TOWN VALUATION

King Country Chronicle, Volume XXVI, Issue 3444, 17 March 1932, Page 5

TOWN VALUATION

AND THE FREEHOLDING PROBLEM. DEPUTATION TO BOROUGH COUNCIL. At the meeting of the Borough Council on Monday evening, a deputation consisting of Messrs. Craig, Frerichs and Morton waited on the Council with a view of seeking its co-operation in trying to bring about a revision of the prices paid in connection with the freeholding movement in 1922. Mr. Craig stated that this was an old subject on which representation had been made to the Government on several occasions. Every year the position was becoming worse, and unless some alleviation was given to property-holders the position would assume a more serious aspect in which the Council must become involved. The economic storm which the whole Dominion was experiencing had brought many property-holders in the town to breaking point over the prices they had to pay for the land in question, and unless something was done there was no alternative left for many but to let their properties revert to the Crown, which means that the Council would derive no rates from these properties. Already the Council had Crown property within its boundaries the capital value of which was nearly £IOO,OOO, from which it derived no rates, and the unimproved value of which was nearly £30,000. Any further reversions to the Crown meant a consequent reduction in revenue to the Borough, and this would mean that the shortage would have to be made up by the rest of the ratepayers. The present economic conditions had forced down rentals for business, premises, and taking a general average it could be said that these rentals were from 25 to 50 per cent, lower than in 1922. This means that many property holders could not pay their way with the high prices placed upon the land. The replies received by the various delegations that had brought this matter before the powers-that-be was that a "contract is a contract," and that nothing could be done "as a matter of policy." The times in which we were living, however, had shown that many contracts entered into years ago were impossible of fulfilment to-day, and this had been proved by the policy of the Government to-day, In any case the freeholders had been forced to safeguard their own interests, but in scarcely one case were they satisfied with the prices they were called upon to pay. The former Minister of Lands, Mr. A D. McLeod, had frankly acknowledged to a deputation that a mistake had been made in these values. The speaker asked the co-operation of the Council in trying to obtain redress in this problem which was now reaching serious proportions. It was a matter which not only affected those who had freeholded under the Act of 1922 and the Council, but the whole of the ratepayers of the town, who would be called upon to make up any deficit in the Council's revenue if more sections reverted to the Crown.

Mr. Morton, when endorsing the remarks of the former speaker, said that the majority of the ratepayers did not seem to realise the seriousness of the position regarding the high prices paid under the freeholding scheme. The rates were already a heavy burden on the town, and if there were further reversions to the Crown there seemed to be every possibility of these rates being increased. With the high prices paid for the land and reduced rentals from shops, many business people were finding it hard to make ends meet. Mr. Frerichs stated that the Crown was entering- into competition with business people and leasing shops which had fallen back to the Lands Department at a rental which would show a heavy loss to a private owner. The speaker quoted a case where the Lands Department was leasing a shop at 30s. a week, the Government valuation of this property being £3OOO. "It had to be remembered," said the speaker, "that no rates were being paid on this property, while private propertyowners had to meet their obligations to the Borough. How can anyone stand up against such unfair competition?" The Mayor stated that some property owners had been fighting this matter for years, but had not received the support of the others. It was in the interests of the Council as well as the whole of the ratepayers to place these valuations on a fair basis. In any movement to bring about an adjustment there must be co-operation, for it was a matter which affected the whole community. Cr. O'Connell asked if something could not be done so that rates could be paid on lands that reverted to the Crown.

Mr. Craig stated that this was a matter which was being fought by scores of local bodies throughout the Dominion.

On the motion of Cr. Carroll, seconded by Cr. Thompson, the Council decided to support any movement to bring about a reduction of the valuations under the freeholding scheme of 1922.