Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-10-14
ASSESSORS SEE TAX
SLUMP, NOT BOOST, IN
EQUALIZATION PLANS
Members of Board Oppose
Mayors Scheme for Revision,
Declaring 1t Would Mean
Guess Work Only
PAST FAILURES CITED

Opposition 10 the proposed plan Of amend
ing the system Of assessing property In this
city, 90 as to separate land values from
building values. is headed BY the members
Of the present Board OF Revision OF Taxes
who contend that instead Of creating from
%. 900 900 10 ,B.ooo,ooo OF additional rev.
enues Il would result IN an actual decrease
The members OF the board are unit In
opposing the scheme OF city nnancers TO
amend and readjurt values and say that
the present system Of assessment IL eouit-
able and only appears otherwise when cases
OF fictitious sales appear or when sales are
made with tho express purpose OF creating
values. The Mayor and other city ofiicials,
they say. have gained a wrong impression
largely through the fact tina, the city noto-
riousiy is forced to pay higher prices for
land than would be the case n II were sold
to private parties.
simon Gratr. president Of the Board OF
Revision. today declared that TO separate
land and building valuos would lead TO n
system OF guess work on the part OF as
| SCISSORS that would not tend to beneht the
| city. He admitted that in some instances
above the assessment figures, but declared
| that In most cases the values were created
| because OF the peculiar needs Of the pur-
chaser and were not fair enough TO use AZ
| an assessment basis.
Phiiadsiphia's present real estate vaiua-
| ton totals ti,704, 100000. The assessments
| upon which II is based were made IN the
| fall Of 1915. The annual report OF the
Board of Revision will be submitted TO Con-
troller walton the iatter part OF the present
month. and the increase IN values is said TO
| be 30 small as not to ngure TO any material
extent I'm the way Of Increasing revenues
| for the city. Municipal flnanciers who are
discussing legislative enactmcnts altering
| the method of asSessment believe could they
have put into effect their plans in time for
| 1917 the figures would be larger by many
| millions OF dollars.
MR. GRATIS POSITION
In discussing the planned change. Pros
| dent Gratz said:
II is all bosh. The mon who are ad-
vocating a change do not know what
| they are asking for. I do not believe
the city would be dollar richer IL
| their plans should go through. Our
present system Of assessment is fair
one and the city receives the income II
| Is entitled to- Our large realty dealers
feel now that many of their properties
are assessed too high, and the change
suggested would make the task OF the
assessors one OF g1lesswork.
| What is TO be gained by dividing
land values from building? In cities
where It has been tried the whole thing
is guesswork. We don't want guess
work and we do want n continuation or
the present system. The men who OPP.
pose Il do not know. We have made a
study OF this work. and am satisfied
that no good would result In the pro-
| posed change. / am very much op-
posed to any change, and the figures
used In a recent argument are not cor
rect.
David N. Fell, Jr.. another member o.
the board, called attention 10 the fact tina
| the Corn Exchange NATIONAL Bank. In {
statement of recent sales, pointed out tina
, | a sale Of riverfront property, In distric
long reported as stagnant, showed s42b,oo'
. | received for property assessed at onl,
| S2bO,00O He explained that the S250,00I
| assessment was but for half the property
and that the total assessment for the prop
erty sold was actually s4ll.40o. He ex
planned other instances OF land assessed a
| a low figure and held for several time
larger figures as cases where the owners o
: property had placed enlarged values ol
their holdings In the hope OF having tn
Government or other possible purchaser
eventually meet their demands
Speaking for the board, Mr.. Fell said:
'"rhe scheme to separate land and build
ing values for purposes OF assessment
} not a new one II has been discussed b
! most Mayors and many times by city imam
clers. The Mayors get the idea that ad
J / ditional revenues cOulu De nhu from Lu
: fact that the city Is notoriously forced I
pay large prices for the land II purchases
These cases where the land has been az
sessed as usual often show discrepancies
that give the city authorities an idea ths
| the city could make more revenue by alter
. | ing the present method OF assessment.
PRAISES PRESENT PLAN
: "Any readjustment OF values such as oh
J | one advocated by bankers and city oficial
: | would In my opinion, result In no increase
! revenues. but might even result In the =,
: | verse. The plan Is one that has been take
Z up and discarded from time TO time and
believe that no good can come OF II.
r "Our present assessments arc equitab
: | except In some instances where sales al
: made TO create false values, or fctitio,
|. | values are placed on lands for reasons be-
. suited to the purposes OF the owners.
y "owners of realty with whom have dl
cussed the matter believe that a. SEPARATE
OF values would result In decrease In eli
revenues and not an increase OF millions
II dollars such as IL claimed for the meth,
4 by those who are advocating H. Stories
4 big sales get In the newspapers and cres
false Impressions. as the readers do NJ
r. know the circumstances surrounding h
= | deals. In my opinion the present syste
= meets the demands and should be cont
| uod.