OTAKI BOROUGH'S MISFORTUNES.

Shannon News, 14 January 1927, Page 4

OTAKI BOROUGH'S MISFORTUNES.

OVER SIX HUNDRED ACRES EXCLUDED. EEVEBT TO THE COUNTY. A special meeting of the Otaki Borough Council was held in the Council Chamber on Friday, January 7th, at 2 p.m. Present: His Worship the Mayor (Mr. J. P. Brandon) and Councillors Kilsby, Smith, Ryder and O'Rourke. The Mayor said that the first business the Council had to deal with was the report of the Commission on an application from a number of ratepayers asking to have their lands excluded from the Borough area. ' - ( The Commissioners were Messrs J. H. Salmon, S.M., H. W. C. Mackintosh, and F. Martin. In the course of their report the Commissioners review the constitution of the Borough and the water and drainage schemes, which the petitioners claimed was of little or no advantage to them. The leasehold petitioners are six in number, and occupy a total area of 257 acres, 2 roods, 9.3 perches. The unimproved valuation of these lands is £13,657. The freehold petitioners are seven in number, and occupy a total area of 167 acres, 2 roods, 4 perches. The unimproved valuation of these lands is £9,260. The total area* of rateable lands in the Borough, is stated to be 1,800 acres. After the constitution of the Borough the general rate was increased from time to time, and these special rates above referred to also became a charge upon the ratepayers, with the result that the amounts of the rates payable by some of the petitioners have increased in some cases to four times as much as they were paying before/ the constitution of the Borough, or twice as much as they were paying in the second year after the constitution of the Borough. In some cases the increases represent six-hund-red per cent.. '. . The Commissioners go on to refer to the previous Commission which excluded a certain area, and in regard to the present application they aay:—

l'our Commissioners inspected a larga area of the lands of the petitioners at various points, and from the evidence and from that view were enabled to form an opinion of the class of country and its suitability for municipal control. The greater portion of the leasehold area and a considerable portion of the freehold area is stated to be subject to general flooding during certain months of the year. From the configuration of the country and its appearance and from the evidence (which was not rebutted) your Commissioners were satisfied that this fact was clearly established. The result is that a large portion—probably the greater portion —of these farm lands is entirely unsuitable for cropping purposes, since by the time that the lands are sufficiently recovered from the effects of the floods to admit of being ploughed it is too late to bring the lands into condition as a seed bed for crops. It was also stated in evidence that owing to the cold sour nature of the lands subject to regulair flooding there is a tendency for English grasses to die out, and their place is taken by swamp weed and native grasses. As a result of these conditions the petitioners have to rely almost entirely upon dairying, and "it is clear that the petitioners are suffering considerable hardship, and that their position as dairy farmers is rendered practically impossible under municipal control. This hardship is frankly admitted by Counsel for the objector (the Otaki Borough Council), but it was stated that the council propose to ask that local legislation be introduced in the shape of a bill similar in terms to the Rangiora Borough Valuation of Farm Lands for Rating Purposes Act, 1924 (Local No. 8) and the Mataura Borough Valuation of Farm Lands for Rating Purposes Act, 1925 (Local No. 11), The hardship appears to have been also recognised by the previous Commission which endeavoured to give relief to some petitioners. In the opinion of your Coimtnissioners the lands of the petitioners (speaking generally) are, in the present state of development of the Borough, not fit for sub-division for building purposes, nor are they likely to be required within any reasonable period for building purposes. In the opinion of your Commissioners these lands are unsuitable for municipal control. Your Commissioners are further of opinion that the introduction of lpcal legislation on the lines suggested is not the appropriate remedy. Your Commissioners therefore recommend the exclusion of certain of these lands from the Borough to the extent and in the manner hereinafter described m schedule A and B, and as shown on th* plan hereto attached and therein ' coloured as described in Schedule C hereto. It was stated by counsel for the Borough that if the lands of the petitioners were excluded from the Borough, it would require a further rate of Id upon the lands remaining within the Borough. It was argued by counsel for the Borough that the lands of the leasehold petitioners were in close proximity to the Post Office which is the heart of the Borough as at present constituted. It may be true that the Post Office represents approximately the geographical centre of the Borough but it is also clear that the business and residential area of the Borough ends substantially at the Post Office and that the lands of these leasehold petitioners by reason of their low levels and liability to periodic floods can never becomo useful for either business or residential purposes. It is desirable to point out that by virtue of section 146 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920, the security for the special loans above referred to would not be affected if the course recoup mended by your Commissioners were adopted, but that the whole of tjhet area upon which these special rates were originally charged will continue to remain liable for such special rates notwithstanding the exclusion of thoe lands from the Borough. The effect of your Commissioners' recommendations,

if adopted, would be to divide the Borough into two portions, namely, the business and residential area to the east of the Post Office and the beach residential area on the sea coast. These two portions would be connected by Tasman Road which should remain vested in the Borough. . The Otaki Borough is to pay the costs of the enquiry. DISCUSSION BY THE COUNCIL. The Mayor asked the Clerk if he could inform the Council ofHhe approximate area affected by the report and also the unimproved value of same. Mr. Wilson said that the land excluded by both Commissions amounted to a little over 631 acres and the unimproved value was £31,000. It would- be necessary to.retain the present general rate of 3d in the £1 over the Borough with an increase in the lighting and hospital rates to |d and 3 of a penny in the £1 respectively. (The total unimproved value of the land in the Borough is £181,654). Cr. Kilsby remarked that it seemed hard that the land on Rangiuru Road was excluded.

Or. Ryder: It seems harder to me \ that all the land on the Tasman Eoad should be excluded and the cost !of maintaining the r.oad be left on the Uorough. Otaki Borough is just about where I predicted years ago, that it would be. If ever; a place is in a mess , this one is to-day. Cr, Smith asked the Clerk if he had J allowed for any rebate from the Horowhenua County Council in connection | with the up-keep of Tasman ;Road. • Mr. Wilson: No. The rebate may relieve the position a little with regard to the rates. ( The Mayor remarked that it was no ( use decrying Otaki or what had been done by previous Councillors. He had . been in touch with these affairs right through even in the days of the old j Town Board. The Board, however, had j nothing to do.with the boundaries. These were fixed by a Commission and J in reality it was all fixed before the : Commission ever came to Otaki. Therefore they had no one on the past Council to blame. - I Cr. Ryder: The past council should j have considered more than they did the question of borrowing on those lands. Apparently money had been borrowed without any consideration of who was going to pay. It was unjust to the farmers to load them with a burden they could not bear. In reply to an interjection Cr. Ryder said they had got out of the borough now but must bear the.burden of taxes already levied for the next 36 years. Cr. Srqith said that this report had i not been gazetted so it was little use suggesting a conference with Horowhenua County Council until this was done.

Cr. Ryder moved that the report be received. This was seconded by Cr. Kilsbv and carried.