Ratepayer lump-sum option for works?

Press, 29 April 1982, Page 3

Ratepayer lump-sum option for works?

Parliamentary reporter The Ellesmere County Council seeks empowering legislation to enable ratepayers in the county to pay lump sums towards water, drainage and sewerage instead of being rated. An enabling bill will be reported back to Parliament today from a select committee. There were no objections to the measure. The bill, the Ellesmere

County Council (Lump Sum Contributions) Empowering Bill, is the second of its kind in New Zealand, and is a model for changes to the Local Government Act planned for later this year.

The act now does not provide for ratepayers to opt between being rated for loan charges on schemes and between paying a lump sum towards the cost of the works.

the bill anticipates a water-reticulation system for Lincoln and. in the near future, water and sewerage works in Southbridge and Dunsandel.

Ratepayers who elect to pay a lump-sum contribution would still be liable for rates struck later to finance maintenance and running costs. They would not be liable for special rates struck to repay loans raised by the council for construction. Under the bill, the total capital cost of any scheme would be calculated, any Government subsidies would be deducted, and the lumpsum contribution would be calculated by dividing the estimated net capital cost by the number of separately rated properties in the area to be served by the works. The ratepayers would then be given two months to opt for a lump-sum contibution or a special rate to repay any loan raised. When the options were returned to the council, the total of lump-sum contributions- Would be deducted from the total capital cost and a loan would be raised for the difference.

To help the ratepayers make a choice, the notice with which they would be served would show the estimated lump-sum contribution required on their properties and the estimated annual rate to meet loan charges.

Any ratepayer who had not made' an option within two months would be taken to have chosen the rating option.

Under the bill, the contribution would be adjusted after actual costs were known on completion of the work and the ratepayers would be given a refund or would be asked to pay more. The ratepayers would be able to switch from a rating option to a lump-sum contribution option before the raising of the first issue of a special loan.

To make sure that contributions and loan money became available at the same time, the ratepayers would be given three months to make their payment. Any payment not made by the due date would attract a penalty of 10 per cent. Any payment and penalty not paid would become recoverable by a special rate on the ratepayers' properties. In a submission on the bill, the council said that 87 per cent of households in the Lincoln area were not on a public water-supply scheme but depended on private wells, which were in constant risk of pollution. One hundred and sixtyeight Lincoln households, of 178 surveyed, were in favour of the options provided in the bill. In Southbridge. 60 households. of 70 surveyed, were in favour.

Advantages of the contribution option were, in the Lincoln area, that it would cost ratepayers $1250, compared with a yearly rate of about $175 for 30 years ($5250 in total). In Southbridge, a lump-sum contribution would be about $650, compared with a yearly rate of about $B5 for 30 years ($2550 in total.) The Lincoln Advisory Committee suggested the op'tion course to the council.