THE KIRIKIRI BRIDGE.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4395, 27 March 1922, Page 3

THE KIRIKIRI BRIDGE.

PLAINS COUNCIL CRITICISED. A POLL WANTED. The action of the Hauraki Plains County Council in proposing to build a bridge over the Waibou River at Kirikiri without ■ taking a poll was criticised at the annual meeting of the Ngatea branch of the Farmers’ Union, on Saturday. Mr Cleaver said that there had been a great discussion on the machinery loan, and the Council had been lucky to carry it. At tlhe same time the Council had on hand a scheme to build a bridge costing a considerable sum, and not putting the proposal to the ratepayers l . The bridge would benefit Thames. He did no.t see that any Plains people, even those at Turuai, would be any better off in ten years’ time. The plea previously was medical service, but a doctor was soon to be stationed on the Plains. He moved a protest against the scheme, without putting it to the ratepayers. ' The money could be better spent. Mr McDuff said the chairman of the County Council was against having a poll. Mr Davidson wished to know what powers the Council had in the matter. Even if the Council had the power to enter into such a scheme without taking a poll he thought a protest should be made. Mr Hayward said he had been against the building of the Kirikiri bridge without taking a poll. If a,U t,he different bodies agreed th,at :r bridge was necessary the matter could be gone on with without taking a vote, but he thought the ratepayers were quite within their rights to demand a vote. The liability of the different councils (with a subsidy) was about £30,000. The Thames County was to give £6OOO and the Hauraki Plains County and Thames Borough about £12,000 each. He ■quite agreed with the motion. Ifl the proposition was a good one the Council should not be agraid to put it to the ratepayers. He recognised that a bridge over the Waihou w,as essential, and Kirikiri was the best site., but the ratepayers should he given a say in the matter. Mr Davidson said the money should be spent on the roads. The time’was not opportune for a bridge at Kirikiri. Mr Cleaver failed to see that the district? would derive any advantages from the bridge. The Thames would reap all the advantages. Mr Shultz seconded Mr Cleaver’s motion, which was carried unanimously.