IHAIA ROAD.

Taranaki Daily News, 31 July 1922, Page 8

IHAIA ROAD.

SPECIAL RATING AREA. SETTLERS’ OBJECTION. At Opuriake, on Monday, the 24tlr inst., Mr. A. M. Mowlem, S.M., sat as a commission to hear the objection of settlers on the Ihaia road to their inclusion in the special rating area over which a loan of £5OOO is to be raised to tar seal this road. Mr. A. A. Bennett. of New Plymouth, appeared for the Egmont County Council and Mr. P- O’Dea, of Hawera, for the objectors. Mr. O’Dea, in opening the case for the objectors, said that there wore some curious anomalies shown by the roll. Settlers on the road had been entirely omitted, while others who had no frontage whatever to the road were included. A Mr. Affleck had been rated on a front section, and a back section which fronted the Kaweora road was naturally omitted, yet Mr. D. D. O’Sullivan, who was in the same position, had both his sections included. The Magistrate: Why should that back section go in; it has uo frontage to the road ? Mr. O’Dea: That doesn’t matter at all, sir. to the Egmont County Council: it is perfectly logical for them. Mr. Bennett: He farms them a* the one property, and all his produce from the back section comes over the Ihaia road. Mr. O’Dea: “Mr. Affleck is in the

same position, but his back section is left out.” Then there was the case oT Mr. Looney, who had a farm at the corner of the Opua and Wirenni roads. His boundary was half a mile from the Ihaia road, and he had no need whatever to use the road. Loans would have to he raised to metal the Opua and Wiremu roads, and yet Mr. Looney was being called on to paj- for the Ihaia road. a. road he would never use when the others were metalled. The same with Mr. O’Sullivan’s back section. When the Kaweora road was m-: tai led he would not use the Ihaia road. Mr. D. D. O'Sullivan said that he objected to his back section being included in the area, because eventually he would have to pay rates on the forming and metalling of the Kaweora road. He also objected to other settlers in the same position as he was having their back sections omitted while his was brought in.

[ To Mr. Bennett: He had no objection to his section facing the. Ihaia road being included in the rating area. Mr. G. H. Looney stated that he used his Opunake farm for grazing. He had no frontage to the Ihaia road, and had no need to use it. It would not benefit him if the road was tar-sealed, as he had no produce to cart, over it. To Mr. Bennett: His farm was too poor for dairying, and could only be used “for grazing purposes. Mr. R. J. Campbell, in his evidence, said his section at the Opunake end of the Ihaia road had been included in the area, although it had no out--I£% to the road at all except through another section of his. A closed road ran through the sections, and when this road was opened he would he called on to pay rates on the forming and metalling of that road- He would not use the Ihaia road at all then, except when going to his other farm at the reserve end of the Ihaia road. The proposed tar-sealing commenced at his boundary, and he would not use more than a chain of tarred road, and yet he was being called upon to pay something dike £3O additional rates for that small piece of road. , While Mr. Campbell was giving his 1 evidence Mr. Bennett intimated to the ; Court that the Council would be prepared to leave Mr. Campbell and Mr. Baylis out of the rating area. Mr. Baylis’ farm was on the opposite side of the road, and was in the same position as Mr. Campbell’s. Mr- Mowlem said the power now rested with him to either leave them out or not, hut he would note the Council’s recommendation. Mr. Geo. Baylis said lie was in the same position as Mr. Campbell, and if the road was tarred it would be of no benefit to him. Mr. Morto Hickey stated that if the proposed loan was carried it would make the rates on the farms so high that tbpv would be less valuable than jaow» lit; alsj have to pav a,

special rate on the closed road when it was opened, and he would not need to use the Ihaia road then. TSie Court adjourned at 3.30 p.m-. and further evidence will be heard on a day to be by the , trwte.rrStar, ■