TIKORANGI'S TROUBLES.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 September 1918, Page 6

TIKORANGI'S TROUBLES.

KATES AND REVENUES. At Friday's meeting of the Clifton County Council, Messrs J. Foreman, senr. and junr., J. Vickery, P. Cole, and S. Allemau waited on the Council regarding the treatment of rates in Tikorangi riding. Mr. Foreman, senr., said the ratepayers of Tikorangi complained of having to pay a share of the upkeep of the main roads. This was an injustice to Tikorangi ratepayers. It was a very serious matter, as they were being deprived of half tlie available money that should accrue to the Hiding from expenditure on their roads. He was not able to give figures for the piescnt financial year, but he had gathered details for 1915-10-17. The position was' that they had a credit balance in 1915 of £125 13s lid, and rates and subsidy netted £728 7s 9d, bringing the revenue to £854 4s Sd. Out of this £346 was spent. For the next year rates and subsidies brought in £909, and the expenditure £423; in 1917 the council received £867 and expended £275. This showed ft total revenue of £2620, and expenditure £IO4O, leaving a credit balance of £IOOO odd. He admitted this did not include cost of administration. He could not say what the mileage, metalled and unmetallod, was, but believed it was 10 miles of metalled, and that they were spending on an average £3OO a year, and probably the cost of upkeep was £2OO (surfaceman £l5O and assisted labor £SO). The chairman stated that settlors in other ridings were treated on their merits, and the money was spent where required. Mr. Foreman disagreed. Previous to 1915 they were not conducting the council under the system adopted now. He wanted to know how other ridings had over-spent their amounts whilst Tikorangi had a reserve. The chairman stated that Tikorangi's reserve would not be like what Mr. Foreman showed. Hospital rates had not been included. Mr Foreman stated that £7OOO hart been spent in the upkeep of roads mid bridges, and this charge was made on the whole of the ridings. Tikorangi's grievance was that they had to pay and got nothing in return. Ho maintained they should get the benefit of all the money raised in the riding. The chairman: Tikorangi received £9O as their part of tollgate revenues. Mr. Foreman said his figures did not include receipts from the tollgate. Tollgates were being placed in various parts of Taranaki, but the amounts raised in the ridings were also spent in those localities. He mentioned the Mangatoki and Riverlea gates in Eltham county, Waipuku in Stratford, and the Taranaki county. Apart from the toll-gates these counties had differential rates in each riding. They struck rates for certain works and improvements. He did not agree with the chairman that the ridings should be struck out and the rates pooled and spread all over the county. Ho had always fought against this. Probably Tikorangi had been fortunate in working on sound lines and had only metalled where absolutely necessary. From what he could see three ridings were deeply overdrawn. This did not concern them, but what did was the fact that rates collected in the riding were being spent elsewhere. Cr. Jones quoted a suppositious case. Suppose a boundary road was good in the riding, but further on very soft and bad, should all the rate raised be spent on the good portion and the other portion be neglected. He favored the money being spent over all the county. Tikorangi undoubtedly was in a very fortunate position. Mr. Foreman thought there was nothing unfair. Originally the land between Waitara river and Onaero was known as Waitara East Road District, and when the Clifton County was established the whole of the Waihi land was not occupied. Tikoranai had no say in being cut off from the Waihi boundary. Cr. -Musker urged Mr. Foreman to look at the matter from a broad point of view. There were 141,000 acres of unoccupied land and 14,000 acres of Maori land. Mr. Foreman should see that by the development of the back country they had made it possible to have the meat works and a good harbor Mr. Foreman could not see the force of Tikorangi paying £2OO for Uruti. It would be as just to approach Waitara West for the same purpose. Cr. Musker: Uruti and Pukearuhc are contributing to several rates, and so should Tikorangi. Cr. Jones: If the residents of Tikorangi go to New Plymouth they go over good roads. Mr. Foreman: And have not to pay anything! Cr. Jones: Perhaps it would be better if they made a charge. Mr. Foreman: You are making one riding pay. A good road benefits all. We do not object to paying a higher rate, if necessary. We want to see our money back. Cr. Musker: Mr. Foreman stated that Tikorangi had 20 miles. Why not view the matter from a national standpoint and improve the roads to twice that distance? Mr. Foreman: How many miles have we put down in Uruti? We object to pay a share in the £SOOO overdraft incurred over the main road to Mokau. Cr. Musker: Uruti ratepayers arc paying the same as Tikorangi, and have extra rates besides. Regarding the £SOOO overdraft, the fringe of the question has only been touched on, but I don't think Tikorangi will get any back. It is money spent within the county. Mr. Foreman said they were dissatisfied with their treatment. If the council was not prepared to treat them better they were prepared to get out. They were paying approximately l-9th of the overdraft of the county and had no overdrafts in the riding. The deputation then withdrew, and after a little discussion the council decided to review the matter at next meeting.