VALUATIONS OF PROPERTIES

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 27072, 22 June 1953, Page 3

VALUATIONS OF PROPERTIES

STRATFORD COUNCIL’S OBJECTIONS

SHIFT OF RATING BURDEN ALLEGED

"The Press" Special Service NEW PLYMOUTH, June 18.

The possibility of a move to alter the valuation law was indicated to the Taranaki Land Valuation Committee by Mr N. H. Moss, president of the Municipal Association, of New Zealand, when he appeared before the committee as Mayor of Stratford to support a blanket objection to the new valuation of the Stratford Borough.

The chairman of the committee (Mr W. C. Harley, S.M.) said the questions raised were of considerable importance and as the' objection to the valuation of the department came from a responsible local body, it should not be lightly brushed aside. The committee adjourned the hearing until July 30.

Mr Moss contended that the new valuations tended to shift the burden of rating from properties in the business area on to the homes of the people. The blanket objection was unusual, but in view of the practice of having valuations every five years these valuations were assuming greater importance than when, they occurred every 10 to 15 years. It was impossible for a local body to examine the rolls in detail in the 14 days available, he said. Incidence of Rating Shifted The .object of the objection was to enable the council to state a case when it had a chance to examine the full effect of the new valuation. In the meantime, the council had been able to assess the effect in the case of some properties five years ago when the last valuation was made. The effect then was to shift the incidence of rating to some extent from the business properties in Broadway, the main street, to properties in the residential area. The new valuation continued that trend.

“We are alarmed to see that the rating liability is being eased in Broadway, and put on the homes of the people,” said Mr Moss. “This year the ratepayers of the borough are being asked to pay £2OOO more than they did last year, but the owners of 1 business properties in Broadway will pay £2OOO less, so that the residential area will have to find the £2OOO, plus the £2OOO easeij off Broadway.” Mr Moss said that he knew the Valuation Department relied largely on sale value in making the valuations. Although there had been considerable activity in the purchase of residential property, there had been practically no movement of Broadway business property. The conclusion that could be drawn was that the Valuation Department was without a reliable sales guide. ‘

The council considered that the increase in the unimproved value in the business area was not sufficient. As far as he was aware the values of the Valuation Department were only an opinion.

Mr (Moss said that the business community had exemption from income tax on rates and the opportunity to pass on to the public any increase in rates, whereas the householder had no such relief. There had been sales of certain choice sections to substantial people who were prepared to pay a high price to get the particular section they wanted and he considered these sal(» had influenced the department’s attitude m valuing the residential area. The council did not want to embarrass the department, but • this trend must be stopped, Mr Moss said, even if local bodies had to seek an amendment to the legislation. A. A. who appeared for the Valuer-General, said this was the first time the department knew the nature of the council’s objection. Mr Harley said that as the procedure under the act had not been carried out properly by the borough' council or the Valuation Department, the committee thought they should go back to the beginning again and follow the procedure through carefully and properly. He adjourned the sitting until July 30. In view of what might transpire as a result of the council’s, blanket objection, he said, the committee d s ol ? e l a *, y p „ oint in Soing ahead with the individual objections. They were also adjourned until July 30