ELECTRICITY RATE

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 220, 13 June 1933, Page 10

ELECTRICITY RATE

Power Board’s Decision TO MEET DEFICIENCY Manawatu-Orcua District Dominion Special Service. Palmerston North, June 12. A proposal to levy a rate of onesixteenth of a penny over the boards S was adopted at this afternoon’s meeting of the Manawatu-Oroua lower Board, following on a recommendation to this effect from the executive. The resolution passed by the board was as follows: “That it be a recommendation to tnc board,' that to provide the estimated deficiency of £6too, the board stiike u uniform‘rate of 1-ieth of a penny in the £ on the unimproved value of all rateable property in the board’s area (this wouhl raise £3364) ; that this rate be reduced by 75 per cent, to ratepayers (provided they make application) whose property is not within 10 chains of the lines of this board or anv licensee; that to provide the balance of the deficiency—£3336, the board strike a separate rate of 7-20ths of a penny over the Palmerston North city area.” City Members Opposed.

The proposal raised a lengthy discussion and opposition from city members of tlie board, who were not in favour of a rate'of any description being levied, holding the opinion that the board’s 1 position did not warrant the raising of a loan. The chairman. Mr. D. G. C. Dernier, who moved the resolution at ,the last meeting of the executive, said that the Palmerston North City Council, which operated its own power plant and bought power from the board, charged less for its power than the board. In the hist five years, the City Council had made a profit' of approximately £75,000 from its undertaking, while the board bad suffered a loss during that time with higher charges. Mr. J. Boyce seconded the recommendation. Mr. J. A. Nash. M.P., did not think there was a valid reason for the levying of the rate. Of 59 electrical undertakings in New Zealand, only four were collecting rates at present. The City Council would have to pay £591 on the general rate, and with the special rate would he obliged to find £3300 or £3900 to be raised by rates, City Council would not take the matter lying down. Everything had been done by the board to antagonise the Palmerston North City Council. “I suggest that we hold over the executive's report until a decision has -been given in the interest case in Australia. I want to lodge an emphatic protest against the proposal brought down by the executive,” said Mr. Nash in concluding his remarks. “Involving Litigation.” Mr. M. A. Elliot said he was convinced that it was unnecessary for the board to strike a rate. The board had adopted in his opinion an attitude of deliberately budgeing for a deficit in order to have an excuse to levy a rate. The matter would eventually go to the courts and would involve expensive litigation. The Palmerston North ratepayers lm,'l mortgaged their properties in order that the board could raise £5,000,000 to carry out reticulation work In its district.

Mr. J. Batchelor said that a,s a country member he had favoured the amalgamation of the City Council’s plant with the board's, but was not in favour of the levying of the rate. Mr. N. Campbell considered the rate was warranted as ratepayers were indirectly paying the rate on account of the board’s high charges. Mr. J. Hodgens, a member of the executive, said that the recommendation had been carried by the executive by four votes to three, Mr. P. G. Guy, Mr. IV. McKay, and himself voting against it. He moved as an amendment that the proposal should be held over. until the next meeting of the hoard in order that a ruling could be secured from the Crown Law Office regarding certain clauses in the Power Boards’ Act. The amendment was lost by five votes to six. The board’s solicitor waited on the meeting to explain certain portions of the Act. The resolution dealing with the rates was carried by seven votes to four.