RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUEB

Temuka Leader, Issue 5543, 30 July 1907, Page 2

RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUEB

(To the Editor), Sir,—in the, lust attack upon mo by "Ratepayer East’’ ho asks, how it is I am only advancing this scheme now, although 1 have lived in Urn town some considerable time ? Let me answer him : Five years ago, when I came here, I was a single man ; it is only about twelve months ago that .1 became—not a ratepayer myself - but a representative of one, therefore, I had no right to concern myself about the system of rating in vogue. ■ Some people are trying to snub irtc now ; what would they have done then ? I think 1 have answered all his personal insinuations. What has all this bitterness got to do with the subject we are discussing ? Let me hasten to assure my friend that his fears are unfounded, There would be no deficiency for the simple reason that the now rats would be based on the unimproved value at a certain rate in the €, which can be calculated to a 1/-, We know the revenue now, and ,wo know the unimproved value, therefore 1 we can strike the rate accordingly. Through rating on property instead of land, the value of the land has never been assessed at anything like its market value in Tetnuko. I know of one case for instance, in which i £2OO is being asked for a section, and ths owner is rated on £SO, paying to the town the munificent sum of C/3 a year. By this anyone can see that were land values adjusted, especially on the west side of the borough, perhaps even a loss rate than 5d in the £ would produce the necessary revenue 1 want all to remember this point, however, the further land is removed, from the centre or most populous, or business portion of the town the less valuable it is. Does that not prove that it is position that determines the price of land ; then why not rate it on that basis regardless of the property on it V My friend makes out a (aso showing that a person with a house and four quarter-acre sections would have his rates raised 11/S a year under my system. Well, what about it ? Surely a rise of 2/11 on each section is no great burden, especially when you consider that by paying the 11/8 extra he could build other three houses and pay no more. Why are there not more improvements on the East side of the borough ? For the simple reason that the empty "sections pay so little that the Council could not afford to make improvements, So long as the position remains'as it is it will bo necessary to plough through mud and gorso. Is this fair to those who have already built ? Let my friend answer this : If a man decides to add another room to his house for the accommodation of his family, why should he pay more rates ? Does lie use the conveniences ol the town to the extra extent ? No, of course not; then why rate him ? Does the town do any more for the man in the £3OO house than it does for the man in the £2OO house ? I will endeavor at a later date, if you will be good enough to lend me your valuable space, to show in black and white the exact manner and to what extent rating on unimproved values will jUfleet Temuka East. The suggestion to form wards in Temuka is premature. A ward niust contain not less than 1000 ‘people.—Yours, etc., C. LASHLIE. 25th July, 1907.