The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-03-04
BUILDING TAX BILL
GETS SEVERE BLOWS
Realty Interests Condemn Her.
rick-Schaap Measure at
Albany Hearing.
DANGER TO INVESTMENTS
Indications Are That the Meas
ure Will Not Pass the
Legislature.
DANGER TO INVESTMENTS

ALBANY, March 3.-1f the attitude OF
members Of the Cities Committees OF the
Assembly and Senate toward the arsu-
ment Of speakers for and against the
Aerrick-Schaap bill can be taken as a
criterion the bill will not get beyond the
committees rooms this year at least.
Questions put TO proponents and OPP
ponents at hearing at Albany to-day on
the bill by members OF the committees in
dicated quito clearly that many OF the
members disspprove not only OF the bill
itself, but also OF the change In the tax
Ing system. for which II ultimately pro-
eides.
Moro than 400 men. representing prac-
tically all property owners associations In
all boroughs OF New York. civic orrani-
stations and the city government, went To
Albany to protest against the passing of
the BILL which proposes a referendum on
the matter of reducing the tax rate on
buildings to one-half that on land. There
were also many persons present who
spoke In favor OF the measure. Senator
Cullen, chairman OF the Senate Cities
Committee. presided at the hearing, which
was held in the Assembly Chamber.
REGULATIONS Presented
Borough President Mccormack OF
Richmond. representing the Board OF Es-
adopted by the board deprecating the
passing OF the bill before committee to
BE- appointed by Mayor Mitchell. could
study the question and report on It. Mr..
Mccormack said the Mayor will appoint
such q committee within few Days. He
requested the Legislature TO take no
action on the bill at this time.
The Department of Taxes and Assess
unents also requested that the bill he not
passed. Commissioners Mullain and Wood
ward. representing the entire board.
offered resolutions supporting the request
Of the Board Of Estimate.
Believing that the principles OF the bill
u enforced on the city would cause a real
estate upheaval which would result In Il
reduction OF the citys borrowing capacity
and general confusion In Its finances, the
Citizens Union appeared In opposition to
the mee sure. as did the Chamber OF Com
merce, the Merchants Association. the
North Side Board Of Trade OF The Bronx.
The Queens Chamber Of Commerce. the
Richmond Chamber OF Commerce and the
Realty Owners OF the City OF New York.
representing practically all taxpayers or
ganixations: the Real Estate Board Of
New York. brokers, builders and repre-
oentatives Of savings banks throughout
The city.
Allan Robinson, Or. Henry W. Berg
and Henry Bloch made the principal
speeches In opposition to the measure.
They took the stand that such a change
- u proposed by increasing the tax bur-
den on land would cause a depreciation
IN values which would result in "A serious
contraction of the city's borrowing power :,
that reducing the tax on buildings would
put q premium on high buildings and
would therefore cause congestion that II
would place In jeopardy the many millions
OF dollars invested In real estate mort
RACES that II Is a single tax measure
(which ~ Tod will hiring n bpls a rea1
estate panic. and that the proposed change
10 sought as an experiment which should
not be tried on the IS 0OO,O0O,000 OF real
estate In New York.
Resolutions against the bill were pre-.
scented by James II. Manning. represent
ing 40 savings banks. whose depostors
he said. would be In danger OF losing their
savings II the bill became a law.
l.. NJ. n. Mcclure offered similar reso-
buttons. adopted by the Real Estate Board
0f New York: Henry Bloch did the same
for the United Property Owners Assoc!a-
ton. while a dozen more organizations
representing every borough petitioned the
Legislature through representatives not
- pass the bill.
Eject on Poor People.
Mr.. Bloch declared to the committees
that the enactment OF the measure would
have the effect of depriving poor people
OF the savings which they had placed in
what was regarded as the most stable
investment In the world. He said these
people had bought land In the suburbs
IN the hope Of being able to build homes
On Il and that to pass the Herrick -Schaap
bill would deprive them of their property
without due process Of law.
Mr.. Bloch said that &C per cent. OF the
$4,000. 100000 OF real estate value In New
York city Is covered by mortgages. largely
held by savings banks. and that the half
tax measure would place the savings OF
wage earners in jeopardy.
Dr. Berg OF the United Real Estate
Owners Association said there Is no reA-
taxation He said that real estate 10 pay
ing the cost Of government and that since
vacant land costs nothing to govern II
should not be taxed heavier than at pres
ent.
He commended that to reduce the tax
on buildings worth less than one-half the
value OF the land they stand on would be
harmful to owners. that is. owners OF
tenements small homes and factories.
Dr. Berg said that under such a law
the largest buildings possible would be
erected. He cited that the Metropolitan
Life Building. worth $4,000. 900. on land
worth $4,000, 900, would benefit by $50. 900
year under the proposed law. Premiums
would be placed on twenty. thirty and
forty story buildings at the expense Of
the small home owner.
The speaker contended that there would
be no lending on mortgage under the pro-
posed measure, since II would force over
production OF buildings and consequent
foreclosures.
Benjamin G. Marsh. Frederick L. Gram
ford and Register John J. Hopper were
the principal speakers for the measure,
Mr.. Marsh presented what he said were
$4,000 petitions from working people ask
ing for q referendum. He said that the
reason why the Board or1Estimiate OPP
posed the measure was because they did
not understand II.
Mr.. Hopper said that he favored the
measure for the reason that a tax on
buildings 10 q penalty on builders
Allan Robinson summed UP for the op-
p0nents OF the measure. He said that the
$4,000 petitioners Of whom Mr. Marsh
spoke. represented people who had replied
favorably to the question advanced by tho
Lower Rents Society. DO you want your
rent reduced?" and that they had not ex-
pressed themselves In favor of the Her.
rtck-Schaap bill.
He showed by figures compiled by Law
son Purdy. President OF the Department
Of Taxes, that a reduction In values OF
100000. 900 In New York city real estate
would follow the enactment of the bill.
with corresponding cut OF 1000. 900
In the city's borrowing capacity.
Among those who attended the hearing
eraI IL Afar' l,.a. II ~,