THE MOSGIEL LOAN PROPOSAL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19527, 9 July 1925, Page 5

THE MOSGIEL LOAN PROPOSAL.

TO THE EDITOR. g I a j Owing to the paucity of information given'in the circular issued by the Borough Council on the Mosgiel loan proposal, X beg space to enlighten the ratepayers a little on the benefits which Mosgiel would gain by acquiring the Church Board property. Tho stumbling block to the carrying of this proposal is a rate of lid in the pound, but ratepayers must remember that for all loan* some security must be given. There is, however, a great difference between a revenueproducing loan and a non-revenue producing loan, such as one, for drainage, roads, etc. The present loan is for the purchase of land which is revenue-producing. The revenue from tho present leasehold, I am' assured by one of tho councillors, exempting the 62 acre block opposite the factory, will pay _e per cent, interest on the purchase price. This leaves 1 per cent, interest to find from tho letting of the 53-acre block. On rentals alone no rate should ho necessary, as the revenue is already there. Now, if the present leaseholders were offered the freehold of tho sections fronting Factory and Gordon roads, which are held on terms that, owing to tho severity of the Glasgow leases, have been the main source of agitation for this purchase, tho council would have sufficient revenue to develop tho 52-acre block. This, if cut up, , would yield IGO sections of a quarter acre each. These, if sold at a minimum of £25 each, say, on conditions of 25 per cent, down and 25 per cent, in three, six, and nine months’ time, would give alone a return of £I.OOO. Allowing £IOOO for reading, etc., these sections would give a profit of approximately £IOOO over the purchase price. This, with the sale of the present sites on Factory and Gordon roads, would repay tho loan and give to the borough the farming land at the back for nothing. The borough could then either cut up other sections or .collect the. rent on this property, and this, would be a means of lowering the present general rales. Further, the present 52-acro block, which is rate-producing on the basis of £35 per acre, would yield to the borough rates on £IOO per acre,'less reading, say, approximately £7O per acre. This, again, would admit cf a further reduction in general rating. Had the council given to the ratepayers a little information like this, showing what could be done with the property, instead of its rail-sitting notice that “ w-e neither recommend or condemn the purchase,” as in its circular, I am sure that tho ratepayers would have had a better grip of what an asset this purchase wo.uld mean to them. Ratepayers need not bo frightened of tho rate, as there is no necessity for a rate at all. The purchase is safe, and it only requires tho council to use pure business acumen ia order to make a real financial success for the borough.—l am, etc. Thos. Miixer. Mosgiel, July G.