NEW DRAINAGE AREA

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 5109, 1 April 1927, Page 1

NEW DRAINAGE AREA

DUTY OF UNITED BOARDS. ACTION UNTIL ELECTION. Further light on the administration of the present Hauraki and Hprahia drainage districts after amalga* mation becomes effective as from April 1 has been received from the internal Affairs Department in reply to a letter from the clerk to the Hauraki Drainage Board asking the following questions:— (1) The number of subdivisions that shall be defined, and their respective boundaries; (2) whether these will have to be settled by the two present boards sitting as a combined board after March 31 ; (3) or whether it will be left to the newly elected board to settle the same, in which event the election fpr the new board be held over the whole district of the two boards without any legal subdivisions. The fullest possible information and what the pewition would oe in the future were other, matters included, and also, information as to how long it was likely that the two present boards would have to sit as a combined board after March 31. In reply the assistant Under-Secre-tary wi'-te advising that the question of subdivision was one which did not primarily concern the department, and the question was raised in previous correspondence liecause it was thought' that it would simplify matteis if the district was subdivided from the cutset. Thfis was, of course, subject to the condition that the two boards would be able to come to an agreement as to suitable boundaries for subdivision. From the correspondence received by the department it was apparent that the boards had negotiated to some considerable extent, but had been unable to agree. This being so, the department did not desire to interfere in a matter which was really outside its province, and as the boards had been unable to agree the whole question of subdivision should be left to the board of the united district to deal with. The union would, therefore, be effected without any provision being made for subdivision, and the board of the united district would have power under section 16 of the Lands Drainage Act, 1908, and section 2 of the Lands Drainage Amendment Act, 1920, to subdivide the distinct at any time and fix representation for subdivision. Under section 9 of the Amendment Act, 1922, the two sets of trustees continue to act as the trustees pf the united district until the first election of the board for that district. It was intended that the new board should be elected as soon as could be conveniently arranged after the union had been effected, namely, April 1, and it was not likely that the present trustees would act as a combined board for more than a few weeks. It was, therefore, highly improbable that the combined board would deal with the matter of subdivisions, and in any case it was unreasonable that it should do s°, as the object of section 9 was really to provide a means whereby the existing concerns of the two boards would be dealt with pending the election of a new board. It was not contemplated that the united trustees would initiate any new proceedings.

Discussing the matter at the conference held later Mr W. E. G. Willy admitted that the provision existed .for the 12 trustees continuing to act, but there was no provision for calling a meeting of the twp boards in combination, and that being so any action of the combined board might be upset as irregular Mr Heappey expressed the opinion that if there was any objection to the procedure adopted due to ignorance' of the Act or lack of provision in the Act to meet the case, such actions would be validated by Order-in-Coun-cil.

Mr Willy pointed out that a letter received by him from the Internal Affairs Department stated that from. April 1 the present boards went out of office and the districts were abolished.

Mr J. E. Green said that the position was ridiculous. Supposing someone came along to pay some rates, was to refuse to accept them ? It was agreed that a meeting of the two boards would be held e.n Monday, April 4.