THE COLONIST. Published Daily-Morning. Nelson, Saturday, Aug. 17, 1907. RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUE.

Colonist, Volume XLIX, Issue 12016, 17 August 1907, Page 2

THE COLONIST. Published Daily-Morning. Nelson, Saturday, Aug. 17, 1907. RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUE.

The advooates of fling; on unim-. proved land values claim for the system that it is a groat check on those who would let land lie idle, allowing the energy and enterprise of others to give it an increased value. It has also been claimed for this system that its effect in towns is tp encourage close building, and thereby save the additional cost that would be placed on'municipalitieS by the additional length of streets, mains and drains were the buildings widely scattered. This system has been in vogue in the city of Wellington since 1901, and a few days ago the New Zealand Times reported the views of various citizens upon the effect of such rating, and the opinions thus given are instructive. The Mayor (the Hon. T. Hislop) said that from the city's point of view the unimproved rating was scarcely such an elastic method of arranging the revenue as the old one. Formerly, so soon as a new building was erected, and the requirements of the particular street wers increased there was an increase in the re|feora& from rates. Now it was necessary to wait until the end of the J Gar before lhe increase took placen^nd then it wag either by means of a new valuation, which put up the value of the land all round, or, if the valuation was the same and more money was required on account of the extra number of buildings it was necessary to increase the rate. It had a twofold effefefc— firstly it had a tendency to close up empty spaces, which would otherwise make breathing spaces ; and, secondly, it tended to prevent speculators from holding on to land without using it. He said that like most cures for ills, it brought other ills in its' trail. Mr J. P. Luke thought the system had a maleficent effect on some industries. Big hotels, banks, and merchants holding large buildings had benefited as their businesses often gave them the opportunity of using the land to the very best advantage by erecting five or six floored buildings. The engineering and allied trades suffered very materially through this valuation:; for an industry from which poisonous gases emanated, no work could be done on an upper floor. He specified other trades that were prejudicially affected, and said that in his opinion the city as a whole had sadly suffered. Whether the small landholder had beneOleu was problematical but certainly the tax had created over-crowding. He believed that in a city like Wellington, where the area of available land is all too limited, this system of taxation decidedly checks those industries which rely lor their success on being able to obtain ground space. Another gentleman, who is a land agent, said, in his opinion, the success or otherwise of the sjstom was a very moot point. He gave his opinion, however, that; it is the right way of rating, especially if you start the system on the inception of a borough or district. In Wellington it had relieved the outskirts, it had reduced the rates on workmen's houses considerably, and materially increased the rates £on business premises. [He held that it prevented a man holding land idle waiting for an unearned increment, and he evidently regarded it as an advantage that a man was rated no more for a fine building of five floors than for a building of one floor. Now, he said, the man with the vacant section had to pay as much as his more highly improved neighbor, which was as it should be. Mr Godber said ho had always voted in the Council in favor of rating on unimproved values, but, he thought, after all, that it had done very mixed good. . Like all other thinga it had its advantages and disadvantages. One evil was that the system had caused many owners to build more houses on theii properties than the latter should carry. On the other hand, people were pevented from holding land for the purpose of securing unearned increment. Mr P. J. O 'Regan, a single, taxer, had nothing but good to say of the system. He declared that it encouraged the utilisation of land; in fact it was the best fertiliser of land known, as in country districts where it was in operation it had made grass grow, and in the city it had had the effect of raising great piles of brioks on land which would otherwise have lain useless. That is all very well as far as it goes, and where graat piles of bricks can be properly used, but what would happen if every vacant piece of ground in a city like Nelson, -with its extensive area, were covered with piles of bricks? Clearly there would be no demand for the great** majority of them, and consequently there would be a waste and not an increase of wealth. Far better would it be that gardens and orchards, which contribute to man's pleasure and profit, should be continued. At the same time it is desirable to impose a check on those who, lackine enterprise themselves, seek to benefit from that of others. Suiely it is not impossible to devise a system which would provide such a check, and which at the same time would not press harshly on those who. utilise their land to the best of the means at their disposal.