KAIAPOI BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2430, 19 January 1882, Page 3

KAIAPOI BOROUGH COUNCIL.

The fortnightly meeting was held on Tuesday. Present—The Mayor (Mr Smith), Councillors Moore, Pinching, May, Fraser, : Stanton, Mathews, Parnham, Woodford, and after making the declaration of a newly elected councillor. Or. Feldwiok took his seat. Letters were read—From the Treasury, forwarding £3 15s for fines and fees. From Public Works Office, {acknowledging letter from Council relative! to tramway, which in due course would be attended to. Prom Kaiapai Institute, forwarding £2 for hall license, and asking remission of same. Cr. Moore asked if th {institute was open to the public. The Mayor replied in the negative, and pointed out that it was so open till the cessation of the Government grant. It was in a languishing condition. Or. Woodford moved to reduce the fee one-half. Or. Fraser seconded pro forma. Or. Mathews moved. Or. Parnham seconded—“ That the fee be wholly remitted.” The amendment was carried after a protracted discussion, A letter was read from the Oddfellows’ Society, asking for remission of rates, and asking to be placed on the same terms as the committee of the institute, seeing that both public halls were let for purposes of income. It was decided to ask the Oddfellows’ committee to explain whether remission of rates or hall license was intended, and consideration of the letter was deferred.—A letter was read from Beach road contractor for an advance of £3O on the work. The Surveyor reported that the work was only progressing slowly. The matter was referred to the works committee with power to act.—The Surveyor reported clearing of side channels in Ohoka and North roads, Hilton, Fuller, Black, Jones, Peraki, and Charles streets ; he was not yet satisfied with the asphalt. Mr Blackwell had drawn attention to defective kerbing on Charles street north. Beferred to works committee, Mr Hnrse had applied to remove sand from Smith street. A greed to. Mr Weston had applied to remove a building across Charles street. Agreed to. Or. Woodford objected to the present system of passing the footpaths and ditches. The chairman of the works committee entered into an explanation of same. It was decided, on motion of Or. Moore, seconded by Or. May, that the asphalt footpath be not paid for till the surveyor was satisfied with the work. The chairman finance committee reported the fortnight’s receipts to be £22 lie 6d, the present overdraft £lO3 Is. Accounts £27 13s were passed. One or two Councillors commented on the pay-sheet, £ll 7* 6d, which the clerk said was for cleaning about four and a-half miles of footpath and side channel. Mr Blackwell, superintendent fire brigade, handed in invoice of requisites for the brigade, £73. Or. Fraser objected, contending the account ought to have come through the fire prevention committee. It was explained that no discourtesy was intended, and it was agreed to pass the account subject to the approval of that committee. The Mayor reported that the question of selling the cemetery reserve had been gone into with the Commissioner of Crown Lands, and if the Council wished to revoke the request it had made to sell it, a resolution would have to be passed. Or. Farnham moved, Cr. Pinching seconded, “That Mr Marshman be written to and informed that the Council wish the sale of the cemetery reserve to be delayed, and that the member for the district be desired to use hia influence in having the nature of the same charged.” Carried. Or. May's notice of motion for production of all vouchers for past two years on account of payments to the clerk was agreed to, and the same produced by the chairman of the finance committee. Or. Moore moved—“ That the clerk receive three months’ notice of the termination of all his appointments under the Council.” However unpleasant, he contended the income of the Council did not warrant the payments which were now being made for the services of that officer ; and making a comparison of the amounts paid with those of a neighbouring municipality with a larger income, he contended that in the interests of the ratepayers a change was necessary. He pointed out that the vouchers laid on the table did not clearly define the payments made, and on that ground it was desirable to have a change. Or. Fraser seconded. Cr. Woodford supported the proposal to frame a new schedule of duties, and re-adjustment of the salary. Or. Parnham contended the clerk was not overpaid, and the question of payment had only recently undergone adjustment. Or. Mathews opposed this constant cry of stinking fish. He calculated that the clerk in all received £ll9 a year, and taking into account all the duties that gentleman had to perform, it did not appear to be too high a salary for an old servant. Or. Stanton, in face of the overdraft, quite thought it necessary that the Council should practice economy as far as possible, and he objected to paying £25 commission for collecting the rent of £450 to the clerk. Or. Pinching charged the misunderstandings about the clerk’s salary to the finance committee, which had neglected its duty. Or. Moore replied at length. The division on the motion was, for—Crs. Moore, Fraser, Woodford, Stanton ; against—Ore. Pinching, May, Feldwick, Mathews, Parnham and the Mayor. Or. Moore’s motion to appoint a committee to revise the clerk’s schedule of duties, to comprise the Mayor, Ors. May, Froser and the mover, was negatived by a like division. The Council then adjourned. There was an attendance at this meeting of about eight ratepayers.