KARORI DRAINAGE PROPOSALS

Evening Post, Volume XCI, Issue 97, 25 April 1916, Page 2

KARORI DRAINAGE PROPOSALS

TO THS EDITOR Sir, —Your issue of the 22nd contains two letters irom Councillors Henderson and Skegg, and one from "Perplexed," on the above subject. As the two former are in the "same boat," I will deal <yith them. Mr. Henderson's effort is largely confined to the water, side of the issue; but, as one of the main leaders of the proposal, he attempts to show that the sums mentioned in the loan are a mere "bagatelle" to give confidence to the mnney lenders, whilst only a small portion is to be called up.' The- hard facts show the contrary. These figures I actually take from. Mr. Ske'gg's own letter to you, as follow : — Water Loan.'—Amount of proposed loan, £13,670; amount of engineer's estimate, £13,164; margin of loan over the estimate, £506.. Drainage Loan.—Amount of loan, £15,330; amount of engineer's estimate, £14,827; margin of loan over estimate, £503. From this it will be seen at a glance that there is only the magnificent margin of £1009 between the total £29,000 of the combined loans and the estimates of the cost as made up -by the City Council's own engineers, arrived at over a. year ago, and prior to prices for material having advanced so seriously, for work which has to be pushed on now at top speed during war time; in fact, the money has been advertised fdr for weeks. In the face of this'we have the assertions that little more than half of the loan will ever be required. Who on earth is to find the money if it is not the ratepayers? And no amount of jugglery will convince bona-fide residents otherwise. Is it not far more likely that it will need a second loan to see the job through? Coming to the next point of extending the water o.ver the whole boi-ough (instead of giving only a part water and drainage), which I consider ought to bo done for about Id in the pound on the unimproved value, Mr. Henderson's line of reasoning is funny and ponderous. He seriously contends that because 300 acres of the closely-settled part of the borough costs so much an acre to water, the remaining 2000 acres, with its large proportion of purely pastoral and high-lying country, is to cost the same rate. He might, just as well argue that because a 1000 acres in the City of Wellington requires, say, £500 an acre to water, then a tenmile radius of country from the Chief Post .Office would need a similar rate, irrespective as to whether the land in the area was used for business, residential, farming, or pastoral purposes. For instance, Air. Skegg's own figures show very clearly, .regarding the present extended area of 300 acres (of 1915 proposal), as compared with the lesser 1912 one of 200 acres odd, that although the value of the former on which rates were computed for water was 60 per cent, higher the total rate is only 15 per cent, greater than it was on the smaller area of 1912. * Tho same principle will apply if wateri is extended to the whole borough, but with a far greater proportional reduction in costs than has obtained as between a 200-acre and a 300----acre range. ' I at once admit that no close survey has been made regarding water for the whole borough for ascertaining the exact cost, but to anyone whose mind turns on survey or engineering matters you can see in the mind's eye so much in the way of 'reservoir construction, pumping, plant, water mains, etc., that with advantage can be "pooled" together with the topographical character of the country—the larger holdings and fewer connections — giving confidence that the cost can be largely reduced. It must also be remembered in an area where drainage, is not proposed the consumption of water will be smaller, and this, as it has all to be pumped, will be in itself a large saving. To my mind Mr. Henderson has got into a hopeless tangle over this water side of the scheme; in fact, he cannot or will not understand its bearings, seemingly in the vain t attempt to prove that in some mysterious manner the city is going to carry out the. works and supply the water for three-fifths of a penny in the £, whilst the council's own able engineers estimate the cost of production at nearly a- rate of 2d in the £ on the unimproved value—with only a margin of £506 on an expenditure of £13,670. It 'will perhaps be remembered that at the statutory meeting I pressed this matter very hard on Mr.; O'Shea, and the final reply that came from him was, that it was believed that the city could 'do the work with a rate of 5-6ths of a penny, but that if it was found unable to do so then recourse would have to be made to the rest of the money raised by loan. The only other points raised by Messrs. Skegg and Henderson requiring | notice are : ~ (a) Whether the time is an opportune I one, as affirmed by Mr. Henderson, and ! those associated with me consider the time as being ir.osfc- inopportune, with the war on, prices high, an 3 every rightthinking man and woman in the community having matters of Far greater importance on their 'minds at present. (b) As to the statement that water srad drainage will be lolled for all time if the los.u is now defeated. The best answpr to this came from Mr. Luke himself at the recent statutory meeting when, in reply to Councillor Faire, Wellington's Mayor stated most emphatically that if the loan proposals were lost the City Council would only be too pleased to consider any future alternative, and in no case would a "dog in the manger" policy be adopted. In conclusion I can only reiterate that the menace of double rates hangs now over the heads of the ratepayers—a handicap that, apart from its immediate loss, means the serious hampering of. all financial assistance in the way of building or improvements, as lending authorities, public, and private, shy clear.of advances when the rates, ■practically amount to rents, aa evs>n now they are doing in Knrori in raanv coses.—l am., ■sin.. - . JAilKf? MACKENZIE. Karon, 2<Hh April.