THE PUTARURU PRESS. THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1924. WER BOARD PROPOSALS.

Putaruru Press, Volume II, Issue 21, 6 March 1924, Page 2

THE PUTARURU PRESS.

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1924. WER BOARD PROPOSALS.

Main Street one 28 - - P.O. Box 44 Por i's and Dallimore’s Buildings.)

BrE explanation of the Power Board Hpan proposals, as detailed by the chairman, Mr. Claxton, show Hp&at the additional £150,000 loan was jMjequifed for further reticulation as becomes a payable proposition. extensions that it is intended Hltbukl be carried out at once our Bpf the proposed loan are named, and H|f these only one is in the Putaruru Restrict, namely, that along- the TaKjjapa road to the Waihou. Local ratepayers may consider this somewhat ■poor compensation for the rest of ■she district, which expected reticulaItion on the authorisation of th? E£350,000 loan over three years ago, expectation, however, had place to the Board’s decision (He erect lines only where the revenue yiffering* would make them a payable broad light this deBb is probably quite justified, in it represents safe? sound, busiBMess and obviates any necessity of ~ Striking a rate over the whole of the t Board’s area, which ratepayers who jjtfrad no prospect of getting the power years -to come would have jßpiEe with those who already ■Hong as th; iJi | 'Ejaculation pay for itself as i j 1 Mjjfred is consistently followed. jKiable economy and efficiency' to ee P power charges H a minimum, many ratepayers will consider that there can be jP#ossible objection to authorising ■board to raise further moneys BBpfme to time as required for exte nsions. K only counter considerations. BPjjest themselves are, firstly, j , ' in the form of Hjr the whole area that jHpiully pledged for eac!i r - Jjptch with the \d in the Bopß9Bfl9P|/' Ahe proposed £150,000 would make a total of over Id in the £; and, secondly, the question as to whether any means can be devised for pay ably reticulating the more sparsely settled districts without 1 waiting indefinitely until thev offer Ithe load of four motors (or in other words 250 cows) per mile at present, required under the Thames Valley Board’s scheme. | These counter-considerations must the left to the ratepayers themselves—the authorities to decide, whatever eac!T~ one’s decision may be, all would be well advised to ensure recording their votes at the poll next Wendnesdavy so that afterwards there shall be no doubt r - ' the opinion of the majority of the ratepayers.