Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 7 · column 5 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
)verturn the work down by iall and the Equalization 3oard. “But if you’re convinced that county citizens sercieve this as a mass inustice, yes, there’s something ,vou can do,’’ he said, suggesting that the supervisors request the Equalization Board to review all assessments between now and December.
Complaint Without
Investigation “Have you gone and pulled cards at random to see if values are enough out of line to justify redoing the whole thing?” Wood asked. ‘‘Of course 1 have not...The point is the perception of injustice.” Eastham replied.
Wood suggested that Eastham check for himself rather than just listening to the complaints of others. “Go in there and pull cards and see for yourself...The ones I pulled looked pretty good to me."
According to Eastham, he’s met with “a blank wall" from the supervisors in his criticism of the reassessment and work by the Equalization Board.
“When we have another reassessment, will you serve on the board?” asked Wood.
“No sir, 1 want people who know what they’re doing!" Eastham replied.
“And you say there’ve been injustices and at the same time, you say that you haven’t even been in to look at the cards!" countered Wood.
Stokes interjected that houses listed in the last appraisal have disappeared in the current reassessment. In addition, he said, in some instances, cards set a separate value on a house lot (generally $4,500) and on others, the house lot isn’t valued any differently than the balance of the parcel. According to Stokes, these inequities have been brought to the attention of the Equalization Board.
“Did they correct it?" Latham asked.
"No," Stokes replied.
“Did they give any reasons?” inquired supervisor Hubert Gilkey.
“I was not there," said Stokes.
85.3%