GREATER CHRISTCHURCH

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11486, 20 January 1903, Page 5

GREATER CHRISTCHURCH

QUESTION DISCUSSED BY SYDENHAM COUNCIL.

BEPORT OF THE COKMITTEE.

MB HULME'S FIGURES.

. Tbe retort of the Committee appointed by the Sydenham Borough Council to go into the question of uniting in the Greater Chriejdiurch scheme, was read &i tie meeting of the Council last night. It dealt in toe first place vita the abuse and charges of misrepresentation levelled at tbe Council by the, '.advocates of amalgamation, and pointed oat that Sydenham had been the first to!move in tbe direction of combination as Regarded eaoHation depots and abattoirs. With regard to amalgamation with the city, the Council, while unanimously upproving of the question being submitted to the barg«Gsee, considered it to be its duty to submat to them reliable information before tiic poll was token. The for amalgamation was no new thing, and bad been going on since Sydenham wu fiiet funned, tit. Albans, Linwood, and others had followed the example set by Sydenham, and had shown at as good results as the city for the expenditure they hod to control. It was churned thai the amalgamation of the districts \ifculd increase We commercial prestige of the city, would enable larger works to be carried oat for its benefit, and that better men would be got to conduct the city affairs. Lhristchurch had been compared with Glasgow, liirminghain, and Nottingham, but the comparison was an idta one. Even Glasgow had .three burghs containing a population of 170,000 within the natural boundaries ot the city which had co far successfully resisted all attempts at incorporation. Though large works were carried on in these citiee, their income and rates \rera correspondingly large, and in Birmingham a Committee wae set up l&st year in order to devise further means of taxation, as rates. on ordinary property had reached their utmost limit, despite improvement work*.' The rates of most of the large towns were about eeven shillings in the £~ and the larger tlie town the higher the rates. Were Chrieteburcb. to follow these examples, her rates would be even more oppressive than theirs. Drainage and tramwaye were already eliminated from the control of a Greater Christcnurch, leaving only water supply and electric worke to be dealt with. Sydenham wae already establishing her own waterworks, and would probably fall dnto line with any approved electrio proposal. •. Mr G-. W. Hulme, F.1.A.N.2., had examined Mr Gundry's frures, which omitted in Table o all extfaoJnnary reoedpte and expenditure in connecfioh with loans and moneys collected for other bodies, etc., and showed that Sydenham, would gain about £32 by amalgamation.

If the xates increased in Ohristohurck and Sydenham as they have •done during the iksti few years, their amount, the report stated, would be much, greater than stated either by Mr Gundry or Mr Hnlme, ac charges on loans for which no special rates are pledged must be paid out of ordinary revenue. The representation quee- | tioa required grave consideration, as tier© was no guarantee that the boroughs would be formed into separate words, or that, if so formed, the wards would not be eboliahed by the amalgamated council, as the Richmond Ward was abolished by the City Council in 1901. Another example of this kiwi of tWng was to be found in the local Dminage.Jßoard, u> which Sydenham bad paid /WOO* year lor over twenty years, chiefly for the sewerage of, Ciwistcburch. The committee thinks thet in any cage four members) {or Sydenham would not be able to give the attention or secure the benefit it at present gete -from the representation being more spread about, and from the expenditure of its own money,, even if log-rolling were an impossibility in the amalgamated council. Referring to the drainage question, the committee thought the idea of the -Mayor of Ohiistunarck, that each district aliould be charged With its own drainage, an unfair one, as the suburbs had already paid for the drainage of Cbrietchurch for. co inariy years. Sydenham had already done all its channelling and asphalting, and the smaller local bodies bad proved in the past that they could do work ftt least as well, and even cheaper, thta the -large once, mi any saving would be more than counterbalanced by the loss of local identity and representation, and of pert of tue Government subsidy. If amalgamation tak« place it will "be unconditional, «s under tie Act of last sewion no provision is made for adjustment of representation, or of accounts after the poll, and the propoiab of the Mayor of Christchurch, as set forth in his circular, *re pot -part* of the proposals upon wthich a poll will be taken. '.:'■ . . MB HUIcME'fl RESPOBZ -■'-:■ The following report was submitted by Mac Bulme:— ;,,.•• ■ • ' -■- ■■ ?■■£ ■':■■■■'■ .•* Sir,—l h«To the honour to report on the comparative statements faniiihed br Sir (Sundry to hi* Worship the Mayor of Christ* church, regarding the figures of t&c City md the three adjoining boroughe. -.The figures of" Table "A" In that report deal, e« you sjre aware, with the loans end cash indsbtedne** of the city, and th« various boroughs. The figures for Chrirt-church are stated at £91,619, and the interest payable thereon £5055. Mr Gundry ikss thought fit to treat the Degtmc- , ' tor Loan of £16.800, «ad of which. £13,700 he* been raised, *c a contingent liability. This , loan is exactly on the s*&ro footing as the other ilotn*, and I therefore piece Christ* churoh indebtedneee at £105,319, sad ike interest payable thereon £5707.. The loans for i the otlwr boroughs are oe stated. ; Table "B" purport* to be "«n account of the real estate ana reserves possessed by each of the* bodies, with the Government unimproved value thereof. , ' I hfcvs fouijd it n«cemary: to' make considerable amendment to the figures given, and for better purposes of compari'"manpt set out MrGandr/a figures a* first (given with, my figure* « *men3edi— Ito Gwsdbx's FiotißEs. ■■■■'■' '■■■■ . :: '.-$ $ : .'*i": M £ £ £ .:*.■■ Unsaleable Be- . - serve mi Go-.; ,■•' '. . . ..■•■..'•■..• ■■.- ', verhment Va- f ';• . '•■•'• ■ ■.•■ lues ... 10,921' 6,459 _ _ Beat Estate at t ' Valuation ... 15,068 1,975 1,530 800 Plant at Eegi- , • neer'a Valuation \ ... 8,060 1,173 '1,795 280 Other Realisable Assets ... 1,163 741 28 164 Total • ... 36,204 10,348 3,353 1,354 Sundry Liabilities ... 354 566 300 329 Net Assets Ua- -.•' ■■■■ '' ■■" der Account B 84,850 9,863 3,153 993 4 4 d d Value per £ on Unimproved ■ Value ... 58244 948-6*24844 13144 A. glance at the foregoing irili show that a mistake of £100 has been made in Sydenham figures •übtoaottn* the liabilities from the total assets, and uiat £9882 should be £9782, which works out 9 8044. Ths figoxes as smandsd by »•:— .. ii f -Ah £ t M * Un»al«*bl«V B*serrss •* Go- ■" ■ . ■~. . ■ ..: ■' HHmwt. Var . ■ ' '-.'-' - luation •■■■._ 90,809 7,763 — — . Bail Estate «t Valoatioo ....' 15,068 3,110 1,830 TOO Pkxtt at Bngi* . mer's Valua- : : '. tion ... 8,060 1,173 1,796 290 Otter Realisable Assets 1,155 754 47 33» Total ... 12,800 1,333 eeadrjr loabilitiss .... 386 566 a» 401 Nrt Assets Ha- - ' ' " "dsr-Account .' . ■••■-,.■■ ■■. . >. "B" .„ 44,199 12,284 8,468 831 • ■ ■•■..'..-." 0. d & ••■:'.-<l ~ Value per £ oa .'■■.- . • ■ .. ••, ■■: : : >.-: Vfthis ... eeO-64 115444 25844 13044 Amalgamated Sat*, 6 8644 <L ; Prsssat proportion of as*eU to xuumptvna Cbristoturch ... 6 62-64 loses j»4l Sy4*alum ... 11 6444 loses 6 1844 St. Albaas ... 2 SS44 • gaiss 8 4244 Xdswood ... 1 3044 gain* 5 1644 It is necessary tim, 1 Afraid ecplsin how this bm wm» about. Liewood and St. Albsjo» wets taken at iatproTed capital vmtoes, SyiUhhsm, at vonnnroved values, tmb two pxaptvtin omitted, r&AA tile city had its Uβsstssfbk ttssrrts at • ummpiovcd ralwe*, sjad its tasi ssfetfa *t im&tirmk ntleas. ~-»»>.

amended it*t«Btnt plitcee titan »U on one common bau« el imjttortd o>pit«l raluie »* eupplied by th« G«vcnan«&«Lan« DeparUiMßt. I take exception, however, to tk* meihol of Xitupinj »dooi«d bjr iLt OuudtJ. The courts pursued fcula to do justice Vα Srtwiutam, posMnios Talu»bC« tndcnrottate and other tesexve* oi a productive nature. I hive, thereJcrft, prepared two other tables, which I call "B" and "ELB." *B'* van %ceouat uf the MMts poeseserf by ekoh borough, wijich do not produce income, mefc ■» la*d buiWinf* need for.officet, Mctiom for the stonjre of road metal, mtttritla, plant, «U, af«o Fire Brigad* plant:~ " ' "B";Amxt« or x NoK-P»OJ»ccrnv«C«A»aCT»« IdtM LUMUTOW. II U 441 J, £ t * Ucsaleab'.e Ree*rve* «t Govenuaect Valuation ... 134 M Mβ — — Real Estate ... 8,068 8,785 1,720 700 Plant at VaJuation .. S,o€o 1,178 1,795 290 Other Re»li»«ble AcMta ... 1,15 a . 754 47 tSi Total ... 30.392 5,533 l.SSbt Sundry Liiibili* ties ' ... 386 See 900 401 Net Assets Utt- ■ • d«r Uiia Account ... 30,006 4,056 3,362 931 d d d 4 Valuation per £ on Unimproved Value ... 4 47-64 4 5Mi4 853-64.130-64 "iJ.B." is «n mooouot thowi** value of the aweU held -by •mah boroueh which. ftve of * productive ch»reot«i, with the annual eccruinf iacoow. I faav* c*pit«li»ed the inooma at 4 per cent., and *!*• aoooun* thus showa what i* lih* capital value ol the property h*ld by each borough. Rente, for tram concession* *r« taken to accouat in tb« jinnual income. ' "B.B."—AISCTS OP A PSODUCMW I' . ' £ M * Jt Un*a3**ble Bee«rve» ... 7,166 6,903 — — Seal EetaU ... 7,005 375 100 * Annual In«om« ■therefrom y ... 1,949 siß t 50 Capi*»lLeed Value at 4 per cent. ... 83,735 14,950 135 1,350 L. 4 ' d d d Value per £ oa . . ■ ■ Uniinptov»d Value ... 530-64 143044 7-M 149-64 !: , ' — "•' " *13r«m* B*nt«. ■ - Amalgamated Rate, S 9M4d. Christohuifeii ... 5 30-64 d gain* 644 d Sydtnham ... 14 8044 d loam 9 4-** d Si Alben* ... 7-ud gaiMie-1»44d Ltawood ... 149-644 |*jn« Ml44d I now come to the group of agime under Table "C," which is the crucial t*«t of the whole poetion, affecting, m it dow, the rate to be struck for th» mtmvl bodae*. Here, again, I tave bad to make amoua •Cteretionj. Tμ Obioinal Fiammk mx Jim Qvwdvt, ■ ./-J -I- 1 j| I a I C'S » S H I 4 < 4 « Cotrt of Adsunirtration .. 3,710 795 9tt 400 PebJo Work* 17,439 5,046 B,M» .8,203 ToW ... iX>,I4» 4,4 ie 3,701 Income other than Rite* .. £,914 2,052 «4 737 Balance ... 14,235 8,491 3,809 2,984 l e * d d 4. Rate in £ on Unimproved V«,.u« ... a 1644 3 8144 » lft-64 41444 Tbb Poemox as I Make It. II *» J- v 4( < < 4 Cost of Adnvo* istratiou .. 3,737 750 £U 4»' Pubho Works 11,676 1,889 8,735 t,OS7 Total .. 4,667 5,30 9,tm Iccome oilier ' than Rate* ... 5,897 3,352 614 707 Balance Hequired 18,416 3,406 B,«W 3^l» a a d d Rate in * on ÜBuoproved Values ... 3 70-61331-64 31144 4 Amalgamated ~*te, a 1944 d, Rate ui«s Unimproved Value Eeaaired*— ' Chrwtchurch ... 2 7-64 LofW 1«44 Sydenhcm ... 3 2144 (Jain* «44 fat. Albans .. 9 1844 Loss* 1644' Lrnwood ... 4 Gains 14144 i The «couiit "C" 1* the orduuKX xecuninc income of «ach body, togvfoer %nk llhe compaiwtrce oott of aomiwistmMen, «(c n td»S showing what nte would hire to fc* s str*ek t<i meet ordmary upeaditure otlier ikstt iateieet Oμ loans. Ibe raMca *ot <tk* samevhat droetio changea. made m (bat n*nia «f cxtmordinary ezpauditnr*, and not recurtinf, have been included in Mr CHtadry , * flgwre*. Foruutaace, mthe City of Ghsirtobuftik, *Atw xoad roller and other new plenty agjtetcfing to £1073 13s 24, Jud been uwludwl. eiau> larly in &t. Ailbam, a new 1 toad wller oosting «991, *bd other plaot avd irWug* for tb* new Fin Brigade, aw kofse*, *M »*■ qiured, aod furytare, lor Gmuaoil CkwaSber. In the case of Sydenhjun, some Imaiiedis oi. pounds of work done far srivafe iwrtits, Wiuah. bad erther been yeld Mr la advance or subsequently, korse* ud plug tod 'lead acquired. battd acquired by JUmnwd 1 Imht' al*o 'been taken to •ocouat. Hk» aftesed remli lite been brought about W ««' elimiaft-bon of the above and siaJU* iMIBSr vvbich, under n*» oinunsias>ees, could be clawed tm. "ordiaar/ raeutriag «xp*ndttau*." I-t should be nMntiooed fUI tnvroreiasote, such m briSee*, completion of new atnsU, etc., for Sydea«aiii, iRUeh Sftpsu keavier thsa usiutl *i» jmf, hay» «ll £m brought to socoun* ta Hie taefeded stjktem#trt. A« sfieotmg -the general v «uastion, I m«f potnt out tli*t tiie City of OhrisfciWefa, «a 4 a!eo Sydenhiuto, have loati* auttwrissd, but without special Ta-tee, *n* I uadeutand Vsat Uie inUreit and eickng fund «i ia«SS loam will be a cbsirfe on toe gesmsj mtes. In tk« event of amalgamntion. these would be a charge tin the extceded area. The losaal refer to are as tollcws:— Chn«tehurca-4ie,Goo loan f«Jr destswrfor and sanitary works,, only partially nsssd; «ie,ooo lean tor not raessd; J6OOO loan for municipal oflees. loan toe iwbUo work*. only pwttsiry raised; JU,ooolose for waterworks, not ntjeed. The stvutgii of 1500 in £he cost of sdmin-, lsttwtton estimated by Mr QtuUhf it purely. conjectural. Psnonaflv, aad sßSsikipt •*** » ktiDwledke 6f the staff sasployed lijTtte reBpeettvs corporate bodies, X eoesidss «OSM iaeiesne inevj(*blt» The report of tin Oni—nits— «• Qnatar Ohrietehurch «v takm «■ Mtd atti adopted. Tbe Mayor atond, «ad Or. Bowdn teoonded, that th* report b* prinUd uti oimdaUd mung tie ntep»yan r Cr. Hadfield suffest*l *a eltcMtstMl which would plainly *how ttasA the Obsja« cil had d«fiait«l7 (kckbd to «bsatt th* matter to the puUUa rot*. Hβ «bo dejected to tbe prophecy contained in th* itsport that tbe null dtoriotawottld]N«tatty annf er toroogh being t**uaiUd into s> tot* diirtrict. Cr. Smith complieießted 4w OeufffttM on its report. Anyon* «ii» oatsjid to read the papsn could bay* vsai ttw dscision of .the Council oe fk* qu»tlo» 41 taking * poiL Cr. Miller also ■ulogiMd tht report. H« »«** «»T, jwiriflwliif tlw 4dww t» .wldcb the Council had been wbjeoted, titat o* wa# satoDtsbed a* the lildhw 0f its wor&ing. In time to come It wm mm than probaW* that otbsr -ovtsid* bovoofto would yet thank Sydenham lor th. W. neitdik* staad it bad taken ia tlw Matter. e>. HadMd eaid tb* ComwU«e had purposely md—rowed to pot tWttfi m mildly as possible. Hβ xafy hoped thU fbrhnuniKe would be xeoagsused. Tbe motion was carried. During tbe evening a petition from G. Turner wad 510 otlftro m «ao »ad, asking that '» poll should be taken on tbe oi Orarter Christcherch. In reply to th* Mayor, the clerk aaid that about ISO of those who.signed were nor ent&Ud to do so. Cr. Hadfield mid that a month ago the CSounol lad decided that a poO, eiould be taken on the Matter, He mot« 4 fbat the poll be taken oa WednesxUy,,* February 4th. . „ , Cr. Jones, la aeooadisg tbe motioti. •aid -the nssnner in winch tie Municipal Corporation Act had'been Manipulated cast atrioai doubts on ib* boa* fid**,tf those who had got up tb* {awitioa. Tbs very mdmduals wl» bad Mad* sees » foss about tberigbU of tb> gsi«p»j«a IH» tbow wno bad robbs* tb» ratepaTvrs oi their ligbt*. There wss & kt *tf back«t*ini' influence *omcwbere, vffcicb MB •<* come befor* ib* Ooeeel. Cr. A. Shmth ttpporu* 4b» nwUte. It wm » matter tbey bad to gstmer, and th»y "might Ji»t s« wtil t«£* tWr enrt « e»'jis»ibk. w v - ■ . '

Or. Bowden object** itmudf W p«t ,^8 •on* who mre nettfcer midanki «or imA*> - p*y*re of Bydenbn(a\ getting «e«fc - ' ; -J, agitation.. He did not «Ty tb» «MI*MK , ■'£ new their earniega, bat *nn» oi tboi W» \<trr abusire. ; U Tbe Mayor alioded to the uiintK*—*»■ Uoa toe Oouncil had (received ten t4* ';; four duty paper*. Th* papam b*d ptt* I «isten%. ignored the expiwaed hilwihi ~ of the Council to take • rot* oa liar Mb* . '• j*A. ■ ■ .. ,-■■--. . . ■■;■■ The motion was oarriad.