Evening star., 1941-11-14
Brookings Aide Cites
Tax Inequalities in
Montgomery System
Suburban Residents Don I
Get Whot They Pay For,
SeIoo Says at Meeting

Residents of the suburban district
of Montgomery County, Md, are not
getting what they pay for in taxes.
Daniel T. Selco of the Brookings
Institution declared last night.
Speaking at the fifth of a series
of talks on the Brookings Institu-
tion's report on Montgomery County
government at the Rockville High
School. Mr. Selco charged that the
county tax system is improperly ad-
justed to its administrative structure
Although proceeds of the 34-cent
suburban district tax are supposed
to be spent for special benefit of
suburban district residents. he said,
benefits of such expenditures are
distributed to all residents of the
area, such as incorporated towns and
village tax districts. which are
exempt from payment Of the SUBJ
urban district tax.
AS Q solution to this problem Mr..
Selco suggested the lowering of the
suburban district tax rate and its
restriction to functions which would
benefit the entire area. removing
the exemptions now enjoyed by the
incorporated towns and village tax
districts.
Assessment Inequalities.
Another inequality in county tax
alton, he continued. is the distribu-
ton of general revenues from the
State-collected gasoline and income
taxes to village tax districts. in
corporated towns and the suburban
district, to be used for purposes
within the jurisdiction of these par
ticular areas.
Since town and village, as well
as suburban district activities are
purely local matters" he remarked,
there is no apparent reason for
financing them in part from taxes
applied uniformly to the county as
a whole
He recommended that the pro-
vision for the distribution of the
gasoline tax to towns and villages
be repealed. This also would call
for the discontinuance of the dis
tribution of the personal income tax
revenues to these areas.
Turning to the present method of
property assessment, Mr.. Selco said
the procedure results in inequali-
ties.
All classes of land. he explained,
are now assessed on an acre or
square-foot basis. Buildings are
assessed on the market appraisal
basis. There is no standard method,
however, he charged. for adjusting
these assessment figures.
Changes Suggested.
In place of the present method
Mr.. Selco recommended adoption of
the unit value method of assess
ment. Under this system, he con-
tinued, land is classified by assess
ment districts according to use.
Buildings under this setup, he
explained. are classified according
to size, structural characteristics and
use. In addition, schedules are used
to calculate depreciation.
With regard to the administra-
ton of the assessment Mr.. Selco
suggested that full responsibility for
assessments should be borne by the
Board of Assessment. At present,
he said, the county commissioners
are required both to assess property
and hear taxpayers complaints.
There is serious question, there
fore" he declared, whether tax
payers under these circumstances
can get an impartial hearing and
also whether the commissioners,
regardless Of their desire to give
such hearing, can consider all
questions which should be dis
posed Of"
Finally, Mr.. Selco asserted that
| the control now exercised by the
State Tax Commission over county
assessments is too broad, recon-.
mended that the commissions au.
thority be limited to making rule,
for the conduct of assessments ano
deciding questions in dispute be.
tween county officers and the tax.
payers.