The Waterbury Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1917-1946, 1946-02-12


--------------------~---
sanction.
Victor MambTuni Cd. chairman
Of the local Board, said that he
had been unoffieially informed OF
such a possibility and planned 10
discuss Il further with board menu
beers Bernard REILLY ID and Car
mine Gallo lRD.
Many Not Heard
State Statutes now pryide that
the local Board hold is sessions
from Feb. 10 FEB. 20, To date but
approximately 800 OF the 400 ap-
pealS filed have been heard, Only
week remains 70 hear the remain
der.
We will certainly welcome he
opportunity 70 extend the hearings
10 benefit the appellants, "Mr.
Mambrun0 told The Democrat to-
Gay. There Is no doubt the curren.
reyaluation situation Is an unpre-
eedented one and gaS not foEeseen
when the state statute FIRST was
placed upon the books
A similar validating action was
undertaken By the General As-
sembly IN 1913 for tax purposes IN
the Town 0f Prospect by means of
such action the local Board could
continue lis hearings altar Feb. 20
until all appeals have been heard
The General Assembly then could
validate such . move giving off-
clal approval Of such hearings
thereby making them legal,
To Resume Tomorrow
The Board Of Tax heSleH ald
not meet today because OF the holt
day, sessions will be resumed to-
morrow with evening sessi0nS-lE0m
7 y. M, 10 3 p, M, - scheduled Tor
tomorrow and Thursday, Day sesr
SONS are conducted from 3 o m, 70
noon and ! p, m, " D. ~, except
Saturday when only the morning
session Is conducted,
Relative 10 yesterdays demand by
the representative Of the Council
Of Community Clubs that Chief As
SCISSOR AldTo jerks produce AN abs
stTaet Of the Grand List, the city
0lllelal said today the abstract" u
nov IN the form of the card indexes
an Me az his Once,
The 0iilclal abstract viii be pros
dneed after the koaFd Of Tax Re-
Yleg has conducted Us hearings and
submitted Us findings, "lhe chief aar
SCISSOR said, These findings viii nnE
douhledly change some TeYalualloN
hguTes he added,
Want 10 hes AhhiFael
Members " the Council called upF
Qn MI Jenks yesterday demanding
LOOK ~ the abstract and we're
told that u nov consisted Of the
A 400 names on property owners on
According % the story IN yesteFr
days 9he American, members "
the Council demanded written
COPY " the ASSESSORS reply % Ehela
rms was denied today by Anthaay
~ MARITIME YleeFehalrmaA VI tbs
legislative COMMITTEES " the 0oaR'
= am Tired u helng mleaaoled IN
lhese newspapers NJ Marine said,
We did not demand any such WFltE
Ten reply from MI, lenksA
Any FFeaerlck w Beach, former
corporation counsel N tins cry 81
Bristol, Wh0 has bRen Retained hy
The Council SAID last night Ne estlr
mated the cost ~ . taA knll against
ne ells y he approximately ka0 400
he said he lola Council members
lhal any attempt % upset the
lekalnallan pF0sTAm might total
Ehal aNQnnl
Stating lAal Ae d nal 4 real ca
tals eAneTl lhe Bristol attorney SAD
lhal lFaA hls study NJ lnalglaual
eases ~ ieli many " lhp 90 Rssfsss
menls ReTl 600 low ana many ~ lhe
heN aneA too hlRh
Any beaqh n0lnled aul lhal ane
slll eallmlne substantial lnlnslr
lees ~ nle community would haYf
~ " backed ~ VI llf testimony ~
lhal estate hkneFls,
ThR hlihl0l laNgeF sald lAal many
MalfFAAFY Taxpayers aFe Va favor
VI lhla lsnf q \ eull although he
doubts whether Tins RDl "A lhe llnf
az Rltaek laken, ana aaaaa he has
no. reached . aefnllf decision