COUNTY BOUNDARIES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4467, 15 September 1922, Page 3

COUNTY BOUNDARIES.

TAHUNA’S secession. the two councils confer. Representatives of the Hauraki Plains and Piako county councils met near Taiiuna yesterday to discuss matters in connection with the secession of the Tahuna riding (from the Hauraki Plains County with a view to it being included in the boundaries of the Piako County. The Hauraki Plaips County Council was represented by Messrs J. C. Miller (chairman), W. G. Hayward, C. W. Parfitt, A. Chatfield,' T. McLoughlin, J. F. Mayn, ER. Whitechurch (councillors), E. Walton (clerk), and J. Higgins (engineer). The Piako County representatives were Messi's F. J. Walters (chairman), 0. Glynn (councillor for Morrinsville riding), and N. Ray (clerk). A number of interested settlers also attended. The meeting was held in the open air beside Mr Barnett’s fine new house and nicely laid out grpunds. Appetising and greatly appreciated refreshments were provided by Mrs Barnett. The Hauraki Plains representatives travelled by launch, the journey up the narrow, winding Piako River occupying three hours and half from Ngatea. CONSULTING TH® MAP. The proceedings opened with a suggestion by Mr Miller that the best way would be to consult the map. Mn Walton spread the map out on the ground, those interested gathering round while he explained the position, saying that there was a little portion -of the Patetonga, riding in the Tahuna. roads loan area. He suggested that a. portion of that area be included in the portion of the county to secede. The Maukoro deviation formation was being done by the Government, the Council to find the legalisation expenses, Mr. Whitechurch explained that a, portion was already legalised and other portions had yet to be legalised. The cost would be under £lOOO. “We tried,!’ he said, "to get the Public Works Department to do it, but they turned us down.” Mr Walton said it was proposed that the legalisation and the bridge be county matters. FAIR DEAL WANTED. Mr Walters said.that oply a portion of the Tahuna riding would benefit, and the whole of the riding should not be called upon to pay for the bridge and deviation. He said he had .a perfectly open mind on the matter, and it was only a fair deal he was looking for. Mr Glynn thought Mr Walters was taking the right stand. Mr Whitechurch said the Hauraki Plains County was pledged to the Patetonga riding to see this bridge through. “How,” he asked, “is the Tahuna riding, .as part of the Piako County, going to see the thing through ?” Mr Walters: Whatever the Tahuna people want the Piako County will back them up in a fair deal. Mr McLoughlin said that the whole of the Waikato was advocating for a flat road to Auckland, and the road would come through that deviation. Mr Walters suggested that the bridge be held in abeyance for twelve months. , Mr Glynn supported Mr Walters view. ~ ~ Mr McLoughlin said the Council had assisted Tahuna riding as far as possible. Mr Mayn said that if the bridge was not built the deviation would never go through. Mr Wbitechurch s.aid that when the Plains County was formed he was against Tahuna’s inclusion. When he had been in the Ohinemuri County he had fought against it. Mr McLoughlin said the bridge was an outlet for the southern end of the Plains. Mr Walters: For only a small potion. ™ Mr McLoughlin said that Tahuna had led the Council to believe that they were always in favour of the bridge, Mr Mayn : For every ratepayer who leaves the Hauraki County we lose rates for bridges at the northern end of the river. If the few Patetonga settlers who are in the Tahuna roads loan area seceded they would still use the proposed bridge as an outlet. Mr Walters understood that the Hauraki Plains County was willing to let the Tahuna riding out if thev paid half, of the cost of the bridge and deviation. If they did npt agree to pay this the Hauraki Plains Council would do all it could to keep Tahuna in. Mr Hedley said that if it came to a general meeting of settlers in the Tahuna riding he .felt confident that they would be against both the deviation and the bridge. Mr Walters suggested the formation of a special rating area, 'to include those who seceded and who would derive a benefit from the bridge and deviation. TAHUNA’S LIABILITY. Mr Walters: What amount qO liability has the Tahuna riding got ? Mr Walton: .Its valuation is onetenth of our area. The Machinery Loan was £30,000, ,and none of that had been spent. Tahuna would then take £3OOO of the liability: Mr Walters asked if that was all the liability at the present time. Mr Walton said Tahupa had the road loan, the housing loan, and a share in the antecedent liability, Tahuna would also have to take its share in the assets and liabilities. The machinery loan was a prospective liability. Mr Walters said that if Tahuna took up the liability it would get the value of it, Mr Walton: Each of the ridings is in debt and each will bear a share of the antecedent liability struck uniformly 'over the whole of the county. Mr Mayn said the worst thing they ever did would be to shift out of the bounty. Mr Walters said that if they could not agree it would be a matter for a commission. It was agreed that there would have to be a special rating area in connection with the bridge and deviation. It was suggested that a meeting of

ratepayers concerned should be held to discufs the matter. Mr Mayn said (he bridge and the deviation were directly connected with the secession. If Talhuna did not agree to the bridge it would be taken as a movement to frustrate the Council's bridge policy. Mr-Walton said it would be six months before Tahuna could secede. Mr Miller, speaking to the settlers, said he believed the matter could be amicably settled. It was decided to hold a public meeting of T t ahuna settlers next Thursday in the Tahuna Hall.