FERRY FOR PIPIROA.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4932, 29 January 1926, Page 2

FERRY FOR PIPIROA.

MEETING OF SETTLERS. ACTION DESIRED. Since 1911 the settlers of Pipiroa have been endeavouring to get some means of crossing the Piako River. At times a fern' has been .almost secured, and then it .would be turned down for the more desirable bridge. When this did not eventuate the ferry proposal wduld be revived, and thus the process has gone on. Now, with the bridge proposal nearer than ever before, and in fact almost assured within a few years, much energy is being exerted towards getting a ferry. The proposal was revived a year or so ago, but progress proved slow, and in an endeavour to speed it up several meetings, have been held. Such a meeting wais held in the hall on Wednesday evening, fourteen persons being present, including Crs. C. Parfitt and C.. W. Harris, the riding members of the County Council. Mr J. Porter presided.

Mr Rolfe, the convener, explained that at a previous meeting, when the tenders for the establishment of a ferry were advertised, the settlers, had come to the conclusion that no tenders would be received, owing to the unreasonableness of the council’s requirements. However, it had been agreed to defer action until it was known whether any tenders were received. The result was as anticipated, and thus' the further meeting had been called.

Cr. Parfitt, on being asked to explain .the position, traced the recent negotiations to date. Mr Dodd had offered to establish a ferry provided the County Council supplied the approaches. This offer was considered very satisfactory, but before anything could be done, Mr Dodd withdrew his j offer. The council had then decided to call tenders for the establishment of a ferry. It would! proa-ide the approaches or subsidise them up to £450. The estimated cost of a ferry was £1250, and towards this there was £350 promised locally in Thames and by the Highways Board. The specifications had been drawn up by the county engineer on .the lines of those used previously. He would like to know what clauses exception was taken to. Mr Rolfe said that from calculations made the settlers had concluded the council would contribute £95, and for this it expected a revenue of £25 a year. Crs. Parfitt and Harris pointed out that a tender of £25 might not be received. The council had leased one ferry for nothing.

Mr Knapp drew attention to the clause empowering the council to take over the ferry at a moment’s, notice.

Cr. Harris pointed out that such safeguards were embodied in most contracts and were very necessary to protect the ratepayers. The amount required to establish the ferry was too much for the council to contribute for the short period until ttie bridge was opened. The bridge was proceeding as rapidly as possible. The council had applied to the Gov-ernor-General-in-Council for a warrant to proceed under section 119 of the Public Works Act, but the Turua ratepayers had intimated to the council their-intention to take active steps to oppose being included in the rating area. There was little chance of the Turua area being cut out of the rating area, but a delay might be caused. In reply to a question Cns. Parfitt and Harris explained the position in regard to the Wharepoa and Netherton ferries.

It was suggested by a settler that the ropes and machinery from one of these ferries could be used at Pipiroa.

Mr Porter said that several Thames men had predicted that more donations could be obtained in Thames. Mr Schwartz expressed the opinion that • every Pipiroa settler would double Jiis contribution if it would mean the establishment of a ferry al once. If this was done, and another £lOO or so was obtained in Thames, the council' should contribute sufficient for a new pontoon.

Cr. Harris pointed out that the charge would be over the whole county.

Mr Porter thought that under these circumstances there was little chance of the council, votjng a greater sum. It appeared that jsome of the councillors, were definitely opposed to «the

ferry. ' After further discussion Cr. Harris said that the question to be decided was Whether the matter should be gone on with in view of the estimated cost of £1250 for a feriy tha.t would only be required for three years or so till the bridge was opened. Mr Porter said that the settlers were unanimously in favour of going on with the ferry. ■ln reply to Mr Torr Cr. Parfitt said that if a loss was made on .the proposed ferry it would have to be borne by the whole county. After further discussion Cr. Parfitt said he did not see any method of getting the ferry- without larger contributions except by the creation of a sjmal], rating area. The area would have to be email, otherwise the loan poll would be turned down. The loan could be for a short term, but in the event of this course being followed the ferry could not be established for 12 months.

Several settlers at once said that such a delay made the proposal outof the question. ' Discussion then ensued concerning the utilisation of one of the pontoons from the Waihou River, .and the councillors s,aid that the matter would certainly be kept in mind.

Mr J. Galvin moved, and k|r Knapp seconded, that a meeting be held in three weeks’ time, and that representatives of the Thames business men and the Pipiroa and Waitakaruru ridings be invited to attend. In. the meantime the councillors were to ascertain all the information on the subject possible.

The motion was, carried, and it was also agreed that Mr Galvin endeavour to induce Mr A. E. A. Dodd to lease the old Kopu ferry pontoon which was lying idle.