The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1912. UNIMPROVED RATING.

Waipa Post, Volume IV, Issue 156, 22 October 1912, Page 2

The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1912. UNIMPROVED RATING.

THE circulation throughout Te Awamutu of a petition praying for a poll to be taken on the question of unimproved rating may be taken to signify that this popular but debatable method of raising the local revenue will very shortly be an issue in local politics. The Act provides that a proportion of ratepayers on the roll varying from 25 per cent where the total number does not exceed 100, to j 15 per cent where the number

exceeds 300 may, by demand in writing delivered to the chairman of the district, require that a proposal to rate property on the basis of tin unimproved value may be submitted to the ratepayers, whose votes shall be taken between twenty-one and twenty-eight days after delivery of the demand. Unfortunately unimproved rating is a question which is thrashed out almost entirely as a matter of personal advantage or otherwise to the voter, and is rarely looked at from-the point of view of the general good

of the district. Ratepayers are all naturally filled with the laudable desire of avoiding the payment of rates, if such payment can be avoided by any legitimate means, and on the face

of it this System of rating seems to present every prospect of a successful attainment of that worthy object. To the man possessed of buildings of greater value than the land on which they stand, the appeal is natur-

ally irresistible, but it would be well for such to bear in mind that the local revenue must be raised in some manner, and that a low rate on the full capital

value may amount to no more than a high rate on the unimproved value. The advocates of this system put forward what they state to be two great points in favour of it.; the first that it tends to bring.about the erection of better and more substantial buildings; second that it makes land speculation, and the holding of sections that are unbuilt on a practical impossibility. It behoves us to analyse these so called benefits, and particularly to see whether they are applicable to the conditions at present obtaining in our own district. The first, that the staffdard of building will be improved, seems to us a statement that will not stand for much when looked at from a commonsense and practical point of view. ' How many men about to erect business premises calculate and are affected in their expenditure by the probable amount of rates that will be payable on such buildings ? In a very large number of cases buildings are erected as a mere speculation, and are intended for the use of others, and the amount of the rates is simply added to the rent paid by the tenant. The style and value of town buildings depends almost entirely on the desire of the individual erecting such buildings to make a permanent job of the work, the knowledge that a good building will let before an indifferent one, the amount of money available for the purpose, and rarely in our opinion on the question of the amount of rates payable on it. The second point, that it prevents land.speculation, and the holding of a number of town sections without buildings on them is a much stronger one. Though we are none of us above making a bit on a land speculation should the opportunity offer, we are all united in condemning the practice (in other people) and bewailing the retarding effects on the progress of the district of such speculation. Supporters of unimproved rating present us with, as it were, test cases showing the

justice of their system, by giving instances of sections lying side by side, some with buildings, others without, those belonging to the speculator (the unbuilt on ones) paying a much less proportion of rates than those belonging to the public-spirited man who has advanced the good of the town by erecting a building thereon. It is indeed a queer ■thing, that the man who has the temerity to own a piece of land without building on it should be termed a speculator, sometimes even a land shark, whib the man who, for his own sob benefit, and in order as he thinks to make more money out of it, erect thereon a building, should be considered somewhat of a philanthropist ! Now this question of

unimproved rating is one that requires careful consideration, and those who support it strongly now, under the belief that they are saving money, may in the long run find that they have done themselves more harm than good. In fine the position is this, the system is designed to free all buildings from taxes and throw

the entire burden on the land. Naturally the man with the costly building and small area of land is a strong supporter of it, but he must bear in mind that the prevention of land speculation may tend to increased building speculation, which.may leave the costly building on his hands without tenants or perhaps with a rent roll that may be quite inadequate to provide reasonable interest on the capital expended. There are many who believe that the erection of shops and offices brings

population, but this is undoubtedly a false hypothesis, and it is better for all concerned that the increase in accommodation should keep time but not exceed the steady progress of a district. To the ratepayer with a moderate sized dwellinghouse and few acres in the suburbs, the system of unimproved rating has very little to recommend it, for he may rest assured that ultimately he will be paying as much, perhaps more, for his few acres alone than he was under the old system of lating on the capital value. We trust that the question will be approached in a fair spirit of enquiry, and every effort made to ascertain whether or no it will be a benefit to Te Awamutu. It must not be forgotten that should it be carried it will certainly nullify all attempts to extend the town boundaries beyond their present limits, and cause a dimution in the number of small holdings of a few acres which add so much to the charm and enjoyment of country life. It is a grave question whether Te Awamutu is in a sufficiently strong financial position to exempt practically two-thirds of its rateable property from paying rates. The present capital value (old valuation) of rateable property in Te Awamutu is£i2s,ooo, and the unimproved value is £44,000. The system of unimproved rating, if now in force in Te Awamutu, would exempt £BI,OOO worth of property from taxation, and it will be necessary to increase the present rate three-fold to obtain the same revenue. The -J«ures for the re-valuation will probably bring the difference between the two values-to well over £IOO,OOO. Can Te Awamutu afford to forego taxes on this large amount of property at the present juncture ?