The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY FRIDAY, AUGUST 23, 1912. RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

Waipa Post, Volume III, Issue 139, 23 August 1912, Page 2

The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY FRIDAY, AUGUST 23, 1912. RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES.

THE following is the text of a sub leader that appeared in a recent issue of the Horowhenua Chronicle and of the correspondence called forth by it : Petitions are being circulated in Levin, asking that a poll be taken on the question of introducing the system of rating on unimproved values. At first blush this system looks desirable, but a closer acquaintance with it shows some unlovely aspects.. In a big city the worst feature of rating upon unimproved values system is its unavoidable association with congested living areas; it creates them where they have not existed before the system became actual. In country towns, I

however, there are other and greater drawbacks to which further references will be made in future issues of the Chronicle.

In the next issue a correspondent wrote as follows : TO THE EDITOR.

SIR, —J am glad to see that petitions for the adoption of rating on unimproved values arc being circulated in Levin, and that your valuable paper is devoting space to the discussion of the question. You are mistaken, however, in assuming that in a big city the rating of unimproved values is unavoidably associated with congested living areas. The worst slums in Wellington, for example, date back to long befoi-e the adoption of'rating on unimproved values, and with a turn or two more of the unimproved values screw these slums would disappear, for under a really substantial rate on unimproved values it simply wouldn't pay to maintain slums on valuable city land. Further, any tendency towards "congested living areas " can always be met, and should be met, by prescribing a minimum site for houses, etc. As to the general question— V hich is the best rating system for Levin? —the answer is easy enough if you ask yourself the further questions : (i) Where would Levin be if every landowner in Levin held his land idle for speculative purposes ? and (2) What would the position of Levin be if every landowner was an improver.

In the first case, of course, Levin would be wiped off the map. In the second case, Levin would go ahead by leaps and bounds. The following examples show how the old, bad rating system encourages the speculator, and how rating on unimproved values encourages the improver. Supposing that the Borough Council has to raise £5 in rates from two sections, each worth £IOO, but one held idle and the other with a £3OO house on it: — (i) UNDER OLD BAD RATING SYSTEM. A B Section, £IOO. Section £IOO, House, £3OO. Rates, £4. Rates, £l. A (the improver) has a (£3OO house on his £IOO section ; a total value of £4OO. B (the speculator) has an idle section, worth £IOO.

The total value for A and B, together is thus £SOO, and to raise £5 in rates will mean a rate of £1 on each £IOO of value. A, therefore, will have to pay £4, while B will pay only £l. The improver, in short, who is helping Levin forward, will have to pay four times as much in rates as the speculator, who is not only doing nothing to help Levin onward, but is actually holding Levin back! (2) UNDER RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUES. A B Section, £IOO. Section £IOO. House, £3OO. Rates, £2 10s. Rates, £2 10s. A's £3OO house is free from rates. Both A and B pay on the unimproved value only of their sections —a total value of £2OO. To raise £5 in rates, therefore, will require a rate of £2 lOs on each £IOO of value. So that A (the improver) will pay £2 lOs insteaP of £4 per year, while B (the speculator) will pay £2 lOs instead of £l; and it will pay B to drop speculating and become an improver. It will pay B, that is to say, to stop holding Levin back and to begin to help Levin forward; and that will be all the better for Levin. —Yours, etc., ARTHUR WITHY. Goldie's Brae, Wellington, August 16th, 1912.