SMALL HOLDING OWNERS AIR GRIEVANCE OVER RATES

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6665, 19 July 1928, Page 3

SMALL HOLDING OWNERS AIR GRIEVANCE OVER RATES

Small Farms and Holding Paddocks RURAL LMDS ENQUIRY Yesterday’s the evidence given before the Commission of Enquiry into the rating of rural lands 1 -’ in boroughs mostly ; concerned rural areas in Feilding and Palmerston North, the subject .of the Commission’s investigations. Small farms and holding paddocks were mentioned, and in the latter case witnesses admitted their advantage in a borough being an important stock centre. Searching examination was made to elicit as far as possible definite evidence as to the bearing high rates had on the holding of rural areas.

On behalf of other counsel representing different affected ratepayers, Mr. b. A. ffiliott, suomilted prepared statements showing the manner in which tne rates, had increased on the rural lands over the period 1918 to 1928. 'l'hese statements showed, that, rates on these lands had increased 50 per cent. One or two ratepayers would be called to support the statements. No Municipal Services. James M'Kenzic Turnbull, owner of ten acres in the borough in Sherwill street, particularised his rate payments and said that although paying for the municipal services, ne did not have water, sewerage, or footpath. Witness did not pay a- water rate, although his land was pledged for. the. water supply improvement loan. Nothing of any consequence had been done to improve the street. His property had not increased one penny piece in value over the last ten years, although the -rates had doubled. , ■■ V To Mr. Pagan (borough solicitor), he sometimes used Kimbolton road to reach his property. As far as- the selling value of his property was concerned, reading improvement had not affected it. The North street drain did not affect his property. He would say taat the Sherwill street drain depreciated the value of his property. To Mr. Nash, his alarm over, the rating .was due to the fear that the equity in the property was. being eaten up in rate payments. His rates had doubled in ten years, and the property was not the same value to-day. it . was inl9lßh He. pair £96 per acre for-the property. ■ Since then he had subdivided the property into slit paddocks and built a bouse thereon. What extra work ho. did to meet the increasing rates was taken by the rates.. ; ■ , 1 , Mr. Nash:'You think that you should receive compensation if the borough'reduces the price of'-your I&nd? c ■; Witness: We don't- want compensation.,' We ask ‘ fbr ; protection against tho increasing pates. V ■ , To Mr. Strand: Witness was objecting to pay , for something ho had not got. Had ho receiy'ed' the services enjoyed hy other’ parts of'the borough he would not have any grounds for objection. -■ ;; .; , ■■■ . ' . - • , , - To Mr;. Nash: -He. did not Nish to make'a. profit out;of the increased- value which might •.accrue.-to his property through-having>the<borough servicefe.; ' V Really a Holding Paddock; W. T. Pratt, farmer, of Apiti,. holding years ago, in the rural area of FeUding, landj "which he/purchased ten to' Is said, that the -different:sections cost a total . of £3900.:' ! One area of. five acres with a house was let for 30/- a week, total rates . w’cfeT £67 per annum. The the remainder of a total of 30 acres,-he ■farmed to .the best, advantages. The high rates were a draw back to the saio of the property. -. ./ To Mr. Strand: Witness had. 2500 acres at Apitiv where he resided. He had a definite reason for purchasing the land in Feildiug because it was handy to the sale yards. So he was really receiving a direct benefit by having' landin Feildingfor holding stock. Mr. ’.Strand: What do you consider the value of that convenience to you? Witness: That is a difficult question to answer. As an .accommodation paddock it might be worth £4O per annum. Mr. Strand: If the rates remained stationary you would, still be making a loss?r—Probably X would. Mr. Strand: So that it would not be right to accuse the borough of Feilding or the rates for your loss. You were losing when the rates were £1 per acre. —The increased rate made the position worse. The speculative element came into it when you brought the property?—Yes, a little. Perhaps two-thirds of the land was in the speculative category?—Yes. If you purchased £3900 of goods and they shrunk in value what would you do?—I would have to stand up to it. And, therefore, if £3900 worth of land also shrunk in value?—l would have to do the same. So that the high rates are not really the essence of your objection?—They make my position worse. To Mr. Nash:' I’m not complainiig about the price I paid for the land but I am objecting to the high rates. It was not a question of being able to profitably farm the land owing to the rates. Purely Panning Land. D. W. Reid, farmer, Feilding, said that 40 of 73 acres he owned in Feilding were excluded in 1924, and the balance was excluded many years ago, being originally in the borough. He had none of the borough services. The rates amounted to £46/17/6 per annum on the 40 acres, and the rates paid on the 33 acres to the Oroua County Council amounted to £5/13/9 per annum. He acquired the land from his father

who held it for 47 years. The land was used purely for sheep farming-. From a productive point l of view the value of the two sections was the sam», although the 33 acres would be greater because of the flooding tendency-of the 40 acres. ‘ . ' To Mr. Pagan: Ho took over the 40 acres just after it was excluded from the borough. He must plead ignorance —ho diij not know the amount of the rates at the time ho purchased ft. • Nash: Do you think a rate of 3/5 an acre would be sufficient to provide all municipal services? —Yes, I do. Witness-continued by saying that 300 acres of land in the area in question had .been paying rates for years ■ for nothing. ’ 1 To; Mr. Strand:'Peilding was of vice to the nearby farm lands. Land nearer a market and other facilities Vas of greatery value than similar land 50 miles away. To Mr. Graham: Land rated at 3/6 an acre a short distance away from land rated at £2/5/- an acre did not affect the values from the point of view of this proximity to Feilding. Both enjoyed the same municipal services, yet. were rated differently. Farm Partly in Borough.

Mrs. Pearson, Cunninghams, owner o* a farm on the Halcombo road, of 145 acres, of which 184 were in the borough, said that the rates on the borough area were £l6/1/7, and for the 12.6 J acres in the Oroua County were/£6/17/11.’ None ofi the borough services were/avariable to the property, and-her objection - was that she was carrying the burden of rates without any benefits. To Mt. Strand: Witness acquired the area in -the borough in .1920, and had ieally bought the whole farm, with the object ; of ultimately living in Feilding. Her objection was that she did not get any advantages from rates. Rated Out of (Proportion.

Ernest; Pair, Mayor, of Feilding, said we quite agree that the areas used for farming purposes in the borough; are under the present system rated out or proportion to, the benefits they derive from the-borough.. This :is due mainly to the inclusion of these farm areas in the original survey , of the borough at which .time it was considered that tad ,borough j would grow; at a faster rate than it has done. . In the borough the largest, portion of the public debt, amounting to approximately 60 per cent., is. covered in three items, water, sewerage, and roads. ~ it must; be> therefore, admitted that, although these lands are classed as farming lands, their proximity to-these services must increase tne value Of the land very considerably.; When raising these loans the council, no doubt, considered that these lands would later on become a residential part of the town, and naturally .provided'services in the way' of water particularly,' sufficient for the needs of the town at present and for a largely increased population. It is, perhaps, unfortunate that ta» town did not increase as anticipated, but it is hardly just that the whole cost of these services should be borne by a portion only of the to the farm area is' afforded I am of Opinion that that relief should not be borne by a section of the borough. It must be remembered'that while ratepayers in the farm areas state that they find it very, hard just to male their farms pay on account of the heavy rates, it-is equally hard for many of the businessmen and tradesmen in the town to make their businesses an® trades a profitable undertaking, for it must be remembered that the business is the-highest and probably over-valued area of the borough .. Further, my experience is that the residential area Is rated to its full value, and the burden of rates is high in that area also. As an illustration of this fact, the town clerk reports that of (i sum of approx*mately £6OO outstanding rates when the 10 per cent, penalty was added in January last, £35 only was owing on farm lands, the balance being on business and residential properties. It is my opinion, therefore, that should this Commission recommend, that relief bo afforded owners of farm lands, by way of reduction in rates, then such relief should be returned to the borough from the consolidated revenues of the country. If this course were adopted the relief would be contributed to by all sections of the community, particularly the business and residential portions. To Mr. Treadwell: The burden of complaint was really the rating to meet interest and sinking funds on loans raised by the free vote of the ratepayers. To Mr. Strand: Feilding was a very solid, but at present not over prosperous. Generally speaking, Feilding would be recognised as being one of the most solid boroughs in the Dominion. He believed that the business people anticipated a greater and more rapid

expansion of tho borough and probably overspent accordingly. Ho did think the council would be justified In extending the sewerage service owing to the scattered nature of the houses. Some of tho lands already had the water service. '• The motor-car and bus has made an appreciably difference in the business of the town. Palmerston North and Wanganui had, both benefited to the detriment of Peilding. Outside country stores in the Peilding district would suffer by- the motor and bus to the benefit of Peilding—to a degree at least. v :'

Mr. Strand: What/the Commission would like would be a tabulated statement showing/what's, 10, and 25 per cent, relief would mean to the excluded area and its affect on the rates generally. „ , ' : ‘ / ' " To Mr. Nash: About £60,000 had been expended in Tending on water supply but very little had been received of the service by ( the excluded land.' Some had paid for something they never re-, ecived, wliilo others have received something for’ which they had not adequately paid. It was difficult to get absolute justice finder the existing system of rating. If some of the special conditions could bo overcome it might be possible to introduce zoning to'remove some of the injustices, but he thought zoning was too late to apply generally now. >, ' ‘ ■ : ■■■ / ■ v To the chairman: Relief to the excluded areas of a one-fifth of their rates would mean an increase of approximately : of onerforty-fifth on rest of the borough. It would be hard *o say whether the town'would accept a two per cent, increase on their rates in return for thc s 2O per cent, decrease on the excluded lands. •iAny.’ such proposal would; require Very car bful, consideration.: /. ’ ■ i ;/- : ,’ , Borough too Big. • Edmund Goodbchcrc,m former Mayor and councillor of Feilding, said that Feilding had suffered -in the past through certain disabilities. One w,as its large, area, also, the,; fact of its being originally 1 a private town . with no reserves, and a further disability was the fact that it was surrounded fy so many water ways. The reason for the original extensive area ‘of the borough was that it. was necessary to, have the required number of residences. The streams and rivers necessitated costly: bridges., The adoption of .rating bn the unimproved value in 1991. forced the Colonists’ Land and Loan Corporation to sell a large area of land in the centre of- the - borough, and a further effect was that residents'purchased their own sections. Tie water supply loans were not. carried 'by large majorities, because the owners of land ,in the outer area did not realise what the result would bo in tho matter, of fates. There was no doubt that this land was carrying a burden in rates; Had tho town progressed as was then anticipated - to-day’s . difficulties would not bo apparent. ' It was not dc.cided then which was to be the vcCntro 7-Feilding or PalmerstoniNortli.’ The Elst Coast railway junction was laid off, at Bunnythorpe, and land sold there in anticipation Of a settlement of importance) and the indications Were that Feilding ' would. bo the, bigger settlement’. However, the stronger pull came from Palmerston North, and Feilding did not progress as anticipated. Suburban , sections "were considered 1 very valuable in . those days, but the days of ; motbr-cars had deprived them of 'much Of their'then value. He had a»fiveacre section 1 which Was practically unsaleable. , ■ . , To Mr. SandUands; /VTitness did not think the property in and around the excluded afeh was as valuable to-day as it-was ?6,years ago. There f was no demand for that land for’building purposes. , ‘ • ■ - 1 . To. Mr. Strand: He considered that tho old Manchester Block of a mile square Would have been ample for a borough area. The reason for. the formation of the fesidentiap quarter on the Awahuri road was due to • residents leaving the borough when ;,the rating on the unimproved 1 value ivjas introduced. He did not agree that -the 1 /mile' square area would be sufficient ’for today’s needs, owing to tho fact that' outside that i area had been considerably improved by tho borough services.. , Mr. Nash: /If the borough boundary' was limited to North’street, would’not you have the same difficulty of people going out of the borough to live and have the advantage of cheaper rates, as was the case With the Awqhuri road settlement?—Possibly, although tho people of tO-day , do not dike, to be too far from the towh and walking was not as pdpular nbTv as in bis'day. Evidence Prom' Palmerston North. William Brown Ellis; 'fruit grower, Palmerston North, said ho owned six acres of land in Botanical road. All was in orchard, and within the borough of Palmerston North. His reason for giving evidence was that he considered his rates too high. He had been living on the property Lor 18 years, and the rates in 1922 were £9/14/-, and this year £26/3/5. No municipal services beyond water and gas main. There was no sewerage but mains for such were now being laid. He considered by the way the rates were increasing that it wgs against the value of the land, and also against the. selling the land. -The land was worth less to-day than it was the years before. . ■■/; To Mr, Pagan: There are three sec-, tions of Palmerston North that would be affected similarly to his, area. To Mr. Strand:' He bought his land for fruit farming and since he had been there only two houses had been built ‘ in the area. His principal markctWas i Palmerston North, but as far as tliat ‘ went it was not as valuable tb-day as j it was six years ago. There was not the demand for tho fruit.’ , j To the chairman: His property was approximately a' mile from tho new station site. • To Mr. Nash: Witness admitted the value of a market of 20,000 people a mile from his door, but it was outside competition which depreciated its value. He would not object to paying £lO a year for the advantage of the market but a further £l3 per annum for’services he did not receive was not justi-

fied. Robert Waller, also of Palmerston North, said that he lived near the previous witness, and he and his wife owned 20 acres in tho borough on whicn were milked 14 cows. Tho rates amounted to £6O per year. He bought the sections for £2BOO, and when he made the deal the rates were £24 per annum. The rates were advancing at such a rate that they would eventually put a man out of his home. That’s what the increase amounted to to him. ' To Mr. Strand: He admitted that he had'bought the property with a view to a little speculation, but he overlooked tho rates. His expectations had not been realised. To Mr. Nash: He was not anxious for the rating system to be altered to square his loss on the speculation he made in 1919.

Vernon E. Fafquhar,. owner of ten acres on Botanical road, Palmerston North, said that thc last year’s rates were £32/11/4. Until recently be milked seven cows, on the property, whicn returned just over £IOO a year. He bought the property in'l9lß .for £200&. The rates were going up'every year,,in 1918 they were £l4, arid now £32. Regretted not more witnesses, continued witness, but had their been time at least 50 witnesses could - have been Brought over. Ho did not buy the property for speculation purposes. Purely Farming Land, B. N. San dilands, farmer, of Feilding, gave evidence, on behalf of lao Sandilands Estate and himself, as owners of rural lands, both in tho borough and in the recently excluded area. Exclusion from tho borough afforded no relief from rates, and it would not bo until the special loans had been paid off in 20 years’ time-that the excluded lands would be relieved of the present rate burden. However, exclusion was a preventitive against further special rates. Witness preceded to state that the 1 lancls he was interested in did hot enjoy any of the borough services; and while they earned the present hign rates, the owners would not receive any benefits from their labours . The rates ori his property paid to the borough amounted to £4.0, and those paid to the county amounted to £9/9/- —a matter of £2/11/- an acre. He paid 5/- per acre for water supplied by the borough. To Mr. Pagan: The total rates paid to the borough amounted to 1 £202 per annum on the whole of tho property,including that within the borough, ana, that, excluded in 19,24. He considered that 1 the borough council should have kept the water tables open in Afnqtt street. That was the le&t it could!h&ve: done in return for the Tates paid. The 1 Government valuation was round about flOu per acre. ; ’ :. ■

To Mr. Nash: He. would not bo prepared to offer his sections at the Government .'valuation,, which, he, considered too high, because he did not want to sell. It placed him iri; the position of the high valuation, forcing him off his land. < , ■, - ■ Mr. Nash: I don’tl think the. Goverment ever place a high value on land with the object of extracting high rates and taxes. ■ I believe that , tho Government honestly tries to arrive at a fair selling value. , ■ , ' 1 To Mr. Nash:-He would be in-agree-ment with the borough council or State taking any accrued value to his (property arising from - the expenditure of public moneys. Pair rating was what witness wanted. ■ 1 After 'further examination, Mr. Nash put the following question: Do you consider, provided all charges on your land are fair, that any increased, value ac-, cruing ■to your land by reason of expenditure ofj public moneys, should go to the local body or State paying the ! money?—-No. -Such require much thinking To Mr. Strand: Ha bought 23 acres for £B7/10/- an acre in 1913.'.- He. knew it would be liable for rates on the unimproved value. At tho height of tho boom ho had been offered £l5O an aero for Si acres. The 23 acres could have been sold for considerably more than £B7/10/- per acre during the boom, but he did not want to sell. Have you not suffered like other people about the district and our friends from Palmerston Nortk by not knowing the right timo to unload ?—No, siri Hd could have made £BOOO or £9OOO six months after he returned’from the war. He did not want; to sell the land. To the chairnian? He could not get the municipal services, and ne did not want them;; ' . , ,MiV Strand: Taking into consideration the' close proximity of the property to Feilding and the markets, What would you consider - .- a fair rate per acre?— On the, improved sections -he would pay what was considered equitable, and on the other sections not more than 10/an acre. • ■ '_ r ' • , -You would consider, that a fair rate? —Yes, ’ and probably a little more, but 10/-at least. • " The Commission adjourned until 11 o’clock this morning at the Borough Council Chambers.