SCHOOL WATER.

Levin Daily Chronicle, 7 February 1918, Page 3

SCHOOL WATER.

The difference between the Borough Council and the School Committee over the rate charged for water used in the school reached its final stage at Tuesday night's meeting of the Council when letters passing between both bodies were read by the Town Clerk (Mr B. R. Gardener) and a brief discussion followed.

As instructed by the Council at its last meeting the Town Clerk wrote to the Committee asking foil an explanation on two points: (.1) The payment by the Education Board to the Council of £5 for water charges after the Council had reduced the charge to £5, believing from the Committee's representation that it was dealing with the Committee and that the Committee's finance would not allow them to pay £10 per annum for water; and (2) the Chairman's statement to the Council that the new grants to School Committees would only mean 15s to the Levin School Committee, whereas a subsequent table published in the press showed that schools of this grade would receive £.1.4 per annum, instead of £3 as stated to the Council.

The Committee's reply was that the £5 was sent to the Council by the Education Board in error; the Committee was doubtful, after a previous refusal, whether the Board would refund the amount and it was after the amount was paid by the Committee that an application was made to the Board for a refund; that the Chairman's statement that the Board had refused to pay the original amount was quite" correct; that the £14 was not capitation but a special grant to meet the high cost of labour, stationery, etc.; and that the Committee resented "the uncalled for and unmerited attack made by the Mayor at the recent Council meeting and wish to point out that both matters could have been clearly explained by communicating with our chairman or secretary previous to the Council meet- • ' 99 xng.

The Secretary of the Education Board (Mr G. L. Stewart) also wrote under date January 28, stating the £5 should have been paid to the Committee and was sent to the Council in error. He asked that it be refunded to the Cornell and stated that the claim for the water rate should be made on the Committee, He further asked whether the Council could not see its way either to grant free water or to make a very liberal concession seeing that the parents of the children were ratepayers or residents.

in a further letter on February 1, tlie Secretary to the Board said

"that accounts for water supplied to the .Levin School should, in future, be rendered to the Board."

The Mayor said he did not think they need make a great song about the matter, which was a quite impersonal one. Both bodies were out to do the best they could for those they represented. He certainly thought that if the deputation from the oommittee had stated it intended to try and get the Board to pay the amount the Council would have taken more time to consider the matter. They might not necessarily have altered .their decision, but they would certainly have deliberated more carefully over it. "I notice that the chairman of the Committee," said the Mayor, "has shot off a lot of hot air on the matter, but I don't see that there is anything personal in the question, and I don't think any good purpose could be served in going over the ground again. As to the £14 grant, whatever it is, it is certainly an addition of ,£l4 to the funds of the School Committee, while there is also the other grant which they say will amount only 'to £;!, but which may prove to be considerably more."

The Town Clerk, in a personal explanation, said he had been accused of doing wrong in bringing the matter before the Council when he received the letter from the Board before asking for an explanation from the committee. But anyone who knew anything about a public servant's position knew that it would be decidedly improper to do anything before he had the sanction of the Council. "Mr Stewart was here to-day," added Mr Gardener, "and before he went away he informed me that the Board had refused payment of this amount to the School Committee. I make this statement to-night in fairness to the Committee.'Mr Stewart expressed the hope that the committee and Council would work amicably together. Cr Broome asked the Mayor whether he was still of opinion that the deputation deliberately mis-stated the position. I The Mayor said he thought too much had been read into his statement, but he was still of the opinion that if the deputation had stated they intended to make further application to the Board for the money the Council would have further considered the matter. Cr Broome said he had mentioned at the first meeting that application would be made to the Board for payment of the water rate, but evidently the remark was overlooked. The Mayor said he could safely assure the committee that no member of the Council had any hostility towards that body. The suggestion of collusion between J himself and the Town Clerk was repudiated by the Mayor. On Cr Lancaster's motion the €5 was refunded to the School ('ommii tee and the incident closed.