OCR Text |
Show . DID NOT THREATEN TO I BRING SUIT ON COUNTY I ASSESSOR, SAYS BOARD I Members of State Board of Equaliza- I tion Make Clear Their Position. Give I Instruction Alike on All Classes of I Property. Do Not Single Out the I Farmer as Some Believe. t B For nearly two months past num- B crons Blgncd articles have nppcared B in tho Cacho county newspapers crlt- fl lclslng tho stato board of cquallza- B tlon for Its efforts to secure the as- B sessment of property at iti full value. B Wo havo no desire to attempt to nn- I swer these articles In dotall, not to B enter Into any newspaper controver- B sy with Mr. Woodward, county as- B sessor, Mr Cronqulst or anyone clso. B However, wo feel that grave rnlsun- B dcrstandlng3 aro being created In B tho minds of tho taxpayers and that B it Is our duty to make clear our po- B sltlon. B To. begin with, neither tho board, B nr nny f 'ts mombers bas ovcr m" B structed your county assessor to as- B sess any land in Cache county at B $25u nCr ncro. notwithstanding tho B fact that it hns abundant proof that B there are many tracts that sum per B acre, neither has It, nor any of its B members, threatened to suo tho ns-B ns-B sessor on his bond If ho falls to as- H sess land at the figure named. Wo IB have said to Mr. Woodward and to rM other county assessors in tho state, vB publicly and privately, that all propyl prop-yl erty must be assessed at Its fair B cash value as required by law; and, B ' the Presence of Mr. Woodward B 0Iul other gentlemen when the qucs-B qucs-B tlon was asked at to what could ho B dono with nn assessor (not Mr. B Woodward, but any assessor) who B refused to comply with tho law on B tho subject under discussion, tho B questioner was referred to sections B 2555 and 255G 6f tho Compiled Laws B of Utah, which aro as follows: B " Section 2555. Tho assossor and B his sureties are Uablo on his ofllclal B bond for all taxes on property with-B with-B lfi tho county which through his wll-B wll-B ful failure or neglect Is unassessed B . or which ha8 been by him wilfully as-B as-B sussed at less than Its cash value B Section 255G. Tho county nttorncy B must after tho assossor completes tho H assessment book for tho- year corns' corn-s' mence an action upon th'o. assessor's B bond for all taxes lost from such B wilful falluro or neglect." B I'leaso note that thoso sections H glo no authority whatever to thl3 board in tho premises. Othor sec-I sec-I tlons of law glvo us supervision of H assessors when assessing and county B boards of equalization when equal lz-B lz-B 'nE. Our only rccourso In tho event that an nssessor decides to tako tho law Into his own hands and Ignore our suggestions and recommendations Is to ralso or lower the valuations fixed by him. In doing so, however tho change mado must apply to all real estate of tho class under consideration, consid-eration, nil merchandise, all llvo stock, or all of any othor class of property within tho county that Is not properly assessed as required by law. Any order mado by thia hoard, under theso conditions, must unavoidably un-avoidably work a hardship upon Eomo taxpayers and In addition couso much cxponso and delay In tho completion com-pletion of tho tax rolls, hence our soUdtudo for a correct initial assessment. as-sessment. We wish to say emphatically that wo aro not making any war upon tho farmers. Our instructions have applied ap-plied alike to all classes of 'property. 'proper-ty. Tho reason that farm lands havo been so much under discussion In this controversy is becauso of tho fact that certain gentlemen In Cacho county, owners of some of tho most valuablo land In tho county, land that has in tho past been assessed nt n very small fraction of its v'aluo, havo eomo to the conclusion that the 'assessment 'as-sessment of all property ut actual valuo would mean Increased taxes to thorn, as compared with other taxpayers, tax-payers, began nn agitation against tho enforcement of tho law. Tho county commissioners, In order to get tho matter squarely boforo tho people, called a mass meeting of tax payers on December 22 and invited niombers of this board to ho present and discuss tho situation. Tho meeting meet-ing was hold, and tho county assessor, asses-sor, among others wns invited t o speak. In the courso of his remarks ho indicated that it wn8 his purposo to assess tho property of tho county on a basis that would yield tho samo revenuo that had been produced in tho past. At a subsequent meeting of tho county commissioners and tho ussesftor with tho members of tho Htuto board of equalization, ho BtateJ that in order to accomplish that object ob-ject It would not bo necessary to assess tho best land In tho county nt moro than $100 per aero. Ho was lemlnded that tho purpose of tho law was tho assessment of tho property (Continued on Pago Eight) Did Not Threaten to I Bring Suit on County I Assessor, Says Board I (Continued From Pago One) I at full value, regardless of whethor I ho result was moro revenue than had I been raised in tho past or less an? I that It was not right to say thiJ I land in tho county should bo asess I cd at more than $100 per Cro ro- J gardloss of its actual valuo H Wo understand that tho ' assessor " has slnco modified his position to ' tho extent of placing somo iatl(, on tho assessment roll nt J125 per aero and that ho also suggested a com-promise com-promise of ?17G an acre. Ho wa8 i. formed that tlio state board of equal-izatlon equal-izatlon had no compromise to niako and no specific price upon nny tract of land or other property to bo as-sessed as-sessed by him; that the only require-ment require-ment It mado of him wa8. that 110 assess all property of tho county in. eluding farm land, at its fair cash value as required by law, thus avoid-Ing avoid-Ing tho necessity of tho board later invoking tlio aid of tho ono undesirable undesir-able and unsatisfactory remedy at Us disposal, that of raising valuo after tho assessment is completed. Wo do not doslro to quarrel with Mr. Woodward nor to Impugn his motives. His lotter of instruction! to his deputios is praiseworthy. Our dlfferenco with him consists in our bo'.ief that it is not his duty or function func-tion to regulate tho amount of taxes to bo paid by his constituents, but rather to assess tho property of tho county, according to law and leavo to thoso whoso duty it is to do so, tho fixing of tho nmount of revenuo to bo produced by tho adjustment of tho lovics. It is our purpose to assess as-sess tho property of tho companies wo aro required by law to assess at full valuo, which valuo wo expect to determine by the samo standards that wo ask tho county assessors to apply. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION |