ARCHITECT’S FEES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 5065, 15 December 1926, Page 2

ARCHITECT’S FEES.

PAEROA HOSPITAL PLANS.

LARGE SUM INVOLVED. Tliq members of the Thames, Hospital Board received rather a shock at Monday’s meeting of the board, when the question of paying certain fees due to Mr Giliman for plans supplied in connection with the Paer.oa Hospital was introduced by a letter from the board’s solicitor forwarding an opinion advising that the architect’s fees ip connection with the plans for., the Paeroa Hospital should be paid out of the building account, and not out of the general account. The board was; virtually a trustee, and having obtained plans 'for hospital there was nothing unlawful in doing so, and there was ho reason why .the board should be one penny out of pocket. The payment of architect’s fees was a capital expenditure, and was rightly payable out Of capital moneys. The only person liable to question the payment was the Government auditor, and if there was any reason to doubt the opinion submitted,, a ruling might, be obtained from the auditor. A letter was also received from Mr Et E. Gillman, architect, enclosing an account for. fees amounting to £344 17s Id, made up as follows : Fees incurred in preparing pla ( n and specifications for wooden building, £228 ; fees for ' plans, etc.? for brick building, £llO 5s ; travelling expenses and advertising, £6 12s Id. In reply to Mr C. W. Kennedy, the chairman (Mr W. 'E. Hale.) said that the Government charged .about 3% per cent. He agreed with Mr Kennedy that had Mr Gillman been allowed tq proceed with the work the cost .would have been little greater than the Government’s; charges. The chairman considered that the fees charged by Mr Gilltaian w€tfe far too heavy, and he moved that the Board offer to, settle the account for £2'so without prejudice.

In seconding the resolution Mr Hall siaid that the board could but try it.

Mr Brenan said that he could not agree with the resolution. It was recognized, that the erection of the Paeroa hospital would eventually be proceeded with, and he thought the wisest way to deal with the matter was by deferring it. He moved as an amendment, that the/ architect’s account be referred to a sub-committee; comprising' the chairman, Mr Danby," and the mover, to interview*. Mr Gillman and an endeavour, made to arrive at an amicable, settlement when the time came to build the hospital. Mr Brenan said that he moved the amendment because he was anxious to save the ratepayers an expenditure <Jf £344, without serious detriment to the architect.

Mr Kennedy seconded, and said that people were, passing strong comment about some members of the board obstructing the erection of the Paeroa Hospital. . The chairman w»as the leader of the hindering tactics, and it ill becamq him to try and bluff the architect out of his fees.

Mr Danby jumped to his feet and appealed for order. He accused 'Mr Kennedy of talking to the Press, and said that his remarks were unparliamentary, ungentlemanly, and untrue.

Mr Kennedy maintained that his 'remarks, were not untrue. It was scandalous to ask a professional man to accept two-thirds of his ’fees; for services rendered. There was not the slightest doubt th'Pit the hospital would have been erected had the chairman not obstructed the project. Hq thought Mr Brenan’s amendment was an admirable one, and all the members should realise the necessity of saving ratepayers, expenses. Mr Parfitt said he intended to support the motion.' As he saw the position, Mr Gillman’s • plans would be scrapped, and the Board would have to depend on the department’s plans. Mr Danby considered that the resolution and amendment amounted to one. and the same thing. Mr Brenan intimated that, it might be advantageous to the board to retain Mr Gillman’s services and goodwill

Mr Danby said that probably the sub-committee could do more good by meeting Mr Gillman in conference rather than making him a straightout offer.

Mr E. L. Walton said that he mueh preferred to see the- committee settle the matter quietly and amicably. Mr Gillman was not, apparently, in a hurry for his fees, and he saw no harm in the wording of the iamendment. The resolution was all right, but it did. not meah finality, for the architect would submit a 'counter offer. The chairman said that he had l no objection to the amendment, but foresaw difficulty in arranging with the department for Mr Gillman to ‘supervise the work. Ih his opinion it was. infinitely preferable to have the department supervising the work.

Mr Brenan said that in framing his amendment he wished tp make.it quite clear that it was not his desire to create any suspicion in the minds of the board members. His sole desire was to save the ratepayers’ money. Admittedly, the chairman had held the project up on every opportunity, but Mr Brenan assured the meeting that there was no ilPfeeling so far as he was concerned.

The chairman thanked Mr Brenan for his remarks and withdrew his resolution in favour of- the amendment, which was put and carried without further discussion.