The Press Wednesday, April 6, 1921. Excessive Valuations.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17112, 6 April 1921, Page 6

The Press Wednesday, April 6, 1921. Excessive Valuations.

-Chd; Valuation Department has been »nd|ng out to property"-ownera notices Kj the new valuations of v their proT&nies, and in moat cases in this city—jndrwe suppose it is the case gener-illyi-these new valuations are very iwiicjj, in excess of the old ones. In ionle oases the increase in the value s per cent,, but it does lot need an increase qf.loo per cent. ' r nw>lving a correspondingly great in?»teft—to 'justify' "the" reaentiient'twhidfi'has been generally caused >y the" new - figures in the , valuation wtieev ( , ?feewhere in this issue we jjftre WsK,«CoOunt of the'enquiries we have with some illustrative examples of'the valuers' wort, together HthTa defence of the J valuers by the bcal Valuation Office. knows ihaVduring\l9lß and 1920 certain kinds if hands at very high -brieesi .bjjit everyone knows also that been a marked tendency tor older and normal-level. Yet |b wofydvapfeear that the valuers, so far L Jhey have gone upon any iked plan, Lave l ' allowed their calculations to be influenced by the temporary and abWhich residential prohands and by the which; in most cases progeriaes .in the ki&inesß''aresC 'vera'disposed -of. In cases, that is to he tte'pjrewnt market value at all. 'lt I further complained that some of the other cities. The jeal Office does not repudite possibility—most* people think i more Ithfcn ,a possibility—that a jduer may forget that | strfeet is not Lambton pay o* gillie street. But his report", X is urg'edf is subject to review by the [caTpidirjcit Valtier, and should thereto be aa good' as if be knew GhrLst- , |iurch' values To what pgree the District Valuer has revised ' fje outside, officer's estimates we are pt told, but the fact remains that, in iost eases, the. reviewed valuation : s ■■■SiK too high. There is a general imthat if an owner findß a value >* upon'his property in excess of what ,/ e tbinkß reasonablo he can require fei.Gbyernment to take over the prc- "■ arty*at ; his lower valuation. This is i mistake. The Act provides only that jplicatiob/to that end may be made, id that .the Government may decline take the property. In that case, jjwever, the value of'the property for Liing and taxing purposes shall be, sduced to the owner's figure. But no vast of property should be placed in ia position of being able to obtain [lief from wnat he may honestly think i -unfair imposition only by offering ;> get.rid'of his* property. wayß complaints when a new valuaAn is made, and often the protests of *ners are sustained. But we do not 'pink that there has ever been such tmeraljy sharp increases in valuations i have now been made. Bates and kes are 'already severe beyond prece4nti and the present is not a time for jrtbor raids upon the publio for the •plenishing of the local and general feasurie's.' f There are bound to be fcdesale„objections to the valuations, fl'if presenfoonditions are to be doilvci "ratbft than conditions that excorijectuW regarding the fcitfojjJifeßt of will be bdd. ' But affected ought l*U> hav#, been put to the trouble {, ii V, -i 1 (

the most unreasonable assessments that . the Valuation Department's officials I have yet made.