Amalgamation with Borough.

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 184, 12 August 1901, Page 4

Amalgamation with Borough.

To the Editor of tho Times,

Sn;, —I propose to call attention to some of the figures submitted to tlio Whataupoko and Haiti ratepayers. The capital value of tho proposed Whataupoko extension is put- at 1180,000, and Haiti extension at 1:50,000. The rental .value of Gisborne is £BB,IOO. And it may bo taken for granted that in the borough rating will in tho future, as in the past, be levied on rental value, so that, if union takes place, tho rental values of Whataupoko and Haiti will have to be ascertained. How ? That is a very important question, as an arbitrary rule ought, in my opinion, to bo laid down. But taking the rule of the Municipal Corporations Act, that Is per £ on annual value is equivalent to :)d per £ on capital value, tho values are easily .determined. Whataupoko £BO,OOO divided by 16 gives £SOOO in the rental value; and Haiti £50,000 divided by 1G gives £81.26. That rule, bo it right or wrong, should tie the hands of any valuator in assessing values for amalgamation purposes. The total rental values of tho extended borough would thus amount to £41,225. It is not necessary for amalgamation purposes to trouble about any rate except the general rate, as no district or ward of the borough could be rated for separate or loan purposes without the consent of the ratepayers therein. A general rate of 2s per pound would yield (on £41,225) ... £4122 10 The like rate on Gisborne as now existing would yield... £BBIO 0 The like on Whataupoko (on £5000) ... 500 0 The like on Haiti (on £8125) 812 10

A rate of 2s would probably be found to be inadequate to carry on efficiently the general work of 'the extended borough. The current rate for Gisborne proper this year is Is 9d general and 3d special, and the borough is now decidedly starved in the matter of needful improvements.

It is very plain that if the same rule for valuing were applied to Gisborne proper its capital value must very greatly exceed what is at present stated to bo its capital value, viz., £301,000, because .£33,100 multiplied by 16 gives 11529,600 ; and if a general rate were levied on capital value the result would b.S as follows: —_ Gisborne proper, on'capital value of 12529,600, at ;]d per £ ... £1651 0 Whataupoko, on 2280,000, ditto 250 0 Kaiti, on 2250,000, ditto ... 156 5 Such a rate is plainly insufficient, and it would have to bo at least doubled, or six farthings in the pound (equivalent to a 2s rate on rental value). At present capital value of Gisborne proper of .£301,000 the inequality would be very greatly against the suburbs. At that iigure Gisborne proper could hardly carry on upon a less rate than 2[d or 2ld per 12, yielding 228000 to £3400. The suburbs would not stand that! They only pay lid now, including County rate. Whataupoko and Kaiti, it appears, would not be as well off as they are at present, if union takes place, for the further reason that the maintenance of the County roads would have to bo provided out of the £SOO and £312 10s a year collected from Whataupoko and Kaiti respectively. Gisborne proper of course could not be expected to bear any share of the expense of maintaining the County roads. That would bo rather a heavy drag on the suburbs, to say nothing of the possible claim by the County Council for repayment on adjusting accounts. I am mistaken if the suburbs will not be much better off by paddling their own canoe for some time yet, rather than byuniting with Gisborne. It is always open to local bodies to enter into contracts with each other as to the execution of, or taking the benefit of, works such as those for water supply or drainage. And amalgamation is -not necessary for any such purpose.—l am, etc., W. SIEVWRIGHT.