USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Saugus > Town annual report of Saugus 1934 > Part 4
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18
From the above the conclusion may easily be drawn that, while the assessors are elected by the voters of the town, their duties are entirely governed by statute and they are under the actual supervision of the commissioner of corporations and taxation. Your committee also realized that it had no greater standing than any citizen or citizens in the town so far as inspecting the records of the Board of Assessors, unless the board was willing that it should receive any additional courtesy by virtue of the vote of the town creating the committee.
Realizing these facts the committee determined to approach the Board of Assessors courteously, and did so on various occasions, but without success. The Board of Assessors at first refused to co-operate with the committee in any way and would not grant the members any privilege which they were not already entitled to as citizens. Nevertheless we kept on
.
64
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
probing, not being discouraged by the fact that the chairman of the committee, in his visits to the assessors' office, was greeted with unbecoming language and remarks anything but courteous. Information reached the committee, in the early stages of its investigation, that the mere fact of its appoint- ment was having a very salutary effect upon the assessors' office and that the members of that board were acting more cautiously than had been their custom hitherto, and because of this effect on the Board of Assessors the committee was of the opinion that more was to be gained by a not too hasty investigation. The results have more than justified this action of the investigating committee.
One of the first cases to come before the committee for study was the McDonough abatement. McDonough was considerably in arrears in the payment of his taxes. He also claimed that $2800.00 was due him by the town in settlement of work per- formed by him some time ago on Essex Street. The selectmen claim the work was never authorized nor the bills approved for payment. The town counsel, at that time, states he advised against paying the bill and gave the opinion that the town could successfully defend the suit which McDonough had brought.
A conference on the matter was held at the State House with Tax Commissioner Long and was attended by members of the board of selectmen, tax collector, town counsel and the chairman of the Board of Assessors. The tax commissioner advised the committee he had considerable difficulty in obtain- ing information about the matter from the selectmen and town counsel. On the basis of such information as was placed be- fore him he believed it to be for the best interests of the town to abate enough of McDonough's unpaid taxes as would offset the amount he alleged was due him from the town.
We do not doubt the tax commissioner acted in good faith and on the merits of such information as was placed before him, but the assessors were not compelled by law to abate any part of the McDonough taxes, although such an abatement was authorized by the tax commissioner. The assessors have no authority to abate taxes for the purpose of settling bills against the town and in this case, where the alleged bill had
65
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
not been approved by the selectmen and the town counsel had advised the bill should not be paid, the assessors should have caused the unpaid taxes of McDonough to follow the same course as the unpaid taxes of any other property owner.
Every property owner is entitled to have a fair valuation placed on his property and the town is entitled to the payment of a proper tax on that property. Also, all property owners should be treated alike. We believe the McDonough taxes should not have been abated by the assessors, because it is not within the scope of their duties to settle claims against the town.
The committee proceeded to investigate other abatements and exemptions allowed in 1932 and 1933. The first act of the committee was to invite the assessors to meet in conference in the hopes of securing the largest measure of co-operation. The assessors refused to attend such a conference but stated the committee could meet with them any time during their office hours. A member of the committee was then delegated to visit the assessors' office to consult the public records and inter- view the assessors during their office hours.
From the start the chairman of the Board of Assessors has displayed an intense antagonism toward the committee, which the town meeting by vote directed to investigate that depart- ment. The assessors claimed the town meeting had no author- ity to investigate their department, that their work was governed by statute and was under the supervision of the commissioner of corporations and taxations. As already stated, they took the position that the members of the investi- gating committee had no more standing before their board than private citizens.
We tried to impress upon them the belief that, notwith- standing their claim that the committee had no authority to investigate their department, the citizens felt they had suffi- cient reasons for being dissatisfied with the operation of the assessors' office; that three times a vote of lack of confidence in the board had been passed and the assessors were, therefore, on the defensive and they should, for their own good, place all information, not specifically prohibited by law, before the committee and frankly co-operate with the investigation. In-
66
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
stead the chairman has done what he could to hinder the members of the committee and on several occasions grossly insulted them.
The law provides that all public records shall be open for inspection of whomsoever wishes to consult them during rea- sonable hours, and also the assessors shall designate some particular clerk to have custody of all records in their office. The regular office hours of the assessors' department are con- sidered reasonable hours for the inspection of public records and the clerk having the custody of the records is not required to have an assessor present before offering the records for inspection.
Twenty-four hours notice was given the assessors that a representative of the investigating committee would visit their office at nine o'clock October 17, 1933. At the time designated the committee member was in the assessors' office but no asses- sor was present and the clerks would not permit the records to be seen. One assessor had agreed to be present, but did not appear up to eleven o'clock. At that time the committee member left the assessors' office at the same time giving notice that another visit would be made at nine o'clock October 20. On that date it was necessary to wait until it was convenient for the chairman to arrive before the records could be seen.
Although Mr. Mullen has no more responsibility for the proper conduct of the office than other members of the board, yet, up to this time, Mr. Daniel B. Willis and the clerks ap- peared to fear to show the public records without the permis- sion of the chairman.
October 24. Much progress was made, however, in studying the records due to the absence of Mr. Mullen and the willing- ness of Mr. Willis to co-operate by showing the records.
October 27. The assessors placed in the hands of the com- mittee members certified correspondence which had passed between the assessors and David W. Creelman, Director of Division of Local Taxation, which appeared to indicate the assessors did not have to answer any questions they did not care to. This was a wrong assumption for the assessors to make. Much progress was made this date in the inspection
67
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
of records because Mr. Mullen and Mr. Willis left the room while the committee member was working.
October 31. No interference. Much progress.
December 1. The committee member was notified by Miss Hawkes that Mr. Mullen had forbidden her to show the public records to him. The reason given was that Mr. Mullen was to be in Boston and Miss Hawkes was not competent to proper- ly supervise the inspection of the records. Miss Hawkes has had the custody of the public records for many years and properly safeguarded them, and it was difficult to understand why Mr. Mullen desired to humiliate her in that manner.
December 6. Two members of the committee visited the office of the assessors to see the records. We were refused a chance to sit down and were told the front office was Mr. Mullen's private office and we could not go in there. We were told the books could be seen one at a time at the counter and if we desired to make notes we would have to do so standing up. Also, Mr. Mullen advised the clerks not to answer any ques- tions.
The committee then wrote the assessors that they would visit their office December 9 and would expect to see all of the members at that time. This was the meeting in which Mr. Bryer offered to provide the committee with such information as was requested and Mr. Mullen was determined that as little co-operation as possible should be given. It was on this oc- casion that Mr. Mullen's remarks were so offensive to Mr. Bryer that it caused the junior member of the board to threaten the chairman with physical punishment and the Lynn and Boston papers reported a fist fight between the two asses- sors. This disgraceful exhibition resulted in little progress being made, although the assessors did admit that in one case an abatement had been granted which would not have been had they known all the facts that have since appeared.
After this fracas the Board of Assessors advised it would be pleased to confer with the committee on December 16, but because of our experience of the week before and knowing that Mr. Mullen would try to block every effort that was made, we declined.
68
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
The committee at no time expected any information but what it was lawful for the assessors to give, but claimed the right to receive information on all matters relating to the affairs in the assessors' department excepting that prohibited by Chap- ter 59, Section 32. We did expect willing co-operation from Mr. Willis, but he appeared to be completely dominated by the chairman of the Board, who on all occasions endeavored to act as the majority of the Board.
The public acts of every official are subject to review by some authority. Two courses were open to the committee whereby they might hope to secure the desired information and complete an investigation of the department. Either the committee could petition the court for an order to have the assessors open all records for inspection or the committee could request the commissioner of corporations and taxation to make an investigation. A petition to the court might have resulted in a long drawn out affair, so consequently the committee went to the State House and in a meeting held December 13 the situation was explained to the commissioner, who, at our re- quest, ordered a deputy to Saugus to examine the books in the assessors' department.
Through that official we were privileged to confirm much of the information which we have presented and which had been denied us by the Board of Assessors. Many of the individual cases which we are making a part of this report, especially as to abatements, were brought out in the tax commissioner's in- vestigation and supported the information that had come to us as a committee.
The commissioner later sent the following letter to the Town of Saugus and in it he confirmed the conviction of the com- mittee that there had been irregularities in the assessors' office :
January 13, 1934.
To the Town of Saugus, Massachusetts
As Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation my attention was called to a vote taken by the citizens of Saugus in town meeting assembled, resulting in the appointment of a com- mittee to investigate the Board of Assessors in order to quiet,
69
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
by the establishment of the facts, unfavorable comment in respect to their activities. It appearing that this was a desire on the part of the citizens of Saugus for proper governmental functioning, an examination of the activities of the Board of Assessors seemed to me to be in the interest of good public policy.
The Assessor is not an agent of the town, but as held by the courts is a public official controlled in his actions by the pro- visions of the General Laws of the Commonwealth. The records of the Assessors, which are required under the statutes to be kept, are in accordance with the law public records and during reasonable hours open to the inspection of whomsoever wishes to consult them. The Assessors, however, have the right to control the manner in which the public records are to be ex- amined and in the event there is a desire to minutely inspect the records regarding numerous actions they have the right to make certain that such examination does not interfere with necessary work. It is to be understood that applications for abatement, requests for exemptions and sworn lists of taxable property are not public records and consequently the Assessors have no right to disclose the contents of these documents to any persons other than the Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation or his representative.
In view of all the circumstances of the apparent situation in Saugus it seemed clear that an examination should be made by me as to the functioning of the Board of Assessors in respect to abatements granted and exemptions allowed. The Asses- sors' records for the years 1932 and 1933 were carefully ex- amined as to abatements granted and exemptions allowed. It was apparent at the outset that the Saugus Board of Assessors had fallen into the error made perhaps by some other Asses- sors who had not thoroughly familiarized themselves with the law and who were at least somewhat lacking in sensing their responsibility as to living within the law. The Assessors of Saugus can very well be charged with allowing their personal thought to control their granting of abatements and allowing of exemptions and with not strictly confining themselves to the statute, which in substance requires every person to prove that he comes within the law and is entitled to the exemption or abatement sought. It is unfortunate, but it is true that old as
70
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
well as new assessors sometimes assume that they have a per- sonal right, by virtue of their office, to favor those who they think are entitled to tangible expressions of sympathy and to refrain from an allowance, although definitely established, to those who seem at the moment not to be worthy of the favor of the individual who happens to be a member of the Board of Assessors.
The Assessors of a municipality must act as a Board. What one member does is of no consequence as to valuation, abate- ment or exemption activities because the entire Board is re- sponsible for what is done by way of valuation, abatement or exemption. It has again and again been demonstrated that after an assessor has been in office for a while he either makes clear that he is definitely unfit for the position because he per- sists in his failure to familiarize himself with the duties of the office and the restrictions which are to guide him in keeping within the law, or he senses that his early activities were in error and that the best public service he can perform is in limiting his activities to what the law contemplates rather than to what his heart dictates or his urgings for favoritism prompt.
An examination of the Saugus Assessors' records respecting abatements and exemptions leads quickly to the conclusion that the liberality displayed in granting certain exemptions and abatements was not warranted by the facts. It does not ap- pear that there was such gross abuse of power that court action should be taken against the Board of Assessors for violating their oath of office, although there were numerous instances of abatements and exemptions which it is believed the Assessors now feel should not have been granted. It seems to me that the situation can be described by visualizing three Assessors somewhat disregarding the statute, proceeding on what they felt as individuals should be done, and discovering, after the seasoning of months of tax experience, that they had gone too far in proceeding without good knowledge of the law or the facts, and now wishing as a result of their inattention to the law and facts that they could undo what they had done and with the thought that in the future they will proceed cautiously in granting abatements and allowing exemptions.
71
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
It is my opinion that the action already taken has proven sufficient to inculcate a spirit of caution in the Board of Asses- sors. While there may be instances that appear as a glaring disregard of the statute, it is not of such devastating character as to warrant action by seeking indictments of the individual members of the Saugus Board of Assessors. Action taken in any way and inquiry made in any way must be against the Board of Assessors as a whole and if blame is to be placed it must be fixed on all three members of the Board, because no one or two members can be held to be guilty of any departure from what would seem to be strict compliance with the law. If there is a departure sufficient to warrant court action, it is against the three members as the law permits lawful action only by a board and action by a single member is totally un- lawful and ineffective.
It goes without saying that the Board of Assessors have at least shown through the record of their proceedings very bad judgment and indication of ignorance of what is required of them as Assessors in handling abatements and exemptions. The town to some extent is at fault in that its civic respon- sibility has only slightly been recognized in but partially mak- ing provision for the proper equipment and providing space for the Assessors, whomsoever they might be, to properly con- duct assessing activities in a municipality the size of Saugus. needing, as it does because of its far-flung borders, greater facilities for accomplishing the equalization of value and a proportionate tax burden.
It can be said with truthfulness that the Board of Assessors of Saugus has shown decided improvement during the last year and have more carefully scrutinized requests for abatements and exemptions, and if there is a continuation of a desire on the part of the members of the Board to properly discharge their duties, as there is present indication of there being, the assessment work in the Town of Saugus will show a most commendable improvement.
Respectfully yours, (Signed) Henry F. Long
Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation
72
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
A copy of this letter was sent by the commissioner to the Board of Assessors.
The majority of the assessors was apparently disturbed be- cause the commissioner had charged them with "allowing their personal thought to control their granting of abatements and allowing of exemptions and with not strictly confining them- selves to the statute", and stating "an examination of the Sau- gus assessors' records respecting abatements and exemptions leads quickly to the conclusion that the liberality displayed in granting certain exemptions and abatements was not war- ranted by facts", and further adding "It goes without saying that the Board of Assessors have at least shown through the record of their proceedings very bad judgment and indications of ignorance of what is required of them as assessors in hand- ling abatements and exemptions."
It was reported by Mr. Long that after receipt of this letter, representatives of the board were at the commissioner's office almost every day trying to persuade the commissioner to ease, at least, some portions of his more or less harsh criticism of the conduct of their office. They, (the assessors) claimed that this committee was exhibiting the commissioner's letter to people in the town for political purposes. This claim had no foundation in fact and was absolutely false.
On one of these visits the assessors advised the commissioner that it had been reported in Saugus that he was to ask for indictments against certain members of the board. That repre- sentation drew from the commissioner the following letter:
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts State House, Boston January 18, 1934
To the Town of Saugus, Massachusetts
This is to advise you that no letter has gone from me as Commissioner of Corporations and taxation to any one that indicates that the Assessors either individually or collectively are to be the subject of an indictment by me or any action motivated by me. There has been no communication whatso- ever in respect to the Assessors of Saugus other than the one
73
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
that was sent under date of January 13, 1934, addressed to the Town of Saugus, and a letter sent to the Board of Assessors under date of January 18, 1934.
If any one says that indictments are about to be sought or that the Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation feels from anything that he has so far discovered that he is war- ranted in bringing indictments, this letter will disprove that statement, and personally I am here taking the opportunity of declaring all such statements false in every particular.
Respectfully yours,
(sgd) Henry F. Long
Commissioner of Corporations and Taxation
In answer to assessors' plea for a more favorable statement than that contained in his letter of January 13, the commis- sioner wrote a letter to the Town of Saugus dated January 19 as follows :
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts State House, Boston January 19, 1934
To the Town of Saugus, Massachusetts
SIGNED COPY
Under date of January 13, 1934 there was addressed a letter to you respecting the Board of Assessors and the granting of abatements and exemptions by them during the years 1932 and 1933. As a matter of right a copy of this communication was forwarded to the Board of Assessors as it was clearly proper for them to know the contents of any communication sent by me which at all affected them or their work. It has been represented to me that persons unfriendly with the Board of Assessors or naturally desiring to find fault, through selec- ting certain portions of the letter, might make it appear that the members of the Saugus Board of Assessors were totally ignorant, had grossly violated the statute and without good judgment or with design granted favors through exemptions and abatements not warranted by the law.
The letter could, of course, be read as a whole and taken as a general statement rather than as a specific statement. Real-
74
TOWN DOCUMENTS
[Dec. 31
izing, however, that there are those who might desire to reflect upon individuals against whom they had feeling, I sense that it may be fairer to state in this letter that there was no thought in my mind of singling out any one for particular discredit nor did I intend that my communication should be used, so far as any parts of it were capable of being so used, to injure or bene- fit any one. My sole objective is the proper assessment of property in Saugus, the proper handling of exemptions and abatements, the proper conduct of the office in all its aspects and with no concern as to individuals, as individuals, who may be occupying the position of Assessor.
It may be well at this point to note that the improvement in the conduct of the assessing office in Saugus has been such that a continuation of it will react to the benefit of the town and to assessing activities of the Commonwealth.
So far as my letter of January 13 is concerned it is to be constantly held in mind, and perhaps I should have made that clearer in the communication, that my observations were founded exclusively on what was shown on the records as made available to me by the Board of Assessors on which reasons for their action in granting exemptions and abatements should be set forth.
Since the letter of January 13 the Assessors have indicated that in many instances oral testimony was given them which was not a matter of permanent record and which if available to me would have permitted the elimination of any miscon- ceptions that my letter might have implied.
Undoubtedly the last few years of depression have been difficult ones for Assessors. It is represented to me that the situation in Saugus was particularly bad. The assessors are of opinion that the information which they had, but which they did not put on a record card, more than justified them in reach- ing the conclusions which resulted in relief and that they are substantiated in this by the results shown, indicating to them that the steps taken were proper to alleviate the great distress they found.
This letter is written not for the purpose of neutralizing my letter of January 13, 1934, but to make it clear and specific
75
ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
1934]
that so far as I am concerned there was no thought to have my letter other than general in character and specific in respect to the Board of Assessors of Saugus only so far as the records as shown indicated a conclusion could be drawn and in no respect to be specific as to any individual assessor. I am now told that there was a possibility of my communication, or cer- tain portions, being used for personal reasons or purposes and not taken as a whole for use in the manner that was intended.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.