TARANAKI STREET

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 11, 14 July 1928, Page 11

TARANAKI STREET

COST OF WIDENING: REPLY, TO CITY, SOLICITOR Colonel T. W. M'Donald, chairman of the Vigilance Committee, has handed to "The Post" the following reply to the City Solicitor:— . , : "Mr. J. O'Shea,' who, under author-, ity' from the Mayor,' has attempted to reply to charge No. 3 in my statement published in Friday's Welling-' ton papers, which charge .wa3 to. the effect, that the council had sold a piece of land containing 12 perches necessary for widening Lower Taranaki street, and a few months afterwards acquired it again at a considerably increased cost to the ratepayers. "The City, Solicitor denies the charge, and published in support of his denial a report which he obtained from the City Vainer, which report states that the land taken from W. D; and H. O. Wills for widening Taranaki street to 34 feet was 14 perches, or 2 perches more than the area previously owned by the Corporation. This statement is incorrect, the area taken for this purpose is 21.76 perches The report contains this further state-. ment that 'in effect, the Corporation sold 12 perches for £5500 and later: purchased 16i perches for £4265 on average value per perch, a clear gain of at least £1000, in addition to the actual saving in cash of £1235—making a total of £2235.' "To this statement also I give an unqualified denial. The indisputable facts are that the council sold the 12 perches of land for £5500, or an average of £458 6s 8d per perch, and that it soon afterwards acquired 22.93 porches (including the 12 perches it had sold a short time before) at a cost to the ratepayers of £13,333 or £579 13s lid per perch, equalling a loss of £121 7s 3d per perch, or £1456 on the 12 perches sold by the council, only to be purchased back again socn afterwards. Tho payments making the £13,333 will be found in th» City Treasurer's cash book and on his vouchers as follows:—Cash book folio 157, voucher N0..4299, to W. D. *nd E. O. Wills, £8084 16s; cash book folio 157, voucher No. 4310, to W. D. and H. O. Wills, £75j.cash book folio 157, voucher No. 4314, to J. Speight and Co., £4274 4s 2d. ' "Surely there is something radically wrong somewhere ' when two highlyplaced and paid officers of the City Council make and publish a statement that a gain'of £2235 has been made on this transaction, whereas there was actually a loss to the ratepayers of £1456. "The City Solicitor's attempt to rescuo the Mayor from, his dilemma over tho Mayor's contradictory statements about the council's legal powers to tnko the adjoining land and placing on the legal branch of the council the responsibility for a mistake in not fully examining the legal aspect of tho matter at the initial stage, is a miserable failure. The two statements are published in the Press on 25th May, 1928, and the 6th July, 1928, respectively, on identically the same point, but diametrically opposed to each other! IN THE INITIAL STAGES. "The report of the conference with the Mayor admits a legal mistake in not fully examining the legal aspect at the initial stage, yet' the City Solicitor states that he made no mistake in the matter. How then does he explain the council's action in attempting to take Jobson's land for the purpose of coniponsating the Levy Estato for land takon from it?' Aii application approved by tho City Solicitor's depart-' ment was actually made by the council for a proclamation to take this land, and even in the face of objections from the owner and lesseo the council still attempted to pursue its illegal course, and it was not until an intorim injunction on behalf of the owner of the freehold was issued that tho council 's attempted illegal action was blocked. l)oes the City t Solicitor deny rosponsibility for this mistake, which caused considerable dolay in obtaining a proclamation and increased cost to the ratepayers? "There are four ( serious charges against the council's administration awaiting answers. The attempt to answer ono of them has, by the publication of erroneous official information, constituted in itself a sufficient further cause for a full and impartial public inquiry into this transaction. If there is nothing to hide, why fear an inquiry?"