LAND VALUATION.

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2363, 20 January 1915, Page 3

LAND VALUATION.

CITY RATING

STATEMENT BY THE MAYOR

COURT'S CONSTITUTION

The Valuation Commission sat in Wellington yesterday. Mr. T. F. Martin presided, and the other members were Messrs. Ewen Campbell and J. S. Rutherford. Mr. M. Mj'ers represented the Valuation Department. Mr. H. C. Gibbons, of the Upper Hutt Town Board, gave evidence to the effeot that residents did not reckon the valuations too high. The system of assessing on unimproved value pressed unduly on small farmers, whoso holdings were situated within the Town Board area. In his own case he got an income of £124 4s. per year from a holding, and the total rates were £92 17s. 4d. Then he had to pay £225 in interest. He had bought the land to establish a nursery,- but- it had not been satisfactory on account of frosts. Messrs. P. D.. Davies and William Brown, both of Upper Hutt, also gave ■evidence. i • ' Comparisons between the. ratings in Wellington and Auckland were made by Mr. J. P. Luke, Mayor of Wellington. For the year ended March 31,_ 1913, Auckland was paying a rate equivalent to 3s. Sd. in tlie £ on the annual value, and Wellington, reckoned on the same basis, paid a rate equivalent to 2s. 9d. in the £1, which was very reasonable, considering that Wellington's municipal- improvements (notably drainage) were more advanoed. He quoted figures in reference to the recent .valuation of Wellington, showing that very nearly half a million had been taken off improvements, notwithstanding that during the period new buildings had been erected to'the valuo of'about a quarter of a million —a shrinkage of £738.173. He did not complain of the valuation; but he suggested that the Assessment Courts might be .improved. There should be, he thought, a permanent President of the Court'(a tnan having the status of a Judge) and two permanent assessors, so that experts would always be on the Bench to hear grievances. ■ • With reference to the unimproved rating system, he was of opinion that it was beneficial for a time in forcing landholders to use land; but it went a hit too far in the direction of making people build on every little section, leaving no open spaces. He thought that open spaces should be considered as not merely valuable to the owner, but as being a benefit to the community, and should have a reasonable exemption from taxation on that account. ' Evidence was given by Mr. O. M. Luke on the subject, of the constitution of the Assessment' Court. He said that at present objectors felt that both assessors, being appointed by interested parties, were inclined to maintain the values; He saw some merit in the scheme put forward by the Mayor of Wellington, but he realised that there were difficulties in its working.- He suggested a.Court composed of a senior Magistrate or Judge, one assessor representing the local body and the Valuation Department,. and another . representing tne ratepayers. But more was required than this to meet the case of the small ratepayers, who often found it cheaper to accept a higher valuation than to go to the expense in time and money of objecting. _ The Government should appoint a solicitor and a valuer to act for Bmall ratepayers, and fix definite dates for hearing cases, so that the men with only a small grievance minht have a .means of redress. In regard to valuation, he urged that special circumstances bringing about sales should not be allowed to affect the. general valuation of surrounding lands. He desired also to urge that there, should be' some provision whereby leaseholders might have a remedy under the Act similar to that given to freeholders under Section 31. He agreed with Mr. Myers that the rating problem lay with local bodies to a certain extent, tliere was no need for local bodies to collect the same rate in the pound when the valuation was increased; but the., tendency of local bodies was not to re-, duce the rates. ! . ' ■ . Mr. Sidney ICirkcaldie said that he naß interested in the working of the Act both as a lessor and a lessee. He was one, of those who lodged objections to recent valuations of Wellington City lands. The conclusion he had come to was that the unimproved value was too high, and that the Department relied solely upon the sums jiaid for' land (irrespective of its pro'dticing valuo) as the basis of its valuation. He contended that was wrong in. principle, as the price paid for City lands must necessarily comprise not only the present value, but also a proportion of the future value of such land. He thought it was quite fair to contend: that whore suitable buildings were erected upon City land there could be ilo increase in the unimproved value until an adequate return was being obtained upon the value of the improvements. The necessity for considering the producing value of land was disclosed by the fact that Government valuations for taxing purposes were 110 longer regarded as suitable valuations uixm which .advances could be made. The ultimate and only test of value by which a true unimproved value could be arrived at was by determining the income available after deducting such a sum us would constitute a fair return upon the improvements effected upon the land. The present composition of the Assessment Court was not a fair one to the property holders. As two of the_ assessors represent the taxing authorities, the third was powerless to protect the owners. There should be ono assessor only for the Department, and one for the property holder, with a magistrate or a judge of the Supreme Court for umpire, and the municipality should be bound to accept the roll 8 and not be ajlowed a voice in determining the question of value. He thought that Section 31 of the Act should be amended so that the Government would 'determine at the hearing of the objection whether it should reduce -to the owner's estimate of value, or take over, and that the values on contiguous lands should be adjusted accordingly. City Corporation lessee? should have the right to take advantage of 31. The present •.omputation gave a taxable interest by the lessee which would be seldom, if ever, realised, and the Act should be amended so that the tenant would b« taxed only on the value of the goodwill of his lease. Mr. F. W. Flanagan, the ValuerGeneral, made a statement to the Commission. He said that s< mo people appeared to be under the impression that the Assessment Court was a kind' of Star Chamber, before which' it was futile to seek_ justice. ' A few years ago the first objections to the constitution of the Court were ?nado and it was suggested that every objector- should have a special representative on the bench,- who would take his seat when the particular case came on. Mr. Flanagan tabled a return which' he ' said showed that the Court has increased in ponularity. and lie added that in considering the constitution of the Court one had to'take a bvoadev view than merely that of the objectors. • The history of the Court showed that the constitution had not been regarded with disfavour by 'the public. The' Court as constituted at the present time did not rmitc fulfil nil that was required of it. The chairman should be a permanent officer and a barrister, and there should he associated with him two other officer b, both apwiated bj the Crown, who

would bo experts in land values. Ho believed that such a Court would have the confidence of the public, for it would be a strong Court. A stipendiary magistrate was an undesirable chairman, because in only a few cases did ho give the necessary attention to the Act. That was one reason why there should be 3 permanent chairman. • The Commission has adjourned till 10.30 to-morrow morning.