FOR the avoidance of the doubt that Councillor Waterhouse may have aroused (Letters, February 10) by his carefully shortened quotation from the story in your paper on January 27, Tavistock Town Council has no intention of maintaining next year's very high precept in future years. No-one has ever said otherwise.

A private company, in a situation similar to the council's, would be able to fund the expensive business of arbitration by borrowing against the value of its freeholds. A council is prevented by law from doing so.

This is why we have to look to the council taxpayer. Tavistock's ratepayers, community charge payers and council tax payers have benefited greatly during the last century from the income generated by the council's freeholds. They will do so again in this century.

For this one year, the council has had to set an unusually large tax precept to preserve this benefit for Tavistock's taxpayers in the future.

Your readers elected councillors to make these sorts of unpalatable decisions on behalf of us all. With the exception of one who abstained on the vote, the council has been united in this decision. Your readers may think that this speaks for itself.

R W Mathew

Mayor of Tavistock

THE two subjects — 'unwarranted burden for borough ratepayers' and 'the square is in need of enhancement' seemed to me not unrelated.

The electorate vote for the representatives necessary to make sensible expenditure decision on their behalf. Building patios outside the town hall was not a sensible expenditure decision when there was a known possible debt in the form of hefty legal fees.

Would it be too much to ask that these representatives return to basics? ie give priority to all necessary expenditure. If we run out of money before someone's pet project can be done then hard luck pet project! That's sensible decision making.

As for the problems concerning Tavistock property, where is the town council contingency fund? Why did Tavistock pursue such expensive litigation if there was no money to pay for it? What will be the outcome if Tavistock wins the litigation? Will all the work by done again?

In other words, where is this problem going? We are paying for it we need to know.

R Crispin

Midella Road

Yelverton