THE BURDEN OF HATES

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 73, 30 March 1929, Page 6

THE BURDEN OF HATES

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Exception has in a recent issue of ''The Post" been taken to the apparent apathy of the electors in applying to be placed on the municipal rolls. I suggest it is more the apathy of dispair at any improvement, in the ever-growing mountain of rates no matter who the particular councillors may be than from any other cause. There appears to the ordinary layman to bo absolutely no limit to the extent of the burden of rates in the City of Wellington. In' the Onslow Ward, for instance, there are seven different rates levied—viz., a general, rate, library, hospital and charitable aid, water, lighting, consolidated special rate, and public hall rate, the total rates amounting to just over 8 3-10 din the £1 on the unimproved value. Now we are asked by the council in a notice appearing in your issue of the 27th inst. to sanction further loans amounting in the aggregate to £165,700 and adding a further burden of l-16d in the £l(to the rates, making a total rate burden ol! just on B%d in the £1.

I may perhaps be allowed to show how this affects me personally. I am the unfortunate owner of some 3^ acres of suburban land on which the rates last year on a valuation (unimproved) of £1190 amounted to some £40. This year, with the increased valuation amounting to £2070 or an increase of £880 (although there are two sections less), the rates on the same ratio as last year will amount to over £75, but the rates struck this coming season will certainly be on an increased ratio, so I may expect a rate demand notice of well over £100. This on some Vh acres of suburban land, I think even the most confirmed optimist will consider excessive. ' ■..•■'

The truth is. Sir, the average ratepayer wants some assurance o£ finality in the ever-growing rates. It is no use the council asserting they are limited by law to the extent of the rate struck. That only applies to the general rate and is always got over by increasing the valuations. The hospital and charitable aid rate goes up by leaps and bounds. Last year the expenditure in this department was some £25,000, and I am told that this year it will bo well over £30,000. Where and when is this sort of thing to end? Again a large part of the money raised in rates is wasted. No foresight is exercised in permitting the erection of buildings, which have subsequently to be bought at a high price for road widening purposes_ aud pulled down. The fact is the municipal government of the city has become so huge and unwieldy that it lends itself to waste. It is difficult to see where the proper remedy lies, but it is apparent one must be found and soon, or the structure will collapse. Already we are threatened with the destructions o£ all gardens and creation of slum areas owing to the excessive burden of rates. In conclusion, can you wonder that the ratepayers are not particularly concerned with the coming municipal elections, seeing that the past has shown, no matter what councillors are returned, the ever-growing snowball of rates still accumulates?—l am, etc., RATEPAYER.

30th March,