GEAR ISLAND NOT FOR CITY COUNCIL

Dominion, Volume 32, Issue 148, 18 March 1939, Page 15

GEAR ISLAND NOT FOR CITY COUNCIL

Hutt River Board’s Reply AREA ABSOLUTE PROPERTY OF ITS RATEPAYERS A statement that there had been an attempt by Wellington sports bodies to stampede the board in its control of Geat Island, and that the Wellington City Council had been led to take action without being aware of the correct position, was made by Mr. J. W. Andrews at the monthly meeting of the Hutt River Board when a letter was received from the town clerk, on behalf of the council, regarding the island. This letter concluded: “I shall be glad if your board will refrain from granting any leases or renewals or leases of Gear Island in the meantime. The board decided to receive the letter and to inform the town clerk, in reply, ■that Gear Island was not available for the use of the city council. The town clerk’s letters stated that at the request of a number of sports organizaions, the council had considered the development of Gear Island as a sports and recreation area and ’had recorded these resolutions: — “At the request of a number of sports organizations the council has given consideration to the question ot developing Gear Island as a sports and recreation area. At the last meeting of the council the following resolutions were adopted : — “(a) That the sports bodies in the locality covered by the Hutt River Board (Gear Island) Empowering Act be requested to investigate the present and possible future requirements in acres and buildings of the various forms of sport and also be asked to supply an estimate of the revenue likely to be derived from the grounds on present requirements and on full development. “(b) That the Hutt River Board be requested not to grant any leases, or renewals of leases, in any part of the area till the local authorities interested in the proposal have had an opportunity of conferring with the board on the question. , -r , . , “(c) That Crs. Duncan and Luckie be appointed to confer with representatives from the other local bodies concerned in connexion with this proposal.”

The board chairman, Dr. B. J. Dudley, said that the lack of interest taken in the facts of the case, which had been given full publicity, was extraordinary. The board’s duty was to administer the island in its ratepayers’ interests; they were the owners. Board members’ were certainly not averse to the island being used for sport and recreation, but its first duty was to its ratepayers. He would remind the council that it had no interest whatever in the island. In asking the board not to grant a further lease, the council was interfering with its business.

Mr. F. J. Jones said it should be made clear that the board’s ratepayers were the sole and absolute owners of Gear /sland, which could 'be divided into building sections or used for industrial purposes so long as the usual statutory proceedings of local bodies in such cases were observed. There was nothing mandatory in the Gear Island Empowering Act, and there could not be, as the island was the ratepayers’ exclusive property. Outside bodies appeared to have the idea that the Act required the board to hand over the island to sports bodies. The Act had no such provision. He felt sure all members desired to carry out the spirit of the Act and were in favour of the island’s ultimate entire use as a park and sports grounds. During his term as board chairman no sports body had applied for its use. The Hutt Valley would, in time, become thickly .populated and would need all the land for its own use. The island should be made a recreational area, but this did not necessarily mean a sports ground, said Mr. Andrews. There were bodies commercializing sport and these bodies should not have the use of the island. The motion to inform the council that Gear Island was not available for its use was carried! unanimously.