|
live, say in the second district, we have
assessment values dropping, say when the
area changes from a so-called "nice neigh-
borhood" to a deteriorating neighborhood,
and urban renewal comes in, and suddenly
the price of the land goes up, the Depart-
ment of Assessments and Taxation raises
the assessments, and, of course, a developer
comes in and reaps a high profit.
Of course, the whole system seems to be
actually exploiting the — well —
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor, are
you getting ready to ask a question?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes.
I wonder, can you exempt a property
owner who is trying to obtain his proper-
ties from paying a tax immediately after
he has made repairs? Could the General
Assembly pass a special act or some type
of exemption to exempt a property owner
if he made certain repairs — in other words,
in the City we have this problem. We find
that many property owners would like to
keep up their property, but — well, when
they make these repairs, quite often they
are taxed, and of course, this really works
against them.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor,
would you permit the Chair to phrase the
question I think you are trying to phrase?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case, I
think Delegate Taylor is inquiring whether
under section 8.02 a classification would be
permitted which would allow a lower as-
sessment, or at least not an increased
assessment in the case of a property owner
who improved his property pursuant to
some plan of urban renewal?
Is that essentially what you are asking,
Delegate Taylor?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Can you answer
that?
DELEGATE CASE: This would depend
upon the classification, if that were the
classification which you have suggested, if
that classification were reasonable.
If the court found it to be reasonable,
then it would be valid. If the court found
it to be unreasonable, then it would be un-
constitutional.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Lloyd
Taylor.
|
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: My main
question, did you give any consideration
for the property of the cities?
THE CHAIRMAN: I think what Dele-
gate Taylor would like to know is whether
your Committee gave any consideration to
the problem in urban areas, where the
policy of the city is to encourage home
owners to improve their property, and yet
the improvement of the property results in
higher taxes. Did you give any consideration?
DELEGATE CASE: We felt this was a
matter to be properly directed to the legis-
lature, and not to this draft. I will say to
you that the draft is flexible enough so
that if the legislature desires to deal with
this problem, it has ample authority to
do so.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: You will find
in the State of Maryland, I imagine, that
three-fourths of the land populated by the
people is land located in urban areas, and,
of course, it seems that the problem of
land taxes is mainly situated in urban
areas. It seems as though you would give
more consideration to the problem in the
cities, since you gave quite a bit of con-
sideration to the problems of the farm
areas. This is my idea.
DELEGATE CASE: I am glad to have
your suggestion.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Do you think
the General Assembly, under this section,
do you think they would do anything to
meet some of these problems?
DELEGATE CASE: I would hope so.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions, Delegate Taylor?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: So many
times when documents like this are written
they really do not meet the needs of the
people. We have a population of 3 million
people, and 1 million people in Baltimore
City, and I know that in many areas in
Baltimore City the assessment rates are
dropping and the property is deteriorating,
and we cannot get enough revenue. We
spent about two hours directing our state-
ments and comment about the agricultural
uses of land, and, of course I do not think
that the average voter in Baltimore City —
he may not know anything about taxes or
assessments, but he feels the effect of this
type of constitutional provision.
Can you do anything to help this type of
taxpayer or voter?
|
