RUBBISH NUISANCE
DISCUSSION AT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
NO FURTHER AHEAD
A subject that has probablyhad more than its fair share of space on the agenda of meetings once more came before a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce held on Monday night and once more reached a deadlock. The meeting decided to press for action by the Harbour Board in keeping the foreshore free of refuse, but following the remarks of the Mayor came to a "dead end" with the discus- _ sion of a borough garbage collection. The subject was introduced by the new chairman, Mr C. F. Thomas, who described the disgracelul state of the waterfront and added that lie had made a number of enquiries and had conic to the conclusion that the only way to keep the town clean was by the institution by the Borough Council of a compulsory garbage collection. He quoted towns which had such a service at a low cost to users. The chairman continued that he considered that a weekly service could be instituted and that it not lie a levy on rates but a charge to the used cither by the tin or at so much per week. Mr Thomas suggested that although he considered the user should pay at a charge of about 15/- per year it would pay ratepayers to keep their properties clean.
The Mayor, Mr B. S. Barry, stated that he could give his answer immediately. The matter had been thrashed out at length on many occasions by the council and had by no means been treated lightly, but it Avas not a simple problem. A service could be made compulsory over the. Avhole borough but not part of the borough arid then the question of avlio Avas to pay for it arose. The council could run the service Avliich Avas estimated to cost over £500 for the initial year and about £370 in successive years. He was opposed to : increasing the rates which Avould result. The business area of the toAvn Avas already paying 42 per cent of the rates and such a scheme Avould increase unduly the rates of those aa 7 lio Avere already paying more than their fair share. This method Avould mean a Id increase on rates and £5 a year to a business section valued at £1200.
Secondly a flat charge cculd be made on all ratepayers but this would also be unfair as the tenant would get the service and the landlord pay. The Fair Rent Act prerA'ented a rise in rent being made to coA r er the cost. Also the toAA r n AA'ould soon have some 100 State houses and while the State had agreed to pay rates so Icing as the rent Avas paid it might not agree to another 15/t per year.
Thirdly a Aveeklv charge could be made on users. This Avould necessarily have to be voluntary and it would- not be satisfactory as it might be that in one long street only tAvo residents Avould use the service. He said that until such time as a Avorkable scheme coukl be brought forward by the Chamber nothing could be done although all agreed that such a service Avas desirable. He added that petrol and labour shortage increased the difficulties at present .
In regard to the foreshore the Mayor traced correspondence had with the Harbour Board over a long period in which'it had asked that the depositing of rubbish on the foreshore be prohibited. Nothing had been done by the Board and at its last meeting the council had again asked the Board to enforce the cleanliness of the foreshore. The council had instituted a collection of 1/- a receptacle but only three businesses had used this and it had been abandoned Avhen the petrol restrictions eA'entuated.
On the motion of Messrs T. A. Bridger and Dillicar it Avas decided that the Harbour Board be asked to enforce the prohibition of the depositing of rubbish on the foreshore. Mr King and the secretary both spoke- strongly on the garbage collection the latter stating that he was not satisfied that the reasons given for not having it were as real us they appeared. He thought all tenants would be willing to pay. Messrs "\V. Sullivan. M.P., and J. Creeke supported the Mayor but no decision Avas reached the meeting considering that it Avould not be of nny use to at present approach the Borough Council.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BPB19420225.2.23
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 5, Issue 21, 25 February 1942, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
739RUBBISH NUISANCE Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 5, Issue 21, 25 February 1942, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Beacon Printing and Publishing Company is the copyright owner for the Bay of Plenty Beacon. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Beacon Printing and Publishing Company. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.