DRAINAGE BOARD RATE.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1912, 10 April 1880, Page 3

DRAINAGE BOARD RATE.

Pursuant to advertisement a meeting was held in the Public Reading-rooms, Knightstown, last evening, to consider the question of the drainage rate. Mr J. L. Wilson, chairman of the Avon Road Board, occupied the chair, the attendance being fairly numerous. The Chairman expressed pleasure on seeing those who were present, and thought there might have been a larger attendance had the ■weather been finer, also there was the fact to be considered, that they had not been able to anticipate the Drainage Board in striking the annual rate. He then read the advertisement calling the meeting. He remarked that under existing circumstances it behoved them all to watch and endeavor to prevent any unnecessary burdens being imposed, and concluded by observing that as, in respect to the drainage of the district, there were gentlemen present who were prepared to go into the question critically, he would not take up their time at further length. Mr J. E. Brown, being called upon, said he had come there in order to give any explanation in his power as to the rate of lid in the £ levied by the Drainage Board. He had not been a party to the levying of that rate, having been absent from the Board through a family bereavement when that rate was approved by the committee, and when the matter came up at the Board he asked for a postponement of the question till further time was allowed for consideration, but the request was only supported by one member, and the rate of lid in the £ was then struck. He might say, in regard to this, that he had never felt so little satisfaction in the proceedings of the Board as he did on that occasion. Mr Brown then proceeded to show the basis upon which the rate was struck, indicating that the amount of the rate would not meet what they had charged to the Avon district for drainage. It had been said that the high per centage of rating was due to the low valuation of the property of the district, but, as a matter of fact, the valuation of the district had increased in greater proportion to that of the city, which was rated in much lower proportion for drainage- As ho had said before, he never felt so little satisfaction in any public position he had filled as in this of which he was speaking, and he felt that there would be no satisfactory solution of the important question at issue until there were a new set of men altogether on the Drainage Board. Some discussion ensued, in which the functions of the Road Board of the district were somewhat irrelevantly introduced, and the chairman had to request that the meeting would adhere to the question directly under discussion.

Two members of the meeting drew attention to the fact that no attention was paid to the maintenance of drains in the district. Mr Brown said that a contractor was employed to look after the drains, and it be did not do bis duty faithfully any resident who became aware of this should make the Drainage Board acquainted with the fact. °Mt Eleaher considered the important question for them to take up was to note the treatment received by the member for their district by the Board. It appeared from Mr Brown’s statement that the Board had declined to concede a just demand made by Mr Brown in the interest of this district, when a very important question was under discussion. He moved —“ That this meeting desires to express its strong dissatisfaction at the treatment which Mr Brown received from the Drainage Board, in making a request that the consideration of the report relative to striking the rate might be delayed.” The motion was seconded by Mr Munroe, and carried non. ton.

Some discussion of a conversational character took place, in which certain residents of the district present stated that the district had been better drained, and at less cost, by the Road Board in the old time than it was at present by the Drainage Board. Mr Brown said, at the risk of being considered unorthodox and with all respect for the ability of the late Mr Clark, that many of the drains constructed would be found utterly useless. One gentleman said he was six months out of the twelve in the water, and yet ho had to pay lid in the £ for drainage. Mr Flesher addressed the meeting at some length, directing particular attention to the expenditure by the Board on draining swamp land, for the improvement of which, according to the Act, the owners ought to have been made specially to pay ; this course of action being an injustice to the cottage population, from whom the principal source of. revenue in the district was derived. Ho thought this and other matters should receive the attention of Mr Brown, member for the district. In answer to a question from Mr Flesher as to what was meant by £42G for “ general charges, 1 * Mr Brown said ho was not competent to explain the matter, Mr Hobbs, chairman of the finance committee, being responsible for the statement in which that item appeared. After further discussion, Mr Flesher moved —“That in the opinion of this meeting the amount of the rate levied is far in excess of any advantage derived by this district; also, that the meeting deems it a great injustice that the cottage population of the district should be rated for the benefit of owners of swamp land.” It was subsequently decided to withdraw a portion of the above motion, and Mr Flesher moved a resolution, which was carried in the following form :—“ That in the opinion of

this meeting the Avon district has not received a commensurate benefit for the amount of rates levied by the Drainage Board, and hereby protests against the injustice they have thereby perpetrated. 1 1 Before breaking up, the meeting resolved to hold another meeting on the drainage question on Monday evening next. Votes of thanks having been passed to Mr Brown for his kindness in attending, and to the chairman of the meeting, the proceedings terminated.