
wnen the supervisor. IN May next. re-
turns his annual roll. the tax commits
sion has information that ore has been
found ON other parts of the four de-
scriptions. the commission will increase
the valuation of these other parts TO
ore deposit valuation.