TE KUITI RECREATION GROUND

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 507, 9 October 1912, Page 3

TE KUITI RECREATION GROUND

The Editor. Sir,- —Our Borough is befogged. Will you allow me a few lines to sum up the position upon an important question. I refer to the question of obtaining of a proper recreation ground for Te Kuiti. Some little time ago a petition was signed bv our leading citizens, and such being the case I suppose we are duly bound to conclude that our Mayor and Councillors were among the signatories — praying that the land called Pukenui 2T, now occupied by Mr Somerville, be seized by the Government, and that an area of 20 acres be handed over to the Council for a recreation ground. The petition was, as every one knows, presented to Parliament and referred by the House to the Land Commiittee for report. There the matter stands for the time being, but we have asked the Government to give us 20 acres of Mr Somervills's land for a reserve. You can, sir, imagine my surprise when I saw thatat the last meeting of the Council it was decided to take the same area of 20 acre under the Public Works Act. That simply means this, that we have by the petition asked to have the land given tc us and before our request is answered, in fact before it is, or can be considered, we say we will pay. The finances of our Borough, sir, are in that condition, that we ratepayers must one and all see that no moneys are wasted, and 1 ask, sir, is it not waste to ask for a thing in ' one breath and then before an answer can be given say, "Oh, never mind, we will pay for it." And then we come to the question of "why should this be," and "where is the money coming from." The reason given is that it is proposed —only propoesd, you will note —to ask the Government to allow the present reserve to be sold, thn money to be applied in the purchase of the new land. Well, well. You remember, and so surely must our City Fathers, the old adage: "Do nut count your chickens before they are hatched." Let us apply this here for a moment —no one, I am sure, will doubt Ihe soundness of the doctrine. The acquisition of the new land is a simple matter; in due course it will be ours, and we will have to pay. Tiiis is our chickens counted. What about the selling of ths old reserve 7 It is a fair size, it is convenient, it is ours and we can use it, it is our children's play ground. Our school committee cannot see it go without a protest and do their duty, nor can any parent. There will, and must be, opposition to the sale. The Government will not give any permission unless there is unanimity and it appears to me that it is a very open question whether the right to sell will ever be granted. And if not, then having in the meantime acquired the area how are we going to pay? Mayor, councillors, ratepayers, beware! Our debts are now heavy enough too heavy, some say—and we are-going to be asked to raise more money for necessary works, such as roads, drainage and water. Should ws risk this further expense when we have an opportunity by waiting of getting what we want. Will not every sane man answer "No!" Sir, I wait with interest to see which of our councillors is alive to the voice of reason, and will move that the original resolution to acquire the new land be reversed. If we have no such man or men upon our Council, then, sir, is the Borough of Te Kuiti hopelessly and irredeemably lost. —I am, etc., PRO BONO PUBLICO.

The Editor. Sir, —I have to thank you for finding space in a late issue of your paper for a few remarks upon the proposal to sell the Te Kuiti recreation ground and devote the money received for it to the purchase of land elsewhere; and as the matter is one of the 'most public interest, may 1 encroach further upon your columns? The only reason I have heard put forward for the change is that the recreation ground is too small —■ that several games such as cricket, or hockey, or football, cannot be played on it at the same time. Although this is unfor tunately too true, and though the municipality may have to pay for ths sins of the general Government and obtain larger grounds at its own expense, is that sufficient reason for disposing of the present ground? Some of the burgesses are decidedly of the opinion that it is not, if any alternative can be discovered. The advantages of keeping the ground as an open space are manifest to any one who has noticed towns where the planners provided similar grounds, such as, say, Palmerston North and Napier. No piece of land in Te Kuiti is so admirably situated, from a hygienic point of view to become a "lung" of the town, as the reserve in question. It requires no great effort of the imagination to realise what a benefit would result in the future from pursuing now a policy of "hands off.'' Also, the State school is situated on the adjoining land, and the school grounds are even now too small; the children frequently find playing room in the recreation ground; and the attendance will more rapidly increase in the future than it has done, in the past. Even present requirements demand additional housing accommodation, and this will mean still further encroachment on the play grounds. In connection with the future rate of increase of the number of school pupils, there is a tendency to extend the years of compulsory attendance, and there will certainly be an enlargement of the education system all roundagricultural, technical, primary, and gacnndarv- Of. course, facilities for

responsioilities for the general Government; but I am mistaken if the public of Te Kuiti would intentionally commit an act which would prove in future detrimental to ths interest of school children. I understand that a Borough Council has not authority to borrow money without first taking a poll of ratepayers, and obtaining a majority consent, Surely, it ia quite as important a matter to dispose of public land as it is to carry on the expenditure of public funds on works; and I beg to suggest that the Mayor should have the scheme discussed at a public meeting and take a show of hands .upon the proposal. There may be many ratepayers who, though in accord with the idea in a general way, are on principle strongly opposed to public property ever being sold at all, and who would go no further than allowing private persons to acquire leasehold interests. —I am, etc.,

NEW ZEALANDER Te Kuiti, October 4th, 1912.