COUNTY PROBLEMS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 19 May 1938, Page 7

COUNTY PROBLEMS

VITAL ISSUES RAISED SYSTEM OF RATING MEETING COSTS OF MAJOR ROAD DEVIATIONS. BRISK AND ANIMATED DISCUSSION. Many aspects of county management figured in a brisk, and animated discussion, at a special meeting of the Masterton. County Council held last evening, to consider a motion by Councillor J. W. Colquhoun in respect to meeting the cost of major deviations on main highways. There was a sharp conflict of opinion between Councillor Colquhoun and the chairman, Mr W. I. Armstrong, who moved an amendment that was considered by Councillor Colquhoun to be aiming at the abolition of ridings. Councillor Colquhoun’s motion, which was eventually carried, was as follows:—

(a) That the resolution passed by the council on the Bth day of April, 1930, authorising the payment of £2,500 annually from the general account towards the cost of permanently surfacing main highways within the county, be rescinded.

(b) That a sum of £2,500 be provided annually out of the general account foi" the purpose of financing the council’s proportion of the cost of permanently surfacing and constructing major deviations on main highways within the county.

Speaking to the motion. Councillor Colquhoun said the council had tarsealed most of the roads where no big deviations were required and was now getting on to roads where a considerable amount of deviation work was entailed to get them into alignment and possibly the ridings would not have the funds to carry out the work. His motion, he said, aimed at helping these ridings to carry but work where there were major deviations to be made by making money available for this purpose from the general account. He was prepared to leave it to the council to decide what

were major deviations. ' Councillor Gordon Lee seconded the motion, stating that it would take some considerable time before the fillings on the Weraiti Hill would settle down and in the meantime tar-sealing could not be proceeded with over the hill. The Weraiti deviation had cost the Te Whiti Riding a fair sum and he considered that the riding was entitled to some assistance, which could be done under the proposal. He was not asking for any back payments, but was prepared to start off from scratch again. CHAIRMAN’S AMENDMENT. Mr Armstrong pointed out that the roads in Councillor Lee’s and Councillor " Colquhoun’s ridings had been tar sealed. The policy of the council, he said, in providing a sum of £2,500 per year for tar-sealing, was to do the back-country roads after the inner roads had been done. Personally he thought Councillor Colquhoun was a bit unfair in wanting to tie up the money now that he had got his roads sealed. Mr Armstrong moved an amendment: “That all county, works, including construction, reconstruction and maintenance, to be provided from general rates, be made a charge against the general account or county as a whole, instead of separately in each riding and that the council proceed to take such steps as may be necessary by law to bring this about.” If this proposal were carried out. said Mr Armstrong, they would help everyone, particularly the back country settlers. “You people here,” said Mr Armstrong, “have got your roads done and we want some of our roads done. The back country settlers, in my riding particularly, are composed mostly of Crown tenants and soldier settlers and they are looking forward to a decrease in the rates.”

“At the expense of the rest of us,” interjected Councillor Colquhoun.

Mr Armstrong: “We helped you to do your roads and you are backing down on us." He added that the council should take up a broad-minded attitude.

Councillor G. Moore observed that he was not altogether in favour of the chairman's remarks. He had a different viewpoint of the situation. BIG DEVIATIONS NOT JUSTIFIED. Seconding the amendment Councillor H. H. Mawley said he was totally opposed to the motion. This money had been passed for a certain purpose and after certain ridings had had their work done they turned round and wanted to use it for something else. Except in the case of the Castlepoint Road he considered that no more major deviations were justified in the county. The county's job was to make the roads safe.

■'What about danger spots?” asked Councillor Moore. "I believe in removing them." replied Councillor Mawley, who added that deviations on the scale of that on the Wcraiti Road were not warranted on a road of that kind, though the whole of the councillors were partly responsible for it. It meant the expenditure of a large sum of money to save a few settlers just five minutes when they came into town. "I think

that sort of thing cannot go on in the future." he said, "but it is fully justified on long distance roads carrying a lot of traffic, such as the Castlepoint Road. I think there will be very few, major deviations in the future." !

FARMERS’ POSITION. Councillor Moore, who spoke in support of the motion, said the roads the council had to seal in the future were in hilly country and entailed heavy preparation work to bring them up to highway standard. He mentioned in this respect the Masterton-Castlepoint Road. At the present time the ratepayers, all of whom were farmers, were, faced with increasing costs and their incomes had been reduced. Their position was very hard indeed and they had to consider them in their operations of the county, which could not go on spending a lot of money on improvements to roads. He considered that Councillors Lee and Colquhoun had that in mind—that the county wanted to limit the amount of money spent on road improvements. After all tar-sealing was all right in its way but alignments and curves came first and to limit this money only to tarsealing involved the county in spending a lot more money in preparing the roads for sealing. He considered the motion a reasonable one. It was very difficult, he added, to get any deviation done at the present time. Costs for everything had increased and made it very expensive work. New Zealand was one of the hardest countries in the world to road. Councillor P. R. Welch supported the motion, with, he said, a certain amount of diffidence. He considered the council should declare what were major deviations and the ridings should contribute a certain amount towards these deviations. He agreed with Councillor Mawley that they had started with the wrong deviation. They should have done the Masterton-Castlepoint Road. “For self-preservation,”' he added, “I have got to support the motion.” ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT. Councillor Moore stated that from an economical point of view the further out lengths of road should be tar-seal-ed, if suitable for the purpose, to effect a saving in maintenance costs. Councillor Mawley: “We have never declared when a road is economical to seal or otherwise.” The County Clerk, Mr J. C. D. Mackley, said the Main Highways Board based its work primarily on the number of vehicles per day using the road. In the course of brief reference to the cost of maintenance of certain roads the chairman, replying to Councillor Moore, said: “You must be fair to the ratepayers and get" the expenses down as much as possible.” Mr Armstrong suggested that the Clerk should read some figures bearing on general questions under discussion. “ABOLITION OF RIDINGS.” Councillor Colquhoun objected. “Your amendment,” he said, “is nothing more or less than, plain and simply, the abolition of ridings. That is the whole sum and total of it. It

looks to me as a direct negative to my motion.”

Mr Armstrong: "It is just extending your motion.”

Councillor Colquhoun: “It is abolishing the ridings. We are only dealing with the £2,500 set aside for tarsealing. We are not dealing with the whole county at the present time. Now you are trying to put over- the abolition of ridings." “It is almost another way of putting the same thing,” observed Councillor - Mawley. “Certainly not,” replied Councillor Colquhoun. Councillor Lee explained that his riding, Te Whiti, got into difficulties solely on account of the Weraiti deviation, which was supposed to have cost the riding £l,OOO spread over two years. Instead of that it had cost £853 in one year.

Mr Mackley explained that the work was put in hand in response to a request by the Government to provide work for unemployed. The total estimated cost was about £9,000 and the cost to the riding £9OO, to be spread over two years. As the result of the conditions that were imposed on the council, which had to pay the men for holidays and the slow progress made it was found that over £5,300 had been spent on the job and only one-third of the work had been completed. By using machinery the council could complete the deviation almost within the estimate but instead of the cost to the riding being ten per cent it had now to find the full 25 per cent. It had got to find a further £1,175. The estimated total cost to complete the deviation was £4,700, making a total of about £10,500. PETITION FROM RATEPAYERS. Mr Mackley then submitted a comprehensive statement to the meeting setting out the position if all rates were levied on a uniform basis over the whole county as compared with the present system of a differential rate over the several ridings. A petition to the chairman was also read stating that Uriti Riding ratepayers had discussed the position, and the majority supported the making of all charges upon a uniform basis. The ratepayers directed the riding representative to vote accordingly. “That has no bearing on this motion, Mr Chairman,” said Councillor Colquhoun. “We are not discussing the abolition of ridings.” Rising to a point of order, Councillor Lee asked if the chairman was in order in bringing his amendment before the meeting. Mr Mackley assured councillors that the amendment was in order, being an extension of the principle embodied in the motion. One of the big disadvantages of a general rate, observed Councillor Moore, was that everyone was digging into it and was intent on getting their “whack of it.” “I don’t agree with you about that,” said Mr Armstrong. “It is individual control as against general control by the council,” said Councillor Moore. “What’s everybody’s business is nobody’s business.” At the present time, he said, the riding member was responsible for the rate in his riding and if the ratepayers did not like the rate they came along to see him about it. Councillor Colquhoun: “Do away with all councillors and have one overseer.” “That’s what it amounts to,” observed Councillor Moore. “Councillors are necessary in their ridings,” he added. COUNCIL’S POLICY. Mr Armstrong said the council had never turned down a proposal which it considered was justified and that, policy would continue in the future. He maintained that the council's affairs would be handled better if the coun-' cil as a whole had a say in authorising the work, as it would if a uniform basis of rating was adopted and the rates to settlers would be much lower. Voices: “To some.” Councillor Welch said his ratepay-' ers were very hostile to anything in the way of uniform rating, and he thought it would be only reasonable to allow time to consult them on the matter.

Councillor Colquhoun said he resented the chairman’s remarks in which He had suggested that he was mean. Councillor Colquhoun said he had never adopted a dog in the manger attitude. They had done their deviations in the Opaki Riding and he was going a little further for the benefit of the other ridings so as to help them with their deviations. He had always tried to be fair. “As to the Uriti petition,” said Councillor Colquhoun, “if you give us a week wc could possibly get from the Rangitumau, Te Whiti and Opaki ridings signatures that would bury it. I say that if you are going to use that petition to try to influence this meeting, you are wrong. I am prepared to abide with what the ratepayers say.”

After further discussion the amendment was lost and Councillor Colquhoun’s motion carried. It'was decided that the whole of the money for all deviations in excess of £l,OOO be provided out of the general account from the sum of £2,500 set aside annually for tar-sealing.