SMALL GRAZING RUNS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3775, 20 July 1926, Page 14

SMALL GRAZING RUNS.

RENTS TOO HIGH. That their rents were too high tyaa tlio contention of a deputation of small grasing runholders and their representative* which met the Otago Land Board on Wednesday morning last. Mr R. S. Galbraith (Commissioner of Crown Lands), who presided, said he understood that the deputation was seeking some redress in the matter of the rents of small grasing runs. He was afraid that the board could do nothing for them, but still, he did not wish to deny the deputation the privilege of a fair hearing. Mr W. A. Bodkin (Alexandra), one of the petitioners said he represented 18 settlers in the Lauder and Blackstone Hill districts who had suggested to him that the question of small grasing run rente should be referred to arbitration. However, he hoped the board would see its way dear to assist them in such a way

that arbitrary litigation would be unnecessary. He maintained that the present unimproved value of his clients’ properties had been assessed too high, and as the rents were computed on the basis of 5 per cent, pf that unimproved value, these also were proportionately high. At the last valuation of these runs the rents had been increased 5n some instances from 50 per cent, to 100 per cent., and his clients had considered such an increase unjustifiable. It was. therefore, decided to lodge formal notice of objection and to ask that the question should be settled by means of arbitration. The Chairman: That is the only way to fix the matter up. Mr Bodkin, continuing, said that it was hoped that the board would review the matter thoroughly and reconsider it 3 latest tulings as to rent. If a compromise by means of such reconsideration could be arrived at, it would save his clients the jßxpense and trouble of arbitration The Chairman: I really do not think that could be done. I would suggest that *all the lessees should combine in this matter and save expense by employing only one arbiter. Personally, he said, he was of the opinion that the present capital values erred on the low side. They had been told, and they knew it themselves, that their rents were ridiculously low. In consequence of this he considered that even a 50 per cent, to 100 per cent, increase was not nearly as bad as it sounded. Mr Bodkin maintained that the properties of his clients had been greatly im proved of late by hard work and at the expense of the lessees. The removal of the rabbit and scrub nuisances had been car ried out more or less effectively, and this work had cost the lessees sums varying from 12s 6d to 25s per acre. He rontended that if the capital value of these properties was lo be assessed without reference to such expenditure, then the 5 per cent, basis on the unimproved value was too much. His clients were up against a big problem in that the value of such improvements was r.ot as readily distinguishable as that of more concrete forms of improve ment such as the erection of fences, or buildings, or the grassing down of sections. It was difficult to produce tangible evidence of improvement in respect of the destruction of rabbits or the removal of the scrub nuisance. Moreover, it was going to be difficult to cite such improvements before the arbiters. One thing was certain, however. The 5 per cent, basis was much to high. The Chairman: We can do nothing. 1 am sorry, but the rents have been fixed, and your only recourse is to arbitration. If our appraisers have assessed the values too high, it will be put right when the arbiters get on to the subject. The arguments and evidence you are submitting now are out of place here. They should be kept for the arbitration proceedings. Another member of the deputation, representing the Middlemarch runholders, said he could not understand why that 5 per cent, basis should be fixed before the valuation was made. That was wrong. It simply meant that the valuers were fixing the rent and not the board. The Act provided that the rate on the unimproved value should be fixed subsequent to the Valuation. The Chairman said he did not think the ti per cent, rate was fixed before the valuations were made. The appraisers were merely given a rough idea of what would be charged. The rate w’as definitely fixed later on. The appraisers, he said, were taen in whom the board had the greatest {confidence, and it w’as necessary that these men should have some idea of the basis on JWhich it was intended to work. “I am afraid, gentlemen,” the Chairman (concluded, “that -your only alternative is to take the whole question to your arbitrators.” The name of Mr R. Jopp, of Moutere Station, was suggested a 3 one of the arbitrators.