TURUA ROADING SCHEME

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXII, Issue 4334, 26 October 1921, Page 2

TURUA ROADING SCHEME

THE LOAN PROPOSAL. BETWEEN £30,000 AND £35,000 REQUIRED. I “We have been attending Council meetings fairly regularly for the past six months, but I hope this will be the last for a while,” said Mr D. Q. McMillan on Monday, when he, with Messrs W. Madgwick and P. Henry, waited; on the Hauraki Plains County Council in further reference to the Turua road scheme, these gentlemen being the settlers’ committee. “SHOCK OF OUR LIVES/’ “We got the ■shock of our lives,” said the speaker, “when we found 1 out that there was only three inches depth of metal on the road* It means that t,he amount of the loan will have to be greater, £30,000, or another £5OOO above our calculations.”

It was explained that the proposed Town Board would have tb take oyer any liabilities existing in the town district area at the time of its formation being gazetted. THE BILLY BOILS! OVER.

A breezy little interlude occurred at this stage. Mr McMillan emphasised that the most important thing in tar-sealing roads was that there should be a thoroughly expert man m charge. He then displayed some curiosity as to the qualifications of the County engineer (Mr R. J. Dillon) for supervising tar work. . Mr Dillon: I have a certificate for my knowledge of tar work, and if anyone questions my qualifications, let them say so, and we will put matters to the proof. Mr McMillan: You may -have the qualifications, but engineers differ. You and the previous County engineer differed on some matters.

Mr Madgwick, to the chairman pt the Council (Cr. J. C.. Miller) : If the County engineer has a knowledge z cf tar-sealed roads and tarred work generally, why did he not tell us, and give us the benefit of his advice instead letting us go to the expense of going to Taranaki to find put for ourselves ? If, in his opinion, tarred works were the right thing, and would give us the better value for our money, he should have said so. Cr. T. McLaughlin: I take strong exception to the remarks made. Evidently they want our .engineer dismissed. Turua is only a small part of the County, and the Council is not going t.P accept dictation from Turua or anywhere else,. Cr. A. Chatfield: The engineer was not asked to give his views on tarsealed roads.

Mr Dillon: I was asked to give an estimate for concrete work, which I did. I was not asked whether or not tar was the better material.

Mr Madgwick : The engineer should have given us the benefit of his knowledge. Mr Dillon: I went, beyond what etiquette permitted as it was ; any estimate prepared by me should have been submitted to the Council first. They asked me to estimaie for concrete only. Mr McMillan: First and foremost, we must have an .expert for the tar work. That was the advice we got .everywhere we went on the recent visit. Cr. McLaughlin: The Council is giving you every chance to protect your-interests. I moved that your committee idea be approved at the last Council' meeting. The Chairman : The engineer has the qualifications, but hie has never had a trial on -tar work here. If you have the County engineer to supervise and. a practical working foreman on the job-all thetime, the committee should be able t,o get satisfaction. The work will. be done very gradually, and mistakes would be detected before much harm could be done. We would soon see whether or not. the work was being done properly. TAKING THE PLUNGE. . The kettle having 'simmered down again to a gentle bubbling, Cr. C. W. Harris moved, and Cr, C. W. Parfitt seconded, a motion to the effect, that the Council take the necessary steps to submit a loan proposal for the raising pf £30,000, plus the cost of raising the loan and the first year’s j interest and sinking ijund, for .the Turua-Netherton special rating ar.ea. —Carried unanimously. - LOAN TO BE ITEMISED. Crs. Parfitt and Harris expressed the opinion that the loan should be itemised, definite amounts being allocated to each road, and the proposal advertised in that way. If the amount whs in one ■stun it might eventual?, that some roads, main ones, would be completed, and there might not be enough 'left to do the side roads. In* that event the people whose roads were done would probably not vote for a subsidiary loan for the completion pf the side roads,. If the money was itemised any surplus left after any given road was done could go towards the liquidation of the loan, probably. ' Cr. Harris instanced a case in point, amounts of £3OOO being raised by the Thames County Council for the Waitakaruru Stream' Road, and £2OOO for the Waitakaruru-Miranda Road. But the proposal was advertised as the Waitakaruru District Roads Loan, and practically the whole of the money was spent on the Waitakaru.ruPokeno Road. The Miranda Road was not done, yet, the only expenditure on it being small amounts spent out of the general fund. It got no loan expenditure. Such a position might happen at'Turua, and would be very undesirable.

After discussing pros and cons further, the committee agreed unanimously to the suggested itemisation. THE POSSIBLE COST. Discussing the possible cost of the proposal, Cr. Harris pointed out that it might not be. possible to raise the money in New Zealand, and after all charges were accounted for it might be found that it would be necessary to advertise for £35,000 in order to get £30,000 to expend on the roadSu Mr Madgwick: Well, we must face the facts. The loan will cost us XOs

per acre, and we must have a. good job done. Cr. Harris: Probably it would be cheaper to go for the County machinery loan of £30,000 and the TuruaNethertpn loan of £30,000, making £60,000 in one sum at Home.