BOROUGH STATUS SOUGHT FOR REEFTON TOWNSHIP

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 February 1948, Page 8

BOROUGH STATUS SOUGHT FOR REEFTON TOWNSHIP

(0.C.) REEFTON, This Day. • 'Lengthy evidence in support of the petition presented by 315 electors of rhe County of Inangahua, praying'that.“the township of Reefton should he separated from the country and constituted a borough was hoard at Reefton yesterday, when the'Local Government Commission began its public hearing. On behalf of the petitioners, Mr J. P. Patterson stressed that the main points to be argued were: (1) That Reefton had inadequate representation on the Inangahua County Council; (2) that' the County Council had failed to provide amenities for the township; and (2) that it was alleged that rates levied on Reefton properties had not been spent in rhe town. The petition was strongly opposed by the Inangahua County Council, on the ground that it would cause the dismemberment of the county.

Mr Justice I. J. Goldstine is chair-* man, of the commission, the other members being Messrs G. A. Monk, J. W. Andrews, and W. C. E. George. Mr F. J. Stephens is administrative officer for the.commission. Mr J. K. Patterson represented the petitioners, I Mr E. B. Taylor the County Council and Mr L. E. Morgan, the Blackwater Mines Limited and Consolidated Gold Fields of New Zealand, and F. W. Archer (all objectors.) Prior to the opening of the hearing, which attracted iconsiderabie public interest, thc.members of the commission inspected the area of the proposed Reefton boroygh. The Chairman opened proceedings With a resume of the functions of the commission, and its application to the present petition.. Mr Stephens spoke on the legal requirements covering the petition, which showed that the proposed borough area was required to be not more than nine square miles, not mco than six miles between any two points in the area, and to have not less, than 1000 inhabitants. The petition had to be signed by at least onemi,! i of the ratepayers of the proposed area. ■- ■ , , . , The proposal, he added, had w be considered not only in relation to Lie Couhty of Inangahua and the distnc-., but the commission had also to consider the proposal as it would aftcet the whol® of the West Coast diswtCv. Case For Petitioners The case for the petitioners was summarised by Mr Patterson in his opening submision. He said that dissatisfaction over the last 10 years m reiurd to amenities and the condition nf the roads and footpaths in toe proposed Reefton borough area, as well ns over the question of represenmtion on the County Council were ■ nt princiixn reasons tor the request for me format ion of a borough. Othe. reasons for the desire to form a bmmngh. said Mr Patterson, were that the majority of the residents v-.-re employed or depended on corn mines in the proposed area, and they lived in the area. There was a strong community of interest. He pioposincorporation of Blacks Point would ensure a water supply and drainage The Conntv Council bad been handicapped bv the- shortage of labour, and bad been at a disadvantage m dealing with Roel’ton. Referring to the special water and fire prevention rating area m Reoften, Mr Patterson said the funds so created were always in credit. Oil March 31, 1039, the credits were respectively, £1202 and £743, and tne ]‘J47 credits were £2BOO in the water .supply, and £llOO in the.fire account, a . total of approximately £400.:. „ , . ‘•That does not reflect in the cash assets of the Council, and must have been spent on items which could not be debited to these accounts,” said Mr Patterson, referring to the £4OOO ‘•in 1931, the credit balance of £1439 in the water account was actually shown as being a balance due by the genera l account.” It was obvious, he added, that the revenue had been spent for general purposes although it was raised under special rates. Witnesses Called

The first witness called by Mr Patterson/ Wallace McAlpine of Reefton, gave evidence as to the population of Reefton, the county roll numbers and of the last census of Reefton. The ratepayers totalled 450, and the area of (he proposed borough held more than, the 1000 inhabitants required. He said he was for a time a lorry driver on the Boatmans Short Track, and spoke of the bad state into which the road had been allowed to deteriorate. Representations from the coal mine operators in the area had induced the Coal Council to obtain a grant for road repairs. The witness held that the money collected in county revenue in Reefton should be expended in Reefton, and not spent in other parts of the county.

Jack Deilaca, a company secretary, of Reefton, gave evidence on statements of accounts submitted to the commission covering the proposed borough area. These were based . on a rate of 6d in the £ on the unimproved value. Total rates bn this basis would be £lBO5, with other revenue £B9O, water and drainage revenue £782, and from special rates £ll4B, a total of £5750.

The witness, under cross-examina-tion, agreed that the rates were low and felt that the council should have si ruck a heavier rate to create a credit which could be expended in Reefton on improvements when labour and supplies were available, lie realised that the formation of a borough at Reefton would result in a sleep rise in rates, but as the town was growing he considered it necessary that additional amenities should bo provided. He considered that the town had been neglected, and that if a borough was set up this position, would be altered. He agreed that the improved position in the coal mining industry had a considerable bearing on the improvement of the town. Many New Buildings

Robert Yellowlees, a building contractor, of Reefton, said that an additional £27,600 had to be added to the rateable value in Reefton, for new buildings completed. Of 22 properties, 14 were new private homes, and only four of these were State houses which were not rateable. In addition to this a further £637,000 had also to be added to the rating values for proposed new buildings. A total of £40.000 of this was for the miners’ hostel. There were also building proposals for a hospital and nurses’ home which would give a further £102,400. TWclve new homes also were planned and an area had been bought by the State for 120 new houses io b 6 built at Chattockville. The demand in Reefton for housing was at present heavy, the witness added. It was difficult to buy a section for building handy to the water supuly and drainage system.’ Major extensions to both schemes would need to be undertaken to cover new buildings planned. The witness held

that Reefton was large enough, and could be best served by administering its own affairs. He also agreed that the inclusion of the coal mines on Boatman’s Short Track would -be revenue-producing for the borough. He considered that the amenities in Reefton did not compare favourably with those provided in other similar areas, and felt that a borough would provide improvements. Clarence Coxall, of Reefton, a member, of the Reefton Riding on the County Council, tendered evidence in support of the borough plan on behalf of the Reefton branch of the Labour Party. He said that of the 120 members of the branch some 85 pei’ cent, were householders, all interested in property in the borough area as proposed. As a member of the committee set up to carry on organisation to further the borough plan he could say that information covering the proposals was made widely known in Reefton. He considered that the case for increased representation on the County Council for Reefton riding had been well and fairly put before fhe council. James S. McGregor, another Reefton Riding member on the County Council, gave evidence in support of the borough plan, as a delegate from Black’s Point residents. The population there was 170 and they claimed. that if a borough was set up to cover Reefton, Black’s Point would be included and it would get improved facilities. Already a plan was under way to give Black’s Point a water supply, for which special, rates would be struck, and the residents had agreed to pay these as well as the usual water rents charged for such an improvement. He considered that Reefton, under the county, did not get the advantages it was entitled to. He knew that the County Council was handicapped in regard to labour to carry out works. Country members on the council had strenuously opposed any alteration in riding membership for Reefton when the petition asking for this had been considered by the council. Mr J. K. Patterson gave evidence covering the rating tables and values submitted to the commission, and also gave a resume of the public meetings held in Reefton on the matter The proposed area of the borough. he said, was 5050 acres, held in eight square miles of land. The commission adjourned at 10.10 p. m. until this morning.