AMALGAMATION.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1023, 16 October 1903, Page 3

AMALGAMATION.

SITTING OF. COMMISSION,

EVIDENCE AGAINST PETITION,;

The Amalgamation Commission resumed its sitting yesterday, Mr E. C. Gold-Smith presiding. C. A. DeLautour, solicitor, gave evidenco in favor of amalgamation, mainly on the lines of that given by previous witnesses. He considered the boundaries fair, but thought the Freezing Works should be left out. Under the Slaughter-house Act of 1900 it was necessary ,to have meat works outside the boroughl He thought it very desirable to amalgamate on aocount of economy of administration. Witness emphasised the necessity of amalgamation on account of drainage. As outlying districts, Kaiti and Whataupoko, might obtain a water-supply, but could not obtain drainage. ' Henry MoKay, clerk of the Kaiti Road Board, stated that as at present constituted his Board was not in favor of amalgamation. He was of opinion that the majority of ratepayers of Kaiti were opposed to amalgamation. Witness quoted figures, showing that the cost of administration on tho net receipts was £4 11s 9d per cent,, and on the gross expenditure £4 7s 4d per cent. Kaiti roads were in very good order and compared very favorably with the outlying parts of the borough. Witness submitted a statement, showing that under amalgamation the Road Boards would havo less to spend than at present. Frank Harris, a member of the Kaiti Road Board, stated that in 1901 he was in favor of amalgamation, and took round a petition in support of it. Many peoplo who signed the petition did not understand the true position in regard to rates, and now wishod to withdraw their names. The petition was not left at the Road Board office. He considorod the administration of Kaiti and Whataupoko had been very good. He did not think the districts mentioned could go in for water and drainage without crippling themselves. They would starve their funds.

To Mr Lysnar: Ho considered amalgamation was not advisable. He favored it in 1091. His main reason for objecting to amalgamation was on account of the water and drainage proposals boing rejected. Nine months ago witness urged amalgamation, and asked for a Commission to be set up. Witness, continuing, said that amalgamation meant throwing water and drainage baok twenty years.

A. F. Bridges, resident of Haiti, and member of the Haiti Boad Board, stated that the rates would be less by amalgamation than at present. As a member of the Haiti Boad Board ho had to protest against amalgamation on behalf of those who wore left out. The large area of Haiti that would bo left out and the small value of the same would mean that a great injustice would be done to certain ratepayers. To Mr Cbrisp : If the whole of Whataupoko and Haiti were included, then the whole of his objections would disappear. There would bo no subdivisions of interest and no destributiou of liabilities. If the Borough were going to give certain services, such as ranging, inspection, etc., without any charge on the amalgamated area, thon ho thought it only fair that they should retain the hotel fees and rentals from reserves. To Mr Lysuar: Portions of Haiti had gone up five times in value during the last two years, whilst other portions had not increased in valuo. Honry McKay, recalled, stated that if

amalgamation were carried, about eleven miles of roads out of fourtoen in liaiti would be left out. The ostimate was only a rough one. William Stewart Davidson, blacksmith, and ratepayer of Kaiti, said that he signed the petition of amalgamation, considering it would be a saving in rates, and that he would have benefit in other ways. He had since ascertained that it would not be so, and therefore wished to withdraw his name. Thera were others who held the same view as himself. Tho Commissioner: Why do you object. Witness: Where I live settlement is very scattered, and I would not be able to keep a cow or a pig. There is no house ■opposito to mo in DeLautour road, and only one on tho same side. There is no liklihood of any more houses going up there for some time. The Kaiti roads are far better than thoso in the town. After the luncheon adjournment evidence was given by William Sievwright, solicitor. Witness stated that he had been a resident of Whataupoko for nearly twenty years. In any proposal for amalgamation thero were several matters that required to be carefully considered if anything like substantial justico wore meted out to the road districts. There was the question of severance and the effect of severing a portion of each of the road districts. Tho present proposal took only a small portion in point of area from each district, say from a third to fourth, but it took all the valuable property, say three-fourths in value. In Whatatupoko, about one third of the area was taken, but at least a capital value of £BO,OOO to £90,000 of a total value of £111,007 was taken. Kaiti was dealt with in a similar way. The outlying portions wore left to shift for themselves as best they could. With regard to rating, ho considered that , for comparison with the borough only the Boad Board’s general rate of fd per £ on capital value should bo taken account of, and not that rate plus the county rate, because the latter was not a rate for Whataupoko local purposes, but for general county purposes, although included in those purposes was the maintenance of the county road. If that portion of the county road were within the extended borough as proposed, ndt only would the aq bo found to be inadequate for its maintenance, but in adjusting finances a heavy claim from the county for capital expenditure would have to be faced. If there was any extension of boundaries ic should embrace the whole of the road districts, and also a small portion of Titirangi, including the Gisborne Breezing Works. It should also be divided into wards, with graduated rating according to benefits received. Such a scheme had been expressly approved of by Whataupoko electors, by resolution carried almost unanimously at a large meeting. A proposal of the kind ought to be determined by a poll of those affected. Such a scheme was the only useful and fair solution of tho difficulties. It would give concentration of administration, a wider rating area, and economical finance. The borough reserves, endowments and license fees should all form part of the common assets, and bo usod for common ' purposes. They were so intended, and not meant for the piece of land which formed Gisborne in 1874, but for the Gisborne of the future. All were practically tho same people in and around Gisborne. He put in a copy of the borough balancesheet, which showed cost of administration at 13 per cent, of revenue. In Whataupoko it was 10 per cent, or a fraction over. Whataupoko electors were getting on very well with the present administration. Ail their roads, footpaths, drains, etc., were complete, and in much better condition than those of Gisborne, excepting two or three side streets. There was no urgent reason for its illusion in the borough. The proposed boundaries were defective, aDd should include the Hill rpad and Waimata road. The former would be the favorite promenade for Gisborne, No doubt a scheme of water and drainage would be more likely to be carrried out successfully if the borough boundaries were extended in the way ho had suggested, and he knew none of the Whataupoko residents would have been opposed to a water supply scheme on such a basis. On the contrary, they were in favor of any suitable scheme. E. P. Joyce, a ratepayer of Whataupoko and Gisborne, objected to amalgamation for tho reason that finder the Public Works Act of 1900, porsous who cut up their properties within threo miles of the borough had not only to form tho roads but metal them. This would retard the cutting up of many properties. The question of amalgamation should not be forced upon the ratepayers, but should bo left to a poll. F Bull a ratepayer of Kaiti ancl member of the Kaiti Boad Board, said that his DroDertv was outside the area which it was intended to take in to the Borough. Ho objected to amalgamation for the reason that in the past nearly the whole of tho rates collected had been spent on that portion of Kaiti that was now proposed to be amalgamated. It left about ten miles of roads to bo formed with a third of the revenue. He considered that the majority of the ratepayers were against amalgamation. If the whole of the Kaiti Boad Board district were included in the' amalgamated area he would have no objection to it. Francis Stafford opposed amalgamation, considering that tho Whataupoko Boad Board had done good work with tbs money at their disposal. Evidence was also given by J. Warren, clerk of the County Council, who stated that tho Council would be glad to be relieved of the portions of Whataupoko and Kaiti which it was proposed to amalgamate. At the same time ho did not think that those places would be as well off as they were under the Boad Boards for the reason that members ot the Council would not consider the outlyiDg districts. Mr Matthews reviewed the evidence in opposition to amalgamation. The Court- adjourned until this morning, when Messrs Nolan and Siovwright will sum up, and Mr Lysnar wilj sum up on behalf of the petitioners.