THE LEVELS VALUATION.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2137, 27 January 1880, Page 2

THE LEVELS VALUATION.

A special meeting of;- the Levels Hoad Board to consider the valuation of the district was hold to-day. Present—All the members. The rolls for last year and the new lists were presented, and some of the items compared. Mr Beswick, Chairman of the Board, stated that there were some largo discrepancies. When the lists were presented at the last meeting it was mentioned that in the total there was a falling olf |of about £7OOO as compared with last year’s valuation. Since then, however, it had been found that there were large discrepancies, some of the properties being notoriously undervalued, while others were over-assessed, and, on the other hand, there were a large number of omissions. The Board had been convened for the purpose of deciding what steps should he taken to rectify those mistakes, lie suggested that the course to he adopted would he to attend the Assessment Court and 'have the valuation lists for 1870 and 1880 compared, and make the necessary objections where discrepancies of a flagrant nature were found.

In reply to a question, the Clerk said appeals against the valuation were being lodged every day. Mr Mee : That is to he expected ; many ratepayers expected a considerable reduction this year.

The Clerk : But there are some very heavy additions. The Chairman : When the lists were presented at last meeting, the Board was not surprised that there should be a falling off as compared with last year’s assessment, but wo not anticipate the discrepancies and omissions that have been made. Mr Macintosh : Arc the reductions serious?

The Clerk : They arc disproportionate. Fur instance, Mi - Briscoe’s assessment is reduced to ,£ooo, or one-third less than last year. The Chairman : Air Jameson advised me that we should attend the Assessment Court and get the valuations altered there. This seems to be our only course. The Clerk —There arc various inaccuracies. The number of the sections are given but not their respective acreage on the new list. The acreage instead of being specified is lumped. Mr Mee—ls it specified by the act that these particulars must be given ? The Clerk —Well, it is necessary that the properties should be described. The names of the ratepayers are also misspelt. The Chairman —Our better plan will be to wait for the Assessment Court, and with the aid of last years’ roll make the necessary amendments. Mr Mee —Yes, and the names omitted can then be inserted. The Clerk —That wovdd be an addition not an alteration.

Mr Moody—lt will be necessary I should think to prepare a supplementary roll for the omissions.

The Chairman read clause G of the Act.

Mr Moody—l have heard several of thejratepayers speak of the discrepancies. Some are under-assessed, but of course it is the others who complain. The Chairman— Oh yes ! There are complaints from all sides. Mr Mce : I have always considered the valuation was too high last year, and that there should be a uniform reduction this year. Mr Moody: Yes certainly, there could have been no objection to a reduction of say 5 per cent or so this year.

After some further discussion it was agreed that a list of those who had been omited should bo prepared and the requisite notices served, and that Mr Barnett should prepare another list showing the properties that were undervalued.

Mr Macdonald, the valuer, was then called and asked to explain the omissions and discrepancies. The Valuer: Well, gentlemen, I am sorry to say there are omissions, but some are accidental. In other eases the information was not given to me. Air White and Air (tuscott have supplied me with the particulars of their properties and I have got their names down.

The Chairman : But there are seventy omissions.

The Valuer: I cannot explain it. There is not a resident in the district that I did not visit.

Air Alacdonald entered into an explanation of the mode in which he arrived at the value of several properties. In the case of the Railway hotel and Point hotel, valued respectively at £l5O and £250, he pointed out that the latter had an assembly room. With regard to Air Perry’s house, valued at £l5O, he said he might have been wrong, but the house was built of timber, and he valued it according to his judgment. He added that he had met with a good deal of difficulty and opposition in getting the returns, He could not say how the difference was so great in the valuation of Seadown estate which he had valued at 9s per acre all round. The Clerk : You charge the whole of the estate to the original owners, Messrs Fleming and Hedley, whereas a good deal has changed hands. Air Alacdonald said he had been advised that the owners would collect the rates and the course he hud taken would

be the simplest and easiest for the Board.

Mr Meo : Perfectly right. Mr Moody : But these occupiers will not he able to vote. As occupiers they have a right to be ratepayers. Mr Mec : Yes! but the property was not transferred and signed to them when the valuation was made and the valuer took the best course. The Clerk remarked that the hardship. of the new valuation would be particularly felt by small ratepayers, whose properties had been increased £lO and £l3 per annum. The Chairman—Yes. As an instance I may mention Old Phil, the fisherman, who waited on me and pointed out that his cottage was monstrously assessed. The Clerk—And the hardship lies in these poor ratepayers having to lose a day in attending the Assessment Court, so as to save a few shillings in their rates. Mr Moe—But wc can’t help that. The Chairman —On the other hand, there arc lots of land let for 25s and 30s an acre, valued at 9s per acre. Mr Mee—l don’t sec any great mistake, except the omissions. All the little fellows seem to be valued very much as they were last year. Mr Shaw —Of course last year’s valuation is not necessarily a guide for this year. If there are disci’epancies, it is just one valuer’s opinion against another’s.

Mr Moc —Cortainl3 r . Mr Shaw (looking at the list) —The valuer doesn’t seem to be able to spell his own name. It is Macdonald, isn’t it, and here wc have Madonald. (Laughter.) The Chairman—He has been a little short-sighted, and left out the “c.” (Eenewed laughter.) Here again we have “ I hereby declair.” Mr Mee —Well, he was recommended by the Chief Surveyor at Christchurch, and there were other testimonials. The Chairman remarked that the Board was pleased enough with their former valuer, but Mr Macdonald was highly recommend and his tender for the work was £IOO under that of their previous valuer. If under these circumstances they had accepted the higher tender what would the ratepayers have said ? Mr Mee : And in calling for tenders wc only' took the course followed by other local bodies. It was finally resolved that lists of the names omitted and of properties undervalued should be prepared for consideration at a future meeting of the Board. The Board then adjourned