Bill aims to raise low Sounds rates

Press, 12 July 1980, Page 11

Bill aims to raise low Sounds rates

Wellington reporter

Legislation seeking to raise the very low rates paid by about 700 landowners in the Marlborough Sounds has been introduced in Parliament by the member of Parliament for Marlborough (Mr D. L. Kidd).

The Marlborough County Council Empowering Amendment Bill was introduced and referred to the Local Bills Committee. Mr Kidd said that the bin would create interest throughout Canterbury, Marlborough, Nelson, and Wellington because of the widespread ownership of land in the Marlborough Sounds. It would affect about 700 landowners, and necessitate 976 different rate assessments.

the bill preserved the statutory rate ceiling protection granted after the enforced amalgamation of part of the old Sounds County and Marlborough County in 1965. he said. It supplemented those very modest rates with a uniform annual charge for each separately rated property of $25. in recognition of cost increases over the last 15 years.

“Most of the present rates are very low — 24 per cent are of $5 or less,” Mr Kidd said. “This bill embodies something quite rare; taxgathering by consent. “Nobody really wants to pay more for anything.” he" said. “A few may actually object, but they will b< able to put their view to the Local Bills Committee.” The bill also had an-

other aim, to empower the Marlborough County Council to extend the boundaries of the administrative rating area. This was desirable to enable the council to relieve an area south and east of Dieffenbach Point, in Queen Charlotte Sound and Tory Channel, involving 43 properties, from full rates. This area had been merged into the main part of the county in 1956, on the assumption that the area would be roaded ; This had not occurred and was not proposed. Mr Kidd said that the equitable treatment of those ratepayers required legislation to give them the justice which they had sought and been denied for so long. Referring to the section of the bill on rates, he said that the properties concerned had had the same rates since the passage of the Marlborough County Council Empowering Act, 1965. The Local Government Commission had in 1965 directed the amalgamation of the inoperative area of the former Sounds County with the Marlborough Countv. The area concerned had been virtually without local Government. The amalgamation had been opposed by both the landowners and Marlborough County. But in agreeing to merge the adjoining Kenepuru and Croiselles-French Pass Roads Boards in the Marlborough County, the commission had insisted upon settling the future of local government for the

entire Sounds area, Mr Kidd said.

The commission, however. had recommended that, the Marlborough County obtain power to lew rates at a lower level than those struck throughout the rest of the county, because there were no roads and little prospect that much expenditure would be required by the council. This power had been given by the 1965 act, which had fixed that rate in what was described now as the administrative rating area of the county a. 10 per cent of the general rate, he said. In the intervening 15 vears the administrative costs of the entire county had increased because of the exercise of additional f motions, such as in the Planning Act. The result was that while the county considered the true cost of administering the “administrative rating area” to be $44,009. the rate collected under the 10 per cent ceiling was only $13,000, Mr Kidd said, thus the rest of the county was substantially subsidising the administrative cost of the area. The Marlborough County Council had sought to promote a change in the percentage payable, relative to the general rate. This had been rebuffed by ratepayers. After a lot of work and discussion, a new approach had been evolved which was embodied in the bill, r Kidd said.