THE ROAD BOARDS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 59, Issue 45, 2 December 1938, Page 3

THE ROAD BOARDS

NEW COUNTY SCHEME DROPPED.

MOUNT HUTT BOARD’S DECISION

CIRCULAR TO RATEPAYERS. The proposal of the Mount Hutt Road Board that, when they vote on the question of amalgamation with the County Council ratepayers they should also vote on the question of creating a new County, centred on Methven, lias been dropped. The Board’s letter to its ratepayers states that it was for the ratepayers to decide whether the present form oi administration was for the good of the district. The capital value of the Ashburton County was £11,000,210 and the population was 13,021, and the capital value of the Mount Hutt and South Rakaia Road Boards was £3.993,525, and the population was 4366. Although there had been reductions in the number of road boards, several comparable with Mount Hutt in capital value had merely been changed in name, and had assumed the rights of counties and boroughs. 01 a total of 128 counties in New Zealand, 72 had a smaller capital value and 56 a smaller area than the Mount Hutt Road Board. The total income of the Boardi during the last nine years, AA'ith the total rates struck in parenthesis Avas shown as folloAVs in the circular: —l93o-1 £3333 (£3125 4s sd); 1931-2, £4501 19s (£2493 18s 2d); 1932-3, £3555 13s (£IB6B 7s sd); 1933-4. £3345 5s 3d (£1705 9s); 1934-5, £3401 8s 9d (£I6BB 8s Bd)j 1935-6, £3939 7s lOd (£1750 7s lOd); 1936-7, £4005 11s lid (£2341 13s lOd); 1937-8, £1766 6s 6d (£3504 13s 6d);- 1938-9,

No Gommunity Interest. Very substantial reductions in rates were made during depression years, the recent increases being brought about mainly by Government legislation. The centre of the board’s district Avas Methven, AvliicU was 20' miles from Ashburton, and the nearest boundary Avas 11 miles from Ashburton, and* the most distant avus 45 miles. Community interest AA'as a big factor why the control should remain at Methven, which Avas the town of the people of the district. There were situated all the amenities for the people’s business and pleasure. Should the control be removed to Ashbul'ton, Avhich definitely hadi little ,community interest Avith the district, ratepayers .should ask themselves if the staff living 20 miles away could be expected to be in such close contact AA-ith the requirements of the district as those living in the area. They should also consider Avhether their interests Avould be better served by two councillors and an office staff at Ashburton or a local authority and staff on the spot. The main reason for the Ashburton County Council Avishing to force amalgamation was the annual loss to the Avhole Comity of £I6OO subsidy on rates. The Mount Hutt district was at present receiving the maximum subsidy of £SOO payable to the district, being £250 payable to the Board, and £250 to the Mount Hutt Riding of the County. If united, the riding would receive one fifth of £2500, or £SOO as at present, so that the district was losing none of the subsidy by retaining the road board, and Avoukl not gain from the subsidy if amalgamated. The Board had recently purchased a grader costing £1625 and it had up-to-date 'plant. Compared Avith counties of a similar nature, the district Avas on an 'equal footing in machinery and finance. Because of remote control, pot-holes etc., requiring attention on County roads were often neglected for long periods. Could the Council, already inconvenienced in other areas by storm Avater trouble and lack of plant, man-

age to better advantage an additional 240 miles of road now controlled by the Mount Hutt Road Board? Could there be a. guarantee from the council that there would be any reduction in rates or that it could perform the work more efficiently or economically? Town Board Impractcable, The Council had not explained how it "proposed to service and control the Mount Hutt district. The road board clerk’s duties included, those of overseer, attentions to domain and cemeteries, relief work, pound-keeper, and issuing drivers’ licences for the Council, in, addition to ordinary clerical work, and it was doubtful if any reduction in those costs 'would be made bv amalgamation, as those amenities would have to be provided for. ligures showed that any suggestion for Methven to become self-governing in the form of a town hoard was impracticable for financial reasons. An increase in rates would be necessary for satisfactory local administration of the Methven township. The Board believed that the amalgamation of bodies that were at present large enough and rich enough in value to be separate entities, would not tend to improve the administration, and might in many cases dpstrov existing community in terests. From analysis ol local body expenditure in the Ashburton County over the years 1933-37 it would appear that the Mount Hutt district was not having returned to it in works and services a full proportion of that expenditure.

“This is obviously an argument for the creation of a Mount Hutt County, but we have abandoned that aim in spite of its obvious merits solely because inquiry lias shown us that we could not hope to succeed,” the letter concludes, “it remains to us, therefore, to endeavour to retain our own community interests by retaining our present local authority, the Mount Hutt Road Board.”