THE PROPOSED NEW COUNTY COUNCIL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2650, 24 April 1894, Page 4

THE PROPOSED NEW COUNTY COUNCIL.

A meeting of the Mount Peel Road Board was held on Friday last. Present —Hon. Acland (chairman), Messrs C. G. Tripp, G. J. Denuistoun, and R. Thew. A deputation from the Geraldine Road Board—consisting of Messrs F. R. Flatman, M.H.R. (chairman), and Metcalf—waited on the board with respect to the proposal to merge the Geraldine and Mount Peel Road Boards into a separate county council. The ordinary boardmeeting was therefore adjourned so as to hear deputation and discuss the question. Mr Flatman said the deputation was present to bring before the board’s notice the desirability or otherwise of merging their two road districts into a county. They did not come with an immensity of figures, nor anything much that they could prove for or against the matter. In fact, he (Mr Flatman) could not then say whether the change would be desirable or otherwise. The present move was simply a preliminary step to see whether both boards could agree to work up information and see if it is desirable that a separate county be formed. Mr Aeland asked “If we merge our boards into a county council the road boards as bodies would cease to be, would they not ?” Mr Flatman replied in the affirmative. One important thing to the ratepayers, some of whom had spoken to him on the matter, would be that as a county council there would then be only one rating body. The funds of the two road boards were about equal. The Geraldine board had £6OOO on fixed deposit and about £7OO current account, and the Mount Peel board’s funds, he understood, were about a similar amount. He got a letter from Mr Stubbs (Timaru) giving particulars of fees collected by the council as follows :

Mount GeralPeel. dine. £ s. d. £ s. cf. Publicans’ Licenses...

Slaughterhouse Licenses Dog Registration from April 1,1893 to 1894 22 15 644 0 0 There was some talk as to whether, if they formed a county, they would or would not have to build a hospital, but he could not see the need of it. . They were in a charitable aid district, and they could not get out of that district any more than they could get out of the harbor board district. The Waimate council had tried to do it, but had failed. They had built a hospital, but still they found themselves part of a charitable aid district. The Mackenzie county paid in 1893 to the South Canterbury Charitable Aid Board £242 2s 4d. The'Geraldine Road Board paid about £l6l annually for charitable aid, and out of that about £26 returned to the district in charitable aid. Of course, they had their use of the hospital when required. He was now convinced that the new county could not administer its own charitable aid. If the Mount Peel board would fall in with the views of the Geraldine board they could jointly ferret the matter out. The great point he could see in favor of the proposal was that each board concerned had funds of its own—and there were not many boards that had such a reserve, and if at some future time road boards were done away with their funds would be handed over to larger bodies, who would have the benefit of the money they (the Geraldine and Mount Peel Road Boards) had accumulated, which would be unjust to the ratepayers of their respective districts. Another thing, as a county council they would have their own affairs to conduct; there would be only one rate, and they could .‘‘lso work matters more economically than they wfl.re worked at present. Mr C. G. Tripp produced a letter from Mr Stubbs re amounts received by council for publicans’ licenses, slaughter houses, etc., in Geraldine and Mount Peel districts. Also a letter from the clerk of the South Canterbury Hospital and Charitable Aid Board stating Mackenzie County’s share for charitable aid. He also read three letters received from Mr Banks, clerk of the Mackenzie County Council. The first letter, under date April 11th, inst., read:—

Mackenzie County Council Office, Fairlie, South Canterbury, N.Z., 11th April, 1894.

C. G. Tkipp, Esq., Orari Gorge, Woodbury. Dear Sir, —Replying to your memo, of 10th inst. re advantages of a County Council over a Road District, a County such as this one, having no Road Districts carries out all the works and duties that would otherwise be done by the two local bodies; there is, therefore, a expenses. A County Council receives aU fees, epch as publican’s licenses, dog tax, slaughter Reeses, &c. A County having no Road Districts would strike only one general rate, and has increased rating powers, constructs its own water racej, bridges, and roads, makes its own by-laws, and has other powers, of which you would find particulars by referring to “ The Counties Act, 1886.” J understand the reason the Mount Cook Road District was converted into a County was that the Road Board did not consider they were receiving a fair return of the County funds iu proportion to the amount received from their district by ths Cpquty Council. I am forwarding a copy of this Council’s balance-sheet for last year, which may be of use to you.—Yours truly, R. L. Banks, County Clerk. The second letter, under date April 14th, inst., was iu explanation of how the amount of £594 13s 9d, sundry expenditure iu Mackenzie County, was made up, the principal item being £4OO on Morris’ house, Fairlie, for committee’s

office. The third letter, dated April 17th, inst., stated that in the amount of £242 2s 4d paid bjr Mackenzie County for hospital and charitable aid the proportion paid by each county was based on the rateable value of property in each. With regard to the Government subsidy on rates paid to county councils, the amount for the past five or six years had been 10s in the £ on rates not exceeding £IOOO. When the amount of rates collected speeded £IOOO, the subsidy was at the rate of 6s in the £, with a minimum payment of £SOO. This subsidy was paid to county councils >vhere no road boards were within the county. Mr Tripp next read the following letter ho received from the chairman of the Mackenzie County Council C. G. Tuipp, Esq., Dkaii Sib, — In reply to yours ns advantage of your having a separate County, I understand our clerk has given you most of the information required. The advantage to us in having a County of our own has be?n immense, i.r. % we. had to pay a separate rate to the Geraldine Council and got nothing for it, besides we now receive all taxes and licenses. Iu fact, with a County of your own you are king Ci the realm. You could work the whole t'-ing wich an engineer with some clerical assistance for clerkship work. I trust you w)H find all other information from Mr Banks.— etc,. J. McG bbgou. Mr Tripp th:m read a letter from Mr M, C. Orbcll as under;— Raukapuka, April IG, 1851, Dkar Mr Tripp, You appear to have misunderstood mo when speaking of County Councils and Hoad Boards. 1 said that I took a leading

part in getting the Road Boards abolished in the Waikouaiti County; I did not, as you say—get the Boards made into a Council. A County Council existed at the same time as the Boards, and these were merged in the Council, and I may say they were never missed. The saving consisted chiefly in salaries and office\work, one officer under the Council doing the work, with the assistance of an inspector, at considerably less than half the cost under the Board system. In Canterbury the feeling appears to be in favor of Road Boards. Why we require the dual system I fail to understand. It was hotcontemplated, when the County Act was passed, that Road Boards would continue to exist. The whole thing is a piece of extravagance. About 25 per cent, of the rates collected by Road Boards and spent upon roads, is absorbed in collecting and spending it. In my opinion it is enough to condemn any such system.—Yours very truly, M. 0. Oebell.

Mr Tripp stated that he had also got information with regard to the number of dogs registered at Temuka belonging to Geraldine and Mount Peel Road Boards, viz., in 1892 17 dogs, in 1893 4 dogs. He (Mr Tripp) could not help thinking that there would be a tremendous saving of expense if they had the proposed county council. The Geraldine and Mount Peel boards had each about £6500, and at present they were united in a way to two bodies that had absolutely no money. To show the feeling of the other boards towards his board, he had only to mention a meeting of members of the various road boards held at Geraldine about one year ago to consider the small birds’ nuisance. He (Mr Tripp) and Mr Thew represented the Mount Peel Road Board there. He (Mr Tripp) mentioned that he thought the agricultural part of the district should only be rated for the small birds’ nuisance, and he remembered Mr Orbell, of the Levels Road Board, crying out against it. Mr Orbell said : “You have all those fine hills round your district, where birds breed and then come down to us, and why should your district not be rated as well as the Levels district?” The great point worth considering is that his board was outvoted by the delegates from Temuka and the Levels, who voted that the whole of the Mount Peel country should be rated for the small birds’ nuisance, although this district was not an agricultural one. They said, “We will give way to you in other things,” but they had not done so. While on the small birds’ nuisance question, Mr Tripp quoted from reports of the council’s meetings that “members thought that the £BOO spent on poisoning in Geraldine County last year would have been spent to better effect under the method adopted by the Selwyn County County Council, as it was doubtful whether it had led to the destruction of 400,000 birds,” Also, on the destruction of small birds, Mr Talbot said, “ The council last year spent equal to rate, taking so much away from works, and he did not believe the results were worth the money. He believed that if they dropped the business for three years he did not think there would be any more birds than now. It was very hard to say what the real effects were, but he believed that all they had done was a mere fleabite.” Mr Tripp also pointed out that there was some feeling in the Levels district about forming the Levels Road Board district into a county. Of course, it had been shown that the Levels had not the proper acreage to do this, but if they took over sufficient land to give them the acreage they might do it, and Geraldine and Mount Peel would be left in a hole. Mr Tripp quoted a conversation at a Levels Road Board’s meeting on the matter: “ Messrs Mee and Campbell, speaking in favor of the change, mentioned the heavy expenditure on bridges in the county, but Mr Balfour pointed out the Levels could not gain much, if anything, in bridges, and they could gain nothing on the main roads, as the other boards would not join, nor contribute to the cost of the roads, but would use them all the same,”

Mr Metcalf said their were four road boards in this county, and he considered it was too large a district to bo ftll in one County. He certainly favoured the Mount Peel and Geraldine Boards uniting. He thought the time was not far distant when the road boards would be done away with. If anything came to the vote he showed that the Levels district had the majority. The Geraldine voting power was 465, and Mount Peel 95, and the Levels and Temuka districts far exceed this. Mr Flatman mentioned in connection with what Mr Metcalf had said that last year the Levels by means of their population were enabled to add another member to the County Council, and to the best of his belief they now had 3 members from the Levels riding. Consequently Geraldine and Mount Peel districts yep.a out-voted. Mr D. clerk to Mount Peel Road Board, iu reply to the chairman, asid he had searched all the Acts, but could find nothing to show how two poad boards could merge into a separate county, Special legislation was required for this. Thp fioweyer, provided that a road board or boards could merge iuto a county council that already existed, or two councils could join together.

Mr Tripp said they could see the feeling jij, the Levels was for division if possible, and then they would leave Geraldine and Mount Peel in the lurch. The Levels had not the means to keep up their bridges, and if they could throw themselves into a county, that would shift the burden on the remaining three road boards. Again, if the Levels Road Board got the Geraldine County Council to take them over there would be no more Levels Road Board district, and then the Geraldine County Council would have to make the roads and bridges for them. In connection with this Mr Tripp quoted from a council meeting on the question of bridging, showing the estimated expenditure for the year to March 31st, 1895, £1,592, and estimated receipts £3,930, which woiffd leave a deficit or overdraft of £6G2. This showed that a |d rate will not pay off the present overdraft and ompt expenditure, so that with that rate no bridge work could be undertaken this year, except the half share of protective works at Pareora, Mr Dennistoun said the Levels board could not merge into a county, because they had not the acreage. Mr Flatman said the Levels board might extend its boundary. Mr Dennistoun said that in the letter read by Mr Tripp from the chairman of Mackenzie County Council one of their reasons for becoming a county was that they did not get a fair share of the money spent. Ho telV -cl Mr Tripp back to the time whoa the Mount Peel road district was formed, and said it was because Mount Peel district did not get a fair share of money spent that Mr Tripp took ve"y dreat trouble to get this road board district cue Cl* from Geraldine. Mp Tripp : From Tomuka district. Mr Dennistoun thought it a pity to undo the work they hud alrpady done, if they saw that the Levels wore actually taking stops to merge into a county lie j would think it time then to take action, but as it was at present, considering their j acreage, he did not think the Luvoja would J

do anything in the matter. Besides, all the Temuka men he had spoken to were strongly opposed to joining the Levels. He could not see how they (the Mount Peel Board) would gain anything by merging with the Geraldine board. They would still have to pay in their regular rates to the'Timaru hospital. Mr Metcalf thought that* delay was dangerous.

Mr Flatman said that by merging into a county council they would secure their funds, and, as Mr Metcalf had pointed out, delay was dangerous. They would then be able to regulate their own rates, and, another thing, as a council they would then be in direct communication with the Government on all matters concerning them, and at present they were not so. If anything happened that the road boards were abolished, and merged into the Geraldine County Council, he did not think they would get their work done as well and as economically as now. He spoke for his own board, and was sure they could speak for theirs. Although he did not think they would save a great deal in expense by merging into a county, still he was sure they could do their work more economically. Mr Tripp mentioned that the Mackenzie County Council spent £1506 on roads and works last year and the Geraldine Road Board’s expenditure was £1504, but the amount for administration of the board he believed was less than that of the council.

Mr Flatman said that the matter of merging into a county was no new thing with the Levels Road Board. Mr D. Macfarlane mentioned that according to the Act an existing county council could take over any road board district if the majority of people owning rateable property in the district were in favor of it.

Mr Tripp said that in the present case of two road boards merging into one separate county it appeared that special legislation was required. At any rate the boards should do something at once, for unless they looked ahead the Levels would gain a step in advance.

Mr Flatman said that the Geraldine and Mount Peel Boards would have to take what was left if the Levels merged into a separate county council or into the Geraldine County Council. For the Government would certainly not allow the Geraldine and Mount Peel Boards to unite and leave a small portion like Temuka to itself.

Mr Deunistoun said that if the Levels district was merged into the existing county council the other members on the council would have it iu their power to levy rates on the Levels according to the money they expended, and the rate could be such a stiff' one that they might wish themselves out of the county. Mr Tripp again insisted that there was danger of the Geraldine and Mount Peel Boards losing their money if steps were not tak-n'at once. Mr Flatman, with regard to the legislation on the matter, had agreed to do his best to push it forward in the House, and when it jvas settled they would be a happy family as it were.

Mr Deunistoun could not quite see with Mr Tripp, and pointed out that the head place of business for the county council would be at Geraldine. He spoke quite independently on the matter, for he had au interest in both the Geraldine and Mount Peel districts.

Mr Tripp suggested that the chairman of the Geraldine and Mount Peel Boards respectively call meetings in both districts to get the opinion of the ratepayers. Mr Deunistoun thought the people would not turn up. They had such confidence in the boards that they would not turn up even to the annual meeting. If the board put a shilling rate on them they might get them there.

Mr Flatman said that his board thought the matter might be discussed by ratepayers at the annual meeting. Mr Tripp considered that the public meeting should be held iu the evening, and not in the middle of the day, so that the working men could attend. It was not fair that the working man should give way to the man with money and time to attend iu the day.

Mr Deunistoun said there were some large ratepayers at a long distance away who could not attend at night. Finally, on the motion of Mr Thew, seconded by Mr Tripp, the following was carried :—“ That this meeting will consider the proposals to form the Geraldine and Mount Peel Road Board districts iuto a county, and that the matter be brought before the annual meeting of ratepayers for discussion.”

Mr Flatman thanked the board for the resolution which, he said, was simply a step tow ards getting the matter threshed out. He thought more ratepayers would be in favour of it than those against, but it would be for the board meanwhile to find out all the evils—if any—that might accrue by merging their board iuto a coupty, pud let the good take care of itself. For bis part be was not prepared to decide in favour of the change until the matter was thoroughly gone into, and if he found anything detrimental to the proppjal he would be against moving furtbop jn tljo matter,

Mr Aeland said it was a tremendous move to make, and he, like Mr Flatman, would not decide one way or the other for the present. Mr Tripp would not be in favour of the proposal, only ho could seethe danger they were iu by the Levels Board being likely to merge into the county council. The deputation then withdrew.