CITY COUNCIL AND RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 26 June 1924, Page 2

CITY COUNCIL AND RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION

(To ttie Editor'.!

Sir, —The Nelson Ratepayers' Association's leaders must be feeling very proud and quite dignified to note how no lily (heV it re defended, and the members' of the City Council given such castigations for daring to resent the constant “pin pricking” of (he Association, which appear in your column's following each meeting of these bodies. The Ratepayers' Association, or one based on the still wider basis of citizenship could he n most useful body, and render some very useful public service fhr the benefit, advancement and progress of the city if they could be kept free of such elements as the paltry personal vindictiveness against the City Council individually and collectively that has been shown so often by some of thote connected with the Association. It will be surprising news to the City Councillors to learn from one of the Ratepayers’ Association’s defenders that the recent reduction in the rates is almost if not wholly due to the zeal of the Association. Nothing can be further from the actual facts, for it is clearly due to tiife wise policy of Hie City Council in deciding to cut out. the old inequitable, policy of carrying out new works connected with the city services, direct front the rates, which has not only compelled keeping up and ever increasing the rates, but also limited the scope of sllch services to far below the' city’s requirements. This is very notably the case in drainage extension to cope with the expansion of housing and businesses; nlso new improvements to the water service, to parks, reserves, public gardens and streets of the city, in addition to the ordinary maintenance cost. To meet these and other progressive improvements, we have seen that the City Council have been most carefully considering every possible pro and con of several loan proposals for meeting the cost, instead of having to continue’ the old irritating policy of increasing the rates. The new policy, if sanctioned by the ratepayers at the coming poll, will give the city many long overdue improvements at a comparative small cost, almost -proportionately at the average of £IO,OOO worth of improvement and new services- for Id addition to the rates, ai d by spreading the cost over a series of years, ■ we only pay for the services as we .use them, and those coming into the city will not only enjoy these added privileges, but- also pay their proportion of the cost. How much more equitable that is than the old policy will be apparent to all, while the comparisons of Hie possibilities of the two policies will be quite as apparent when it is recognised that by doing new work or improvements at the direct cost on each annual rate w, can only secure a little ever £6OO worth feu- each, penny of rate that has to be put cn. In other words, we can get £50,000 worth of new services and improvements of old for about a sixpenny rates, or for less than we could got £3OOO worth if paid for direct annually. While we can then enjoy up-to-date "services in the immediate future and make our city famous for its up-to-dateness the envy of and example for others to follow. Here, then, is something radical and on right lines for our Ratepayers’ Association to give its whole-hearted support- to, something big and something good for them' and the city they love so much ; something that will lift the Association cut of the rut' of carping critics and win them fame and the “well done” of all well-wishers of this city and its Ratepayers’ Association. The Ratepayers’ Association could also render their city a great service bv its advocacy and the inducing of the ratepayers and City Council to change the system of rating to that on unim proved values. Will they rise to these heights of usefulness And activity?—l am etc., VOX