The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1914-05-27


practlcally same as 1910 assessments
and OF the average assessed value per
acre In the respective townships
II. E. Wilder, Auditor.
IL Will be noted from the above
statement that the total assessment of
real estate in five townships was dc.
creased, in three townships increased
very slightly, and in one township
remained the same. The aggregate de-
crease in assessment values consider
ably exceeds the aggregate increase.
The 1914 figures for Sumter township
are not yet available.
The board had before it the aver
age per acre assessmen Of all the
counties of the State. A few we'll
known counties will answer our pur-
pose here. The average assessed VAL
ue per acre Of Lee county land is
$6.91; Of Florence county. $3.50: of
Orangeburg county, $3.50; Clarendon
county, 1852; Marlboro county, $5.Ts.
1t will be noted that Sumter county,
based on values Of her land, is fully
as high, if not higher than any of
these counties and therefore until the
lands are generally assessed through
out the State, our board could hardly
oe blamed for not increasing the as
sessments Of Sumter county.
Having decided not to do this be-
rore the assessments were made and
having ratified the action of nine of
the Township Boards of Assessors in
not increasing the returns, the board
could not we'll stand for an increase
OIL $4,000, on the business property
OF the city Of Sumter, especially IN
view of the fact that the PROPERTY in
the city of Sumter was increased four
years ago by more than 5000, 900, and
property assessed in the city at ap-
proximately one-third of the market
value Of the property.
Unquestionably values have in
creased throughout the State in the
last four years, but in the absence
of a general increase of assessments
throughout the State, Sumter county
could not well afford to increase her
assessments, for if that were done
Sumter county would bear an unjust
proportion Of the taxes which go in
the State treasury, aggregating 9
mills.
l have no desire to criticise the
Sumter Township Board of Assessors
for the members Of that board under
took to do their duty as they saw it
and should be commended for their
earnest efforts to do something to-
ward equalization. They made the
mistake, however, of undertaking to
assess whole blocks, except the cor
ners, at the same price per front foot,
without giving the proper considera-
ton to the nearness to the business
center OF the town, the depth Of the
lots, alley rights and similar factors
that determine the value of business
property. The result was a heavy in
crease in the portions of the block
furthest from the business center,
while the property in the block near
est was really returned too low Take
for instance the block on the west
side Of Main street from Liberty
street to DUNCAN street and it is i
readily apparent that the value of
property within 80 feet of Liberty
street is greater per front foot than
that of property within 80 feet of Du-
gan, yet the board returned all this
property within 80 feet of Dugan
street, yet the board returned all this
property at $3.50 per front foot. The
inevitable result of such a basis of
valuation was that the property nearl
Liberty street was returned at not eX-
ceeding 20 per cent of it's value and
property near Dugan street, was re-
turned at approximately 33 1-3
per cent OF it's value. CThc
above valuation applies to lots
only, and not buildings.) The board
did not apply the whole block basis
to the next block south, but the
on the Same valuation were
too long. The township board re-
turned all the property on IIarvin ,
street at SO per front foot while
property OH this street is held at ap-