BRIGHTON AFFAIRS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27514, 7 October 1950, Page 8

BRIGHTON AFFAIRS

Sir, —Although not a resident of Brighton, I would appreciate an opportunity of a few words in reply to " Ratepayer’s ” letter, which could also create a wrong impression in the eyes of ratepayers who are not conversant with the striking of rates for amenities supplied under the Counties Amendment Act, 1949. The present rate levied is 2Jd in the £ (2d general rate and a id hospital rate) and the county would be empowered to strike up to a maximum of a further 3d in the £ for any amenity supplied under the 1949 Act. I would stress that this is purely a protection for the ratepayers. If this maximum was not set, then the county would be at liberty to strike any rate to suit themselves. In such a case, should, drainage or water be supplied, the county could, and would, strike a rate far in excess of 3d. in the £ to defray the costs involved. Under the Act, the county can strike a rate which would cover the cost only of any particular amenity supplied. If a county township is formed, then moneys collected as a result of the special rate can be expended only within that county township, and this special •rate must be adjusted accordingly in the event of any land value fluctuations or in the event of the council altering the capital value of any property in that township, thus being a further protection for the ratepayers. The cost to the Taieri Council to instal 16 street lights in Fairfield is to be £92 per year for the first five years and about £4B thereafter. The Taieri County quoted a rate of 4-5 d in the £ for the first five years and 2-5 d in the £ thereafter (this being when the initial cost of material, labour and installation had been paid off). This affected only about 90 ratepayers, and since that quote was received a further 100 properties are now affected, which will reduce that rate further. With 400 ratepayers in Brighton, even 32 lights would be little cost to them. Eighty-five per cent of the resident ratepayers m Fairfield voted for street lights under this scheme, and no fewer than 100 per cent, of Middlemarch ratepayers have done likewise.

Rather than ask Brighton residents to follow my or anybody else’s, opinion on such vitally important local matters, I would suggest that they read and become fully conversant with the Counties Amendment Act, 1949, themselves, and I will predict strong support in Brighton for a county township and street lighting, as has already been proved by a huge majority in Fairfield and Middlemarch.—l am, etc., Fairfield Ratepayer.