Provisional Catchment Scheme: One Big District Proposed

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 12, Issue 56, 16 June 1948, Page 5

Provisional Catchment Scheme: One Big District Proposed

Having taken voluminous evidence in an inquiry at WhakaNtane on April 28 and 29, the Local Government Commission has promulgated a provisional scheme for the constitution qf a Bay of Plenty Catchment district to comprise the whole of the Counties of Whakatane and Tauranga, part of the Counties of Rotorua and Opotiki and small portions of the Counties of Waikohu, Taupo and Matamata, also the Boroughs of Opotiki, Whakatane, Rotorua, Te Puke, Tauranga and Mi. Maunganui. Objections, if any, must be lodged by July 13. The area outlined in the provisional scheme closely approximates that proposed by the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Council and opposed at the April inquiry by the Whakatane. County and Borough Councils, Rotorua County Council, Federated Farmers (Bay of Plenty Province) and the Rangitaiki Drainage Board. Witnesses supporting the scheme represented the Tauranga and Opotiki Counties and the Opotiki Borough. It is now proposed that the district should be administered by a Catchment Board of nine members, representation being spread as follows: Opotiki and Waikohu Counties, 1 member; Whakatane County, 2; Taupo and Rotorua Counties, 1; Matamata and Tauranga Counties, 2; Opotiki and Whakatane Boroughs, 1; Rotorua Borough, 1; Te Puke Borough, Mt Maunganui Borough and Tauranga Borough, 1. The Commission found that the administrative expenditure involved in one Catchment District would be less than if two separate catchment •districts were established. It also found that there would be no loss of technical efficiency nor of local interest by the setting up of such a single catchment district. Its report comments on the fact that the Government, through the Lands and Survey Department, will continue to be responsible for capital works in the Rangitaiki District, although it mentions that ultimately the maintenance of the drainage work in this area will be the responsibility of the Catchment Board. The Commission discusses at some length its reasons for including the Rotorua Borough in the Catchment District and concludes that since it

was agreed that Rotorua would ultimately have to be in some catchment district it was logical that it should be in that district to which it geographically belongs. One interesting paragraph in the report comments on the fact that since no building permits are issued by the Whakatane County Council, the inter-valuation period accretions on capital value are not included on the valuation roll and hence in this inter-valuation period such capital accretions are not liable'' for such levies as are calculated on the capital value. These include the Hospital levy. Comment is made that m the Whakatane County one large industrial undertaking has completed since the last valuation large capital works which are not at the moment liable to such levies. They will be liable for levies when the next revaluation takes place, but in the interim the Commission comments that the position is “absurd if not iniquitous and calls for immediate legislative action.” Discussing the Commission’s findings in general terms, Mr J. L. Burnett, chairman of the Whakatane County Council, said he was disappointed. He still felt that the smaller area advocated by this County and Borough and including Opotiki County and Borough, would have had advantages in economy and efficiency, as well as getting away from centralised control. He added, too, that, though Whakatane and Opotiki had common problems, they had none in common with the western Bay of Plenty area. So far as the representation was concerned, he said the two members would seem to he quite fair for his County, but he did not see how one man could satisfactorily represent both the Whakatane and Opotiki Boroughs. In the absence of the Mayor, Mr B. S. Barry, who had represented the Council at the Commission’s inquiry, there was little discussion on the findings at Monday night’s meeting of the Whakatane Borough Council, though Cr W. Sullivan did comment that, from a rating point of view at any rate, it would have to be admitted that the provisional scheme had definite advantages, embracing as it did the town areas of Rotorua and Tauranga.