Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1939-11-01-BASS-min.pdf Meeting, Nov. 1,, 1939-1.; ti :� SYS f Messrs Steeve.s,Cann, hanahan,,Burnha n,;EmerySpencer :and> Miss Ready ;�. were present. all �t • b Comma. signer Long;,having sent .his..authority _oto,: the Board; to."--Abate " 'certain. 1932,193.3 .and 1935 real estate, taxes .uncollected, , the.-Assessors �... , signed the abatement slips,. t; r, 4;1'1, ' Amounts abated being 4.52 1932 amount 32.60 1933 amount 12.21 1935. amount Abatements granted underSec. 72, Chap. 59 of -the General Laws. The 1939, apportioned Water Assessment , (#101),. Ervine : R. Dix et al iiSome.„Finance ,:Co. was..abated .b:y. the Board because as?:of.,Jan. 1st, 1939 the "whole Of-their real estate tax for. property was not assessed correctly. , z sr Committed; apportioned,,betterment amount..-abated;being $5.40;-.;commit- ',';;;; commit- ' .k ted Interest being X2.94. ,. . �� , ” "' '' The two above amounts .,wi11.,..be committed. again in Dec. when the 1939- real- •parcelis assessed. • The .letter received from Rev. >William A. Connor of:,#627 Mass. • Avenue was read b the Board. ,Mr. .Spencer told ` Assessors .;that she sent.fFather Connor's letter s r td Commissioner Long`,and as,ked,.his .;opin on. on the matter. Commissioner Long's- reply was read to the Board and after they discussedthe matter they ;voted' to allow the <5000 valuation exemption to e .East Lexington Catholic parsonage. " Mr. h€ nahan gold he :Board that on account of the large :mortgage f 15,000 on}_the church property that :the ,Cardina1..would not allow :the as Lexington Parish `to buy tie, property a.t #•627•.Mass. .Avenue .so• Father Connor purchased the property in his name. and he has asked the Cardinal to. take, the :property over: in the ;name, of the 'East-.,'.Lexington Prish but „ad.. yet the, Cardinal has not; done. so.. .' The `Board construed that although the ...property::stood:in,rthe name of Father Connor that it was held in trust by him for the parish and • 1Tlat the exemption should be allowed• ,r; ,.Father; Connor_ was notified that, the Board voted to, ,grant hitt an abatement of $177.50 on his 1939 real, :estate;•tax bill. . • Commissioner Longisauthority to the Assessors to. grant a 1937 1938 abatement on the .Filling Station property tax 'ori' `property "...located at #329 Mass. . Avenue was received and the abatement slips, Were signed .by; the board.._ • . The Assessors were notified that the' two . Tax Appeal 'oases; ori' the bov,e mentioned property: was .'scheduled for immediate hei:rin sot some members of the Board went down `-and viewed the property 'and they dew '-aided that the parcel •was over.. assessed , They agreed that 45000 .wasp a .fair assessment for ,the totah .parcel. `a Mr. Spencer talked over: the, telephonen'w'ith the attorney =for• the' Appellant and ;they. agreed .on the; 85000` valcation instead of the, .'•-$4000-;valuation-;as.- printed,on their appeal: papers. •_ In 1937 the property was assessed to. James F. &•• Annie M. Prendergast. In 1938 the property las assessed to ' Jeanette Lamken. ` Thea:ttorney -notified the:..Tax -,Appeal Board that the% tw°o Cas'es'.. were withdr awn. _ ;. b t144.05 abated-.on the 1937.tax and 171,70 on`the 193a--•-tax., The Board •considered the letter end -1938 statutory exemption ` application received -from::,"Mrs. Hannah B.` Breslin, widow, of #25227_' Massachusetts Avenue, buton account, of her equity in her property.,,-; a#ate the SQardf could=:not.. grant 'her exemption under-,'Clause'•`17 'but -they to grant her an abatement of 168.00 on her 1.938 tax bill rr.'-- l 4 under Clause 18, Sec. 5, Chapter 59. The Board considered the statutory exemption application received from Mrs. Johanna Langer, widow, of 28 Chase Avenue but because her total equity in her real estate and personal property was away over the $2000 limit allowed by the State Statutes the Board voted that no exemption be granted. Letter sent to Mrs. Langer informing her of the decision of the`' Board. b The Board considered the statutory-exemption application received from Mr. Paul R. Snow of 43 Pollen Road, but because his equity is over the $5000 limit allowed by the State Statutes the Board voted that no • exemption, be al lowed to him under Clause 23, Sec. 5. Chapter 59 Letter sent to Mr. Snow informing him of the decision of the" Board. The statutory exemption application received from Mrs. ' Isabel M. Simo of. 45 Grove Street was examined but because of her equity in the propert " and because the property she was seeking the exemption on is not domicile;* by her the Board could not vote to grant her the exemption. Letter sent to Mrs. Simonds informing her of the decision of the Boar`J. .The Board examined the statutory exemption applicationreceived from'` Mrs. Pearle C. Montgomery, widow, but because the property is not domicil ) by her the Board could not grant her the exemption under Claude :l7. ' Letter sent to . Mrs. Montgomery informing her of the 'decision of the '' Board. The statutory exemption application received from Mr. Thomas D;, Warren of #500 Marrett Road was examined but because he was ndt 'the , record owner of the property on Jan. 1st, 1939 he was not entitled 'to the exemption ,under Clause 23, Sec. 5. Chapter 59. , A letter from Mrs. Evelyn M. MoVetty,' widow of a W.W.V. of ,4 Taft Avenue in which she thanked the Board of Assessors for the abatement granted to her under Clause 18 was read. The Board voted authority to Mr. Spencer, Secretary of the Board, to sign whatever 1939-" abatement slips they do not sign after; they , have been acted on by the Board. Authority was given to Mr. Spencer in 1938 to do this same task. The following abatements were granted by the Board at this meetings Bailey, Daniel A. 35.50 Clause 18,., Sec. 5.- Chapter _59 Balmer, Hannah M. 71.00 " 17 Blake, Lulu M. 301.75 "Castle property over assessed. Boyd, Thomas T. 17.75 Clause 23 ff Bresnahan, Michael J. . 35.50 Clause 22 . Brown, Cyrus H. & Louise 71.00 Clause 22 Chase, Lou M. 17.40 Clause 23 Clark, Agnes S. 71.00 Clause 17 • Connor, William A. 177.50 Parsonage exempt from taxation.' y Corry, Katherine J. 28.76 Clause 18 4 Cotter, Bridget M. & John 71.00 Clause 18 Coye, Jennie C. 3.55 No garage on property 1/1/39 Crouch, Edward 71.00 Clause 22 Denney,, James W. & Julia A,0 35.50 Clause 23 r Egan, Albert J. 35.50 Clause 23 Egan, John J. 35.50 Clause 23 Farnum, Harriet 7 ..00 Clause 17 Ferry, Mary A. & Anastasia R. 35.50 Clause 18 1 Hinds, Clifford W. & Sadie M. 10.65 No henhouse on property °Jan. hst,1939" Hoy, Catherine F. 850.00 : Clause 18, Chap. 59, Sec. 5. Kelley, Margaret T. 71.00 Clause 17 - Lamken, Jeanette 72.07 property over assessed . Latter, Elizabeth 71.00 Clause 17 Lee, Arthur N. 3.55 No garage on property 1/1/39 Libby, Francelia 35.50 Clause 18 Luongo, Pasquale 2.31 Owned no cow Jan. 1st, 1939 MacDonald, Willens M. Gdn 31.95 Clause 17 f� et al 14.20 Clause 17 U tir " 1.78 Clause 17 Maloney, Rose 71.00 Clause 17 McDonnell, Elizabeth A. 71.00 Cll use: l7 McMakin, Annie 71.00 Clause 17 Measham, Milda V. 71.00 Clause 18 Mitchell, Mary._: , . .. 35.50 Clause 18 Pero. Annie 35.50 Clause 18 Potter,. Joseph H. & Susannah 71.00 Clause 18 Reardon, Mary E. 17.75 Clause 18 Rose, ' Mary E. 71.00 Clause 18 Samuels, Ellen L. 35.50 Clause 18 Sandison, Gertrude B. 71.00 Clause 18 Sullivan, William E. & Edith W.. 71.00 Clause 22 Tribune, Raffaele & Elizabeth 35.50 Clause 18 . Valliere, Heirs of Joseph H. 71.00 Clause 17 Videtta, Maria 44.02 Clause 17 Walton, Agnes M. .71.00 Clause 17 Wezinger, Heirs of Wallace G. 71.00 Clause 17 Whiting, Etta L. . 71.00 Clause 17 • Poster Bros. &Wilson 3.55 Owned on horses Jan. 1st, 192 Wright, Isabella D. 35.50 Clause 23, Little, Philip P. & Georgie A. 35.50 Clause 23 Mellow, Alice C. 71.00 Clause 18 Nuttall, John L. 35.50 Clause 22 Savage, Chester R. 71.00 Clause 22 Timothy, Elizabeth M. 71.00 Clause 17 Mr. Philip Clark of 41 :Hancock Street. came before the Board , • in regard to the "Castle Estate' which he. had looked into thoroughly and he wanted to 'find out what the attitude of the Board was on the matter of reducing the present assessment. Mr. Clark told "the Board that he was doing the dealings with - • Mr. Couette. The Board said then you know what agreement the Assessors had with Mrs Blake in regard to the 1939 assessment and he said he had heard of the latest figures. Mr. Clark told the Board that the Blakey and `Mr.. Couette, their realtor, have been unable to sell the. estate and that if it is not sold very soon that the buildings will be taken down before Jan. 1st, 1940. Hard house to heston account of its size. Mr.Clark told the Board that ,he was sorry he did not purchase - the "Tower Estate" before the house was demolished. The Chairman of the Board asked Mr. Clark what he considered a fair 'assessment would 'be for the property. Mr.' Clark said the New England Trust 'Company had sent their Mr. Harris out to appraise his property at #41 Hancock Street and Mr. Harrists figure for mortgage purposes was 22,000 for the buildings and land. . Mr. Clark told the Board that Mrs Blake was willing to swap the "Castle Estate" and throw in the meadow land parcel consisting 'of 8 lots for his property located on Hancock Street. Mr. Mark said he felt the land down in front of the. large. house should be assessed as farm land, that some of0it was low land and } that drainage water from Franklin Street enters on it. Mr.. Ci.a.rk said Mr. Blake used part of the land for a vegetable garden ..andalso had hay cut from part of it. Mr. Clark described the view from the front of the large house - 1 down, over. the vacant land ancLsaid it should go with the Castle : Estate and that he would not want to see houses built on itwhile he lived in the large house. Mr. Steeves told Mr. Clark that the Board had felt that the Town , ` might be better off if the castle was demolished and five or six .niOe homes built on the land. Mr. Clark said if he did take over the property that, he `would touch up some of the dark paint, put on new wall paper, put in ..brass pipe in place of the old lead, pipe, fix or replace the furnane.e, repair leaks and make the house sound. e Mr. Clark said his own property was assessed for 830,410 and that he felt it should be reduced ,to $22,000 the appraised value, and that ` if he did not take over the Castle Estate that he would file for a reduction on the 1939 assessment. The Board and Mr. Clark tried to arrive at some figure on ,the 8 lots of land now assessed for. $8,160, some of the members -felt that part of the area should be aspessed' at $300 per acre, others said they felt the high land should be assessed for more than` 8300 per acre. 8 lots contain about 5,. acres. Mr. Clark asked the Board„ why they would not, assess the field as farm land and when it is put pn then market for sale as house lots to assess it then by the lot. Land around the large house to be .assessed at 890p0. Mr. Clark asked the Board, if he did put the large house into livable' condition would the assessment that the Board now agreed upon be raised , '. after the alterations were made and the Board said not while they were members of the Board. One member did say that the Board would be, murdered if -the Castle was put back to its good condition and still carried a low .assessment, he said the neighbors would object on their assessments on much smaller houses. The matter of re-valuing the whole town was mentioned and the Board said if the town was re-assessed that the total valuation would becut a couple of millions. . The Board tried several times to have Mr. Clark give a figure of what he felt the place should be assessed at but he would not.., Mr. Clark said that the big houses that carried " "the town in prior years were going by fast, he mentioned the following:.. Tucker's on Mass. Avenue, Keenan's on Mass. Avenue, Taylor's house, :Tower's house and several others. Mr. Clark suggested that the Board make the large house assessments 'attractive until good times come back. The Board again asked Mr. Clark for his low price and Ye Said why ask an amateur for his figure. Mr. Clark said he was interested in an assessment around 020,000. Chairman Steeves then asked the members of the Board 'what .their low figure was and the following gave these figures : Mr. Burnham. . y$30,000 Mr. Emery 832,000 Mr. Shanahan '27,000 Mr. Cann ;28,500 Mr. Steeves $28,000 - total of the five valuations $145,500 average assessment 829,100. Mr. Clark 'was asked if he was interested in a total ;assessment of 030,000 and he said not interested; asked if he was interested in $28,000 assessment and he said not interested. , After a lengthy discussion the Board told Mr. Clark that € 28,000 was their valuation, regardless of what he paid out for fmproveznents4 assessment to remain at $28,000. Mr. 'Clark told the Board that he was not kicking on the _ assessment on the land that the Castle sets on .if it compares with the assessment on the land in the neighborhood. The Board mentioned the figure of 025,000 but Mr. Clark did not say yes to that assessment figure. Mr. Clark then decided to leave the Board to talk over the matter and let him know their best figure. as soon as convenient. The Board told Mr. Clark that they could not compare the • castle house with any other house in town. Mr. Clark thanked the Board for allowing him to appear be- fore:them and talk over the matter with them. After Mr. Clark- left their office they talked the matter over further and they agreed on an assessment of X28,000 on ' the whole parcel-. Letter dated Nov. 3rd, was sent to Mr. Clark informing him of the decision of the Board. Secretary o e Board. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •