SOLDIER SETTLERS' RATES

Otaki Mail, 22 December 1924, Page 4

SOLDIER SETTLERS' RATES

COUNTY COUNCIL LACKS POWER TO REMIT. CHAIRMAN REPLIES TO DEPUTATION. An answer to the vexed question of the basis on which returned soldier settlers, should pay rates, whether on the original valuation, or the recent revaluation, was given at Saturday's meeting 01. the Horowhenuu County Council, when representatives 01 tne various soldier settlements waited on the Council to put iuea case before members. The ineinbeis ;oi the deputation were Mr .v G. ■ Hunter (Kuku), Mr is. Everton (otuu- ! rua;, and Mr S. l'attun, representing i outside settlers, Mr U. D. lianimuu, ! president of tne Levin brunch ui tne Ii.S.A., also attended in support 01 I the deputation, wlneti was introuuced I by Cr. C. 1. Darkness. I *Mr Hamilton, in outlining the case for the deputation, said that their case might be put in a series of questions, possibly there was a point ol law involved which would influence the Council's decision. Briefly tlie questions were, as follow: (1) Whether the County Council would take into consideration the recent revaluation ol soldier settlers' sections, and ;reduce rates accord- . ingly. ' (*) In the case oi rates having been kept up, whether the council would consider a refund or allowance in ; accordance with the. revaluation standard. i In connection with the rates, Mr | Hamilton stated the settlers were in the peculiar position of having iwu ' valuations, one the purchase value, and the other the rateable value. The former had been reduced, but trio latter remained the same.. Personally lie was of opinion that now that the revaluations had been made—in most instances on a scale which would allow, the settlers to make good—the settlers should go ahead and clear off ihe whole of the arrears of rent. He iccognised that without the rates the local government could not function, lie did not know tlie arrears of soldier settler rates throughout the County but if the Council could see as way clear to submit - in the strictest confidence a list of these to the U.S.A., lie would bring the influence of the Association to bear in endeavouring' i 0 get a settlement made at the earliest possible moment. The question was: was it within the powers of the council to give a remission of rates, either in the case of the settler wiio uad paid, or tlie one-who had not? ORIGINAL VALUATION RIDICULOUS Mr Everton drew attention to the ' yreat reduction in tlie capital price J made by the recent revaluation, and \

supported Mr Hamilton's claim to have this taken us a basis of assessment, in his own case the purchase jit'ice oi his farm had been £3985, ivliich had now been brought down to £1635. The Government valuation

of the land lor rating purposes had been fixed at £1568 in 1931, this Having since been raised to £2ols. The point he wished to make was that tiie original value had been ridiculously high. .The chairman (Cr. G. A. Monk) asked how the valuation had happened io go. up. There had not been a Government valuation since 1921. Mr Everton said he did not know why it should have gone up. All he knew was that he had met the valuer on the road one day, and had answered some questions put to him, tvith the result that the addition had een made to the valuation. The valuer had not even seen the place.

The chairman: That's a strange diing. We have had no revaluation.

Mr Hunter said that at a meeting of soldier settlers recently held at Cuku, the question of rates had been one into, when it had been found 'iat, based on the revaluation, the oldiers settlers were rated consideribly higher per £ of value, than vere t'be remainder of the rutepay•s of trie riding. Mr Patton spoke on the same lines -; the previous speakers. THE CHAIRMAN REPLIES.

The chairman, in reply, stated thai .e. could answer the ttuee questions ut to him by answering the in si of '.rem. The County Council was bound „y Act qf Parliament, to rate on yie . aluatipii as it appeared on tne vaiu--tion roll, 'line law was definite on ais point and stated that no aiiera>on in the value of land during tne .ear, shall make any difference to .ie rating value. The figures quoted y Mr Everton were, certainly interesting, A reduction in valuation from I' .':3900 to £I6OO was a big tiling. 11 ■he valuation lor purchase—adiuittedy too lugh—were taken, and the Gov."rnment valuation lor rating purpose's compared with it, it would be ( ound that the settler had been rated I'll about 50 per cent, of tlie price .vhich he had been willing to pay for lie land. This, did not seem unrea-

sonable. Now, however, the Revaluation Commission had gone through he district and had given very considerable reductions in capital value. I'he Council had no quarrel with this :nd were glad to see that the settlers uad now. got a valuation which would ,-nable them to cany on successfully. 3ut the Council. had no latitude in .egard to the rates—they had to rate on the value as it. appeared on the .aluation roll. The County Council had to bear this in mind: Some soldier settlers had kept their rates paid up and some had not. In neither case had the Council power to remit, however much they might like to. These people had the sympathy of the Council, who had indeed done all they could by deferring pressing for settlement of the rates, until there was a danger of losing those longest outstanding.

EVERY CONSIDERATION SHOWN TO TRIERS. Regarding Arrears of rent, the Council was willing to help tiie set tiers as much as possible. Notices had been sent out to all those in arrears," stating that they must pay the ' rates. Many had made arrangements Lfor this being done, and he wished to point out that where any offer whatever was made, the Council was willing to consider it. There were i some who had come along and ex--1 plained their position and stated that i for the time being they were unable , to pay. In these cases tie. Council ! had accepted the statement and fle- : ferred payment. There were, how- ' ever, a number of cases where men had simply ignored the notice, and this could "not be tolerated for a mo- ; ment. Mr Hamilton said that as he had stated earlier, the case appeared to revolve on a, point of law. He understood that in certain case's the County Council had power to remit rates. It was simply a question 01 whether this was a case in point. REMISSION IMPOSSIBLE. The chairman stated that the only case in which a County could remit rates, was where after a certain period, it was decided to wipe them out. Except in such cases, once, a rate was struck, it must be collected. The cosition now was that the Government had agreed to be responsible "or rates as from a certain period, provided the local body had first, ex. liausted all means of getting them Jrom th«" soldier- settler. Unless ttiey tued for the outstanding rates, they

cottld not make a' reasonable claim against the Department. Mr Hamilton stated that his Association was. willing to assist in the : getting members of the R.S.A. to come to an arrangement about their outstanding rates, provided the Council would supply the names of the men concerned. DRASTIC ACTION DEFERRED. The chairman said that he did not see that there would be. any difficulty about doing this, and the Council would go so far. as to withhold drastic action to see what success attended the efforts of the. Association. He would suggest that in the meantime the settlers write to the Valuation Department, pointing out that the capital values of their properties had been reduced below the Government valuation for rating purposes, and asking, for a revaluation. It must be clearly understood tliat the Valuation Department was a different thing to the Revaluation Board. He would like them to understand that the Council was sympathetic fo the soldier settlers, but they had to do their duty to the remainder of the ratepayers.

Cr. Catley said that Mr Hamilton's suggestion of approaching the settlers through the R.S.A., was a good one and would probably enable the business to be- settled without friction.

In conclusion the chairman repeated his advice to the settlers to apply for a revaluation for rating purposes. He did not think that if the matter were explained to the Department, there would be any difficulty on this score. . . Following the withdrawal of the deputation," it was decided to defer suing for rates for a month, pending action by the R.S.A.