Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NOT AT ALL PLEASED

RATEPAYERS INDIGNANT

Referring fo the discussion at yesterday's meeting of> the City Council, and particularly to the deletion of a proposal, made by^ the estimates committee that a 5, per cent, reduction in rates should; be budgeted for, the chairman a£ ■ the executive of the Wellington' Ratepayers' Association writes:—

"The newspaper reports of the finance committee's meeting mako interesting and amusing,' even if tragic, reading.- The Wellington City Council seems; to have developed into a sort of bandits' stronghold, where from time to time wordy battles'take place as to how the loot shall'be shared between the various committees who literally lust for tho power to spend.

"No longer do we possess a council whoso purpose it is to act as. stewards for. the people's money, to uso- only what is absolutely necessary to manage the, city efficiently and work towards a credit balance at the end of each year, so that the ensuing year shall riot be burdened, but rather that its demand for rates bo decreased.

"Today there is an imprudent and outrageous . demand for half. a million of the people's hard-earned money, and then follows an unseemly struggle by the various so-called committees so that they may obtain a lion's share of the haul, irrespective of, and without regard to, the real, necessities of the city. It is quite obvious that at any one time the work required by one committee J may be paramount, and that other committees should give way— shorten sail so to speak—but of late years various ' Mayors have found the greatest difficulty in adjusting estimates. Councillors seem to be imbued with the idea that they must spend as much, as can be extracted from ratepayers, that the city would go to rack and ruin were the sum. now spent reduced to the 1929 figure, deemed sufficient to administer the city's affairs efficiently during the peak of the boom period. Wo emphasise that actually the council so. overstepped itself in 1929 that £70,000 had to be added to the rate demand of 1930. in order to assure the mere balancing of the budget. This increase has never been lifted. True, in 1931 a 3 per cent, reduction was made in the demand, but this was made possible principally, by the eco-

nomies effected by the Hospital Board and not by the City Council. PROMISES AND PLEDGE. "Overburdened ratepayers have boon patiently waiting for relief, and the mothod suggested in the second resolution placed before the finance committee is the only method by means of which a reduction of rates can bo effected. Sydney last year adopted this course, and the Commissioners said that, recognising the great need there was for* relief from rate burdens, they had decided to budget the coming year's expenditure on a rate demand considerably reduced. "Whoever was responsible for the second resolution moved knew his subject and evidently recognises his duty to ratepayers. The resolution reads:— 'That the amount of rates to be levied in the coming year be calculated to produce 5 per cent, less than the total amount levied in 1933-34.' Why the Mayor asked for its withdrawal is a problem he will no doubt explain. His action seems contrary to his: various promises and pledge. "In conclusion wo should like in this public statement to put this question to councillors:—By what process of reasoning do they look upon property owners as the universal providers— milch cows from whom can bo sucked a never-ending supply of sustenance, always on tap for any feather-brained scheme that may be propounded? If certain schemes are good, if they are necessary to keep men in work, why not spread the burden? Why pick only on property owners? "During the last ten years municipalities have completely lost sight of their true function, which is to administer the city's affairs as economically as possible. Development work and capital expenditure of magnitude should not bo carried out at the will of fifteen men representing over 100,000 people. Big works should all be voted on by some system which would really give the people who have to foot the major portion of the bill the predominating say in what shall be raised and how it shall be spent. "The resolution referred to is, as a start, a wise move. It is just, and nothing short of it should be acceptable to the ratepayers of Wellington."

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19340327.2.73.2

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 73, 27 March 1934, Page 10

Word Count
733

NOT AT ALL PLEASED Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 73, 27 March 1934, Page 10

NOT AT ALL PLEASED Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 73, 27 March 1934, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert