Dear Editor

I cannot comprehend Frank Giles’ deliberate personal attack. Frank has been somewhat parsimonious with the full details regarding rate reduction and my reasoning for voting as I did.

To set the record straight I strongly supported the need for a rate revision.

As a Councillor I obtained consensus from a broad cross section of the community. This proved that there was  support for such a rate revision within the farming sector.

However, the mood was that this section of the rate paying community should not pay the same as the residential levy, as all sectors, except residential, can claim the rates on their tax.

I voted against the proposed reduction from 12 odd cents in the dollar to 7.5¢ because I felt that there could be a rate adjustment in the next Council budget to raise any loss of income from this year’s rate.

I moved that the reduction should be 9¢ or the same as the commercial sector as this would alleviate any huge raise, if any, in the next budget. The residential and commercial sector provides over 85% of the rates, which Council uses to provide all the  essential services to the community.

Frank Giles asserts that there is no garbage collection; hence, the cost is not included in the rate demand. Water and sewerage was handed over to Ben Lomond several years back and is not a Council issue. Lighting is the responsibility of DIER. If Farmer Giles has an issue with these authorities then he should make his concerns known to these organisations.

I agree wholeheartedly that many farmers employ people, as do ratepayers and commercial businesses, albeit, without the luxury of engaging woofers. I myself employ and shop locally. In fact Frank…I have employed you on a few occasions.

Councillor Johns, St Marys.