WATER AND DRAINAGE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLV, Issue 65, 17 March 1911, Page 3

WATER AND DRAINAGE.

TO THE EDITOR

Sir,—Mr Homes in his first letter considers that he asked a question. He states. "To pay interest and sinking funds, it means our rates will be MORE THAN DOUBLE what they are at present." Then, after that-, "Then there is the water and drainage rate each year for the upkeep and working expenses to be,j>aid .by all' who use the same." Well, this is no.t' quite so. He want's to raise more money than-necessary. If the~ raies were doubled, not any more, tHat amount would cover everything. It would not be necessary" afterwards to-find more for the.upkeep. This "was the position pn the old rate of interest, viz.," 4J' per cent and 1 per ceht. sinking fund—s£ per cent; but we\ have now been offered the money by the Government Department at 3$ per cent, plus £1 7s 6d per cent, sinking fund—£4 17s 6d per cent., or a saving of 12s 6d- per cent, on our estimate, equal to £406 a year (nearly id in the £ rates) or a total of £14,820 saving in interest and sinking funds for the period of the loan. In his second letter last night he proceeds further, and refers to the halfrate and no-rate-at-all ratepayers, asking who will make up the deficiency. The law is clear on the subject that properties must be within certain distances to be ratable; but Mr Homes overlooks this fact, that all properties must have a street frontage, and that the £65,000 is intended to cover all streets j" therefore, on the completion of .the- scheme, and" when the total cost is expended, all sections would be within the rat-' able area. On the other hand, he assumes that two-thirds of the building sections will not be connected. I think his estimate is too high, but I would point out that the large areas held in/ the Borough that are most likely not to be connected are the least valuable from a rating point of view; being valued very low. For instance, if you cut out the whole of the Waterlea estate of 150 acres, it would make only about the same difference to the rates as if you cut out the threequarter acre block I have on High.Street, owing to the difference m.locality'and.ratable value per acre. vi 1? not tne householder and sectionholder who is going to contribute heavily to this rate, but the business area, which are the largest ratepayers as everybody knows. All Mr Homes arguments are based on the idea that all values of sections will remain as. at * present right through, surely he knows'that the Borough unimproved value is going up every year. I would like to ask Mr Homes where he gets his £25 or more per house for necessary connections?' In Falmerston North it has averaged less than £16, and for the whole of l^nristchurch large houses ancl small under £20. Surely we can do it at the same rate. I would just like to re/ er. to Councillor Allan's figures which are all wrong, on each occasion to suit his own statements or course Annual revenue he states is £4000 It is nearer £10,000. The rate of interest is 3% per cent, noi 4 per cent and total yearly interest is £2275' not £2600. There are not three engines proposed to be used, and the estimated annual cost for fuel, oil, wages, and wear-and-tear, including depreciation £270, is totalled at £993 10s, not £2000. Why do you exaggerate so, Councillor, Allan, or where do you get your figures from? Why will Islington, Drumclog and Riversdale never reap one farthing's worth of benefit? If the scheme is completed and. the total amount expended they will have the advantages the same as the other portions of the Borough, and until then the^ will not be specially rated. Several prominent citizens are industriously informing ratepayers that it is only intended to drain theThner area and the four main streets for the money. Their case is surely pretty bad when they already have to employ deception like this to gain adherents, knowing as they do themselves that . the whole of the streets of the Borough will be connected where necessary. Again, they state that most of the present ratepayers will receive no benefit, as the drains will not get therfi during the present generation. Well, one of the Gov-

ernment conditions is that the money shall be taken up in four years, so we would have to shift the work ; along when it once started, and1 I think everybody could expect to get the benefit unless they intend to die off immediately. Councillor, Allan's gravitation scheme to provide water for Mr Pollard en route is too ridiculous. I wish he would go into cost and quantities of water to be supplied ,jbbM^ Pollard for £400 per annsm#^pze of pipes, required to carry* it;»Mflo advocate such a thing only, displays his ignorance on the subject^ , These |/ impracticable suggestions are onlyi/ throvm out to try to befog the more practicable scheme.