BOROUGH OR COUNTY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 1122, 15 July 1913, Page 2

BOROUGH OR COUNTY.

COUNCIL OPPOSES PETITION

FOR REDUCTION OF

BOROUGH

The petition from the residents at the east end of the Borough asking that their properties should be merged into the Mauawatu County, which had, in accordance with the Standing Orders, been held over since last meeting, was brought up for consideration at last night’s meeting ot the Council. Messrs Thompson and Kempster attended in support of the petition. The Mayor said he asked the Town Clerk to furnish the figures as to revenue and expenditure in connection with the area proposed to be cut out and the amount of rates received was ,£2OO per annum, the expenditure on maintenance being between ,£6O and ,£7O annually. The unimproved value of the land in question was about ,£IO,OOO. He invited the members of the deputation to make any statements they desired. Mr Thompson said that at the present time the farmers in the borough were very heavily rared and as there would be additional rates in the future for water and drainage etc., they felt that they could not afford to pay the rates and therefore asked to be cut out. The borough as a whole was pledged for the gas rate and they lelt that in this respect they were suffering a distinct injustice as they were rated for something from which they got no benefit or were ever likely to get any. They thought it was possible that in the future they would be so heavily taxed that their land would not be worth owning. Even if the borough were reduced as suggested it would still be a large borough and in any case they were prepared to agree to a smaller area being cut out than that asked. They were prepared to give and take in the matter.

Mr Kempster said be did not think that the system of rating on the unimproved value was really intended tor rural lands, and there was no doubt it pressed very heavily on them. Their rates at the present time were unreasonable, amounting to a rent of nine shilling per acre, Cr Whibley moved that regarding the petition asking that the borough be reduced the Council regret that they caunot accede to the request on the ground that the borough would seriously suffer by loss of revenue He said he had a lot of sympathy for the ratepayers concerned as their rates were undoubtedly high, due iu the first place, however, to their own shortsightedness, as when the re-valua-tion of the borough was made they did not bother to object to their valuations. To accede to their request would mean a loss of revenue of about ,£l3O per annum. Mr Thompson had mentioned that they did not get any benefit from the gas rate, but whether they were cut out or not they would still have to pay this rate. They need not be afraid of the water and drainage rate as they would not be iu the special area. At the previous meeting both Mr Carter and Mr Thompson had stated that they did not get any benefit from Foxton, and it did not matter to them whether the town went ahead or not. This was contrary to fact, as both these gentlemen got very material benefits from Foxton, aud the more the town advanced the more it would benefit them. He was absolutely opposed to the area being cut out, aud it the petition is gone on with he would take steps to oppose it at every stage. Cr Chrystall seconded the motion. He did not see that the petitioners would gain anything by being cut out of the borough, as they would carry the gas and other special rates with them. Cr Henderson said he sympathised with the gentlemen concerned, and asked if it was not possible to in some way get their rates reduced.

A Councillor: They should get a revaluation of their laud.

Cr Coley said he would support the petition. lu reference to the statement about not objecting to the valuations put upon the land, he said that in the first place his

property in the portion ol the borough under discussion was valued at £-]o per acre —the rates amounting to xßs per acre. He went to Wellington and put it under offer to the L,aud Purchase Board at ,£3O. and as a result his valuation was reduced to ,£35 per acre. He had since sold 40 acres at £26 5s per acre. He didn’t think rating on the unimproved value was intended for rural lands.

Cr Speirs said he could not support the petition. He was a property owner in the area concerned and he was not anxious to be out of the borough. Both Messrs Carter and Thompson derived great benefits from the borough, and consequently they should be prepared to pay some of the expenses. They both used the borough roads to a very large extent.

Cr Read, as Councillor presenting the petition, said that he bad told the petitioners that it was a case ot finance, and didn’t give them any hope of the Council agreeing to the proposed reduction. There was no doubt they all got benefit from the town, particularly Messrs Carter and Thompson, and if they looked at it in the right light they would see that they were not so heavily taxed as it at first appeared. Cr Freemau said they had to look at it as a business proposition for the borough as a whole, and as such he could not support it. The Mayor said he was sorry that he would have to take up the same attitude as the other Councillors. He assured the petitioners that if it were possible to agree to the petition he would do so, but in the interests ol the borough as a whole this could not be done. At the same time he considered that rating on the unimproved value was not intended for rural lands. Both he and the Councillors had been returned in the interests of the whole borough and he asked what explanation they would be able to give the ratepayers if they agreed to the petition. The only chance the petitioners had to get any relief in the way of reduced rates was to get their valuations reduced. As far as the gas rate was concerned the petitioners were getting a certain amount of benefit through the street lighliugs although.not in proportion to th, gas rate paid by them. He fele sure the petitioners would appret ciate the difficulty the Council wain and assured them that if things were anywhere near equal the Council would agree to them goiug out. Another course opeu to them was to try aud revert to the old system of rating. In replying Cr Whibley supported the system ot rating on the unimproved rating and said that the Mayor had omitted to inform the petitioners that when a previous endeavour to revert to the old system of rating was made enough signatures could not be procured to allow of a poll being taken.

The motion was then put and carried, Cr Coley alone dissenting.