Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-12-05
Gives House Fiscal Relations
Committee Instances
of Increases.
SUPREME COURT SITE
EMULATION IS CITED
Richards Unable to Offer Remedy
fog DeplOred Costs Of Acquiring
Land for Government.

The higher prices which the Govern
ment is forced to pay when acquiring
property by condemnation were deplored
today before the Mapes subcommittee
Of the House District Committee inves-
tigating fiscal relations, by William p.
Richards, District tax assessor, who
said, however, that such an increase In
prices of property condemned, as COM
pared with previous sales, was general
in other localities as well.
Mr.. Richards was pressed by commit
tee members for suggestions as to how
the condemnation procedure in the Dis
trict Of Columbia might be improved,
but he replied that he had no recon-
mendations to clear up the situation.
The assessor laid before the commit
tee numerous instances wherein prop
,erty in this city had been acquired by
the Government by condemnation pro-
ceedings- substantial increases over the
prior sales Of the properties.
Cites Municipal Center.
The price Of land in the municipal
center, which the District government
Is purchasing, so far without condemna-
ton, was also reported by the assessor
to be on the increase. But, he added,
the District government has so far pur-
chased about two-thirds Of the land
needed for its municipal center at an
increase Of only so per cent over the
assessed valuation.
Condemnation prices, according to
his figures, showed o larger increase
over assessed values.
The site purchased by the Federal
Government for the new Supreme Court
building project, now under way, was
one Of the principal examples brought
to the attention Of the committee.
Richards opened discussion OF this
case by explaining that explicit in
structions are always given to- con-
demnatfon commissions and ccndemna-
ton iuries. The same definition Of
value of q piece Of property Is out
lined to them, he explained, IS Is used
in his own ONCE.
Explains Definition.
This definition, the assessor explain.
ed pointed out that the value Of Z
niece Of prupeTty Is what willing per-
s0nr not hound to buy and not forced
10 buy, Win give to willing seller whc
Is not BOUND 70 sell.
The total of q number Of individual
awards In condemnation Of squares T21
and 728 In the Supreme Court site was
shown by Mr.. Richards to have aggre-
gated $500, 759, as compared with prior
sales on the same. pieces OF property Of
total of only $163,S50.
Mr.. Richards commented that these
figures showed that the condemnation
procedure had forced the Government
to pay to property owners total which
was almost twice as great as the acCual
sales of the same pieces of property on
previous dates. The sales, he said, had
been made, furthermore, during period
Of high prices.
Brings Forth Lot Figures.
Some of the individual lot figures sta
tistics were cited by the assessor. For
instance, he said that lot No. Is in
this square had been sold in Septenn-
Der, 1919, for $4,000, but the Govern
ment award in condemnation had PAID
$l1 500 for the same piece Of property.
Lot 40, he said, in the same square
had sold In June, 1919, at $4,000, but
the Government award was more than
twice this figure at $25, 900.
Lot 8O4, which sold in December, 1928,
for $4,000, brought $14,50O in the con-
domination award, he declared.
Other figures were cited by the assess
or in square 728, which IS bounded by
First and Second streets, A and East
Capitol streets. He said that lot Dol
sold in June, 1925, for $4,000, but that
the Government award had been $500.
Lot 800, he said, had sold in Novem-
Der, 1922, for $4,000 and the Govern
Continued on Page 2, Column ID