Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

County scuttles agreement on representation

WaimarinoCounty Councillors threw a spanner in the works of the proposed district council at their meeting last week when a notice of motion by Cr John Martin to rescind the previously agreed formula of five representatives from Waimarino County and four each from Raetihi and Ohakune boroughs, was unanimously passed. This followed the breakdown of a steering committee meeting of representatives of the three local councils the preceding week over the insistence by county representatives that financial arrangements be considered before going ahead with amalgamation. A document prepared by Crs John Martin and Malcolm Whale had been presented which detailed the cost of administration, and relative expenditure and income of each council, but representatives of the two boroughs would not consider it. Cr Martin apologised to other councillors for not acquainting them with the full facts when his notice of motion was first considered and rejected at a special

meeting of the county on 24 October. "I didn't have figures that would justify a change then and relied on a verbal account," he said. Since that time Cr Martin said he had worked out relative administration costs of the three authorities using 1985-86 estimates which showed that Waimarino County would be paying about half of all costs. "I believe in amalgamation, but not amalgamation at any price — it must be shown to be justified in cost," he said. "I am aware of the effects of my actions, but amalgamation is such a monumental thing that it must not be rushed into." Chairman Bruce Berry confirmed that the figures had been presented to other authorities and that they accepted them as true and accurate. Cr Bennett asked several times whether cost recoveries would reduce gross costs and therefore make a difference to the figures, but Crs Martin and Whale said they did not vary much. "If you do these figures on any formula, such as rate assessments, they still come •Continued page 2

County meeting

•Continued from page 1 out the same — it's costrelated," said Cr Whale. Cr Heinold praised the work of the councillors who had brought the figures together. "The only thing is, I am sad we didn't get these by figures together before discussing amalgamation," he said. Mr Berry agreed that this was a pity but said the opportunity had been available for any councillor from any of the authorities to carry out a similar exercise. "I feel we must consider these figures now and the boroughs must front up with their share of the administration costs," said Mr Berry. He pointed out to councillors that they were not considering Cr Martin's preamble nor were they putting anything in place of the representation formula. "We are voting to rescind the 5-4-4 representation formula only," he said. Bruce Berry said he had asked borough representatives several times at the steering committee meeting what their criteria of cost sharing would be, but they had had none to present.

"I am prepared to listen to any sound proposition on the basis of fair consideration," he said. Cr Bennett said that if the boroughs were not Willing to do more work then the county ought to look at some other proposition than the present amalgamation proposal. Cr Jones said that he was dismayed that the allocation of administration costs had been considered 'fine tuning' by borough representatives. "The principle of these figures was not addressed at all — they are the guts of the whole thing," he said. Following the unanimoUs vote councillors decided to write to Brian Elwood, the chairman of the local governmdnt commission, asking for an extension of time, and to the Raetihi and Ohakune Councils informing them of their decision. The county will prepare a document on the financial aspects of amalgamation which they want discussed before representation is considered again. Cr Martin said representation should be the last issue discussed. They also plan a public meeting to acquaint ratepayers with proposals.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIBUL19851126.2.2

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 3, Issue 27, 26 November 1985, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
658

County scuttles agreement on representation Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 3, Issue 27, 26 November 1985, Page 1

County scuttles agreement on representation Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 3, Issue 27, 26 November 1985, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert