UNHAPPY RATEPAYERS

Manawatu Times, Volume LII, Issue 3614, 15 September 1927, Page 3

UNHAPPY RATEPAYERS

Experience Doubtful Gain

OF EXCLUSION FROM BOROUGH

Those ratepayers whose property, on petition, was excluded from tire borough of Feilding some time ago and included in the Oroua County art. apparently hot satisfied with the change over as far as the rate position is concerned. On behalf of several of those Interested Messrs. Graham and Reed, solicitors, wrote to the Oroua County Council yesterday with reference to the special ratac, stating that the rate had considerably increased this year and alleging that the Increase was almost altogether attributable to the fact that the County failed to collect the rate from one or more of those included in the area and who arc liable to the special rate. The letter further claimed that. th e principle was wrong and its operation would lead to an injustice being done to those ratepayers who carried out their obligations and paid their rates. It was never intended that when a special rating area was established one or more of the ratepayers in that area should bo liable to carry the whole buden of the interest on th c loan because others in the area failed to pay. The letter concluded with a request, that the Council should put the matter right. After the letter had been read the chairman (Cr. A. Campbell) said that the land taken over was subject to certain special rates. The County rates were levied annually and in accordance with practice the rates on the area concerned were levied in the same manner as apply to the rest of the County. The Oroua County struck its rates somewhat earlier than the borough and since thc area was absorbed in th,c County, it had been the practice to ascertain from the borough the amount of rates required from this land. Oh two occasions the Information given was under estimated and the County rates wore struck accordingly. This resulted in a debit being created as far as this area was concerned and the County had no option but to increase the rates to make good the deficit. Another point which affected the rates was that the borough, since the transfer, had realised on certain debentures affecting this land and this had caused the rates' to bo increased. ‘‘At no time," continued Cr. Campbell, “have we collected more rates than we are legally entitled to.” Thc County Clerk (Mr. R. L. Harding) amplified the explanation of the chairman as to the borough under estimating its requirements and further explained that this year the borough had over estimated the amount. The rates had been baaed on-the borough’s estimate and this over estimate would,-necessarily make an increase in thc rates. Next year a reduction would bo made.

The chairman further explained that the County at first collected the rates on this area on the unimproved value and bad obtained legal advice that as the County was rated on the improved value this area would have to be similarly rated. This would hit some of The ratepayers rather heavily and is a point which the ratepayers concerned should have looked well into before they decided to come into the County.

Cr. O. McElroy conisdercd that there was only one thing to be done and that was to write and explain the position.

The chairman was satisfied that the office action had been right and proper. The deficit had to be made good otherwise the area would become a charge on the whole County. The County Clerk stated that the debit balance on account of rates on this area last year was £79 9s lid and this sum had to bo made up. The current year’s rates provided for this debit and also arrears on one property amounting to £37. The rates levied amounted to £513 of which the Borough Council received £436. If all the rates were paid this year the account on account of this area would bo just over £35 in credit. Cr. McElroy stated that the property as farming land was very heavily rated, but it was not the fault of the County. The area concerned was just over 400 acres. After further discussion in which Councillors expressed sympathy with the raiepayers concerned, it w r as decided that the chairman and Cr. McElroy frame a reply to Messrs. Graham and Reed’s letter.