Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-08-25
Court Disputes
Effect Of Equal.
Assessments
County Tex Appeal
Tribunal to Allow
For Lond InfIotion

For lond lnfIutIon
The Montgomery County APP
peals Tax Court regards the
clamor over Statewide equaliza-
ton of assessments a tempest in
a teapot.
Although adhering to its origi-
nal view that the State Tax
Commission should bring up to
par the Is counties with low as
sessment rates. the court mini
mized the seriousness Of the
situation. Par is regarded as
between As and IS per cent of
actual market value.
The change of heart came in
a 41-page report submitted to
the County Council yesterday by
the court members, Carey E.
Quinn, Robert e. Redding and
Robert w. Farmer.
The court also revealed that
its reappraisals Of the upper
county-slated originally for the
fiscal year ended last June 80
had been delayed at request Of
the Upper Montgomery County
Planning Commission.
Zoning Status Studied.
The commission asked the de-
lay, pending completion of its
study of the zoning status of
property in the rural area, the
court said.
A new practice of allowing an
imitation factor on land assess
ments similar to that allowed on
buildings is being inaugurated,
the court said.
In the past, a 40 per cent
factor for imitation was deducted
on the appraisals Of buildings.
Land, however, has been assessed
at it's full value.
The court said it felt inf1a-
tionary factors on land were
equally justified" and will be
applied during the coming re-
assessments.
To Press for Compliance.
In breathing new life into the
long fight between the court and
the Council on the one hand and
the State Tax Commission on
the other, the court had this to
say:
1.-THE court has repeatedly
urged compliance by the State
Tax Commission with It's statu-
tory duty to equalize assessments
and will continue to do so."
A survey made by a group OF
| county assessors. last year re-
vealed that the range Of ratios
of assessments to market value
extended from a low Of. rs per
cent.in Calvert County to 60 per
cent in Baltimore City.
Montgomery stood. at SO pei
cent-the rate sought by the
commission.
Courts Ratio at SIG.
The court yesterday said Its
own study indicated Montgom-
ery's ratio was SIG
In attaining this ratio. the
court said the 1853 reassessment
of residential property in the
suburban area brought an aver
age increase of nearly 81 per cent
to home-owners' assessments.
The assessors Office had put
the increase at % per cent.
# assessments in all Is coun-
ties assessing with low rates hac
been brought up to IS per cent
the increase would have
amounted to only SLAB million
the court noted. That is about
one-fourth Montgomery's base
Of $3.50 million at the time Of the
Statewide survey.
The court also pointed out thai
the aggregate base Of the /:
counties amounted to only three.
fourths of the Montgomery base
The court said that SIS bill.
lion worth of property in tn,
State was assessed at higher
rates than that in Montgomery
The total base was 81 billion.
Means No More Funds.
| Even If the low counties in.
creased their assessments to tn.
approved State ratio. Mont.
gomery would get no more ii
State school equalization funds
the court pointed out.
The increase. however, woulc
cost the Is low counties about
So million in State school aid
the court said. That would be
less than 10. per cent of the
amount distributed on an equal.
cation basis.
I'VE taxpayers" the court said
assume much of the educationa
burden without equalization aid
and properly So" It added how.
ever. that the burden should not
be increased uniustiy by forcins
the county to pay unwarranteC
funds. no matter how little, tx
the low-assessed counties.
The court. in discussing the
sharply increased assessment.
made in 1858. noted that the
median value of Montgomery
homes was $16.136 In 1850
double the Statewide average.