County Council Affairs.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 1, Issue 27, 4 September 1912, Page 1

County Council Affairs.

To tiie Editor. Sir,— Regarding the Franklin County Council, 1 noticed in your report of the council's meetings that several councillors, who are also members of road boards in their several districts, made positive statements as to whether the different road boards would merge with the council or otherwise. I may be mistaken, but I have always understood that the ratepayers of road board districts had to be consulted by vote as to whether they would merge or not, so that the above could only be a personal opinion on the part of road board members. With all due respect I think the council has acted a little too previous In this matter of the merger, and in striking a rate. Before this is done I think the council should make a statement showing which roads in the different ridings they proposed to take over as county or main roads, and which they proposed to treat as by-roads provided the road boards did not merge. I believe I have rateable property in three ridings of the county and personally, though generally in favor of the mer- ' ger, I shall, and trust other ratepayers will join with nie, vote every time I against the merger until we have more detailed information from the i council on the following points : —(1) In rating districts that do not merge which road or roads they propose to bring under their jurisdiction, and leave under the control of the road board; (2) in rating districts that merge, which roads in the different districts they propose to treat as main roads and which as by-roads. It seems to me that on September 5 proposing to strike a rate of Jd in the £ in most of the ridings, without making any proposals to take over any of the roads in these several ridings for the purpose of spending this rate, the council proposes to hoard up money. I have not seen any report of any arrangements they have made with the different road boards as to where or on what roads they propose to expend this rate. As to the farthing rate which tho council proposes to strike on the sth day of September, and collect on tho 21st day of the same month, I am not concerned with other ridings in the county, but as a ratepayer in the Waiuku, Mauku and Awhitu Ridings I think I am justified in enquiring what the council proposes to do with this ]d in the £ rate on the capital value. If, as councillors have asserted, the road boards do not propose to merge, does the council propose to hand this rate over to tho road boards to expend ? Or do they propose to take over some of the roads in the road districts as county roads and expend it on them, and the road boards also to strike a rate and expend it on other than county roads ? In either case, in my opinion the council will prove an expensive white elephant. When a road board strikes a rate the ratepayers generally know the scheme of expenditure, and I submit, sir, that no county rate should be struck until the council take the ratepayers into their confidence and explain to them what they propose to do with these rates. Let councillors explain the position to ratepayers, show them what they propose to do in the event of the road boards merging, and that it will be more economical having one local governing body than two, and I have no doubt the merger would take place. But I submit that the ratepayers are entitled to expect a lead from their representatives in this matter, and trust that we will get it before a county rate is struck. —I am, etc., J. W. McLarin.