HARBOUR RATES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 9 August 1928, Page 4

HARBOUR RATES.

PAID BUT NOT DUE

LANDS NOT IN BATING DISTRICT

An interesting, position involving ome history of tne past forty yeans, m the Patea narbour district and centring round a l.aw in a rating Act was | disclosed at a meeting or the Patea . larbour .uoard yesterday as the outcome of demands for refunds of rates paid for six year by owners of land in tiie hinterland of Patea and proved ,;ow not to’ be due because the area was ■ iever included in tlie harbour area. Messrs Matthews and Peat claimed repayment of rates paid and wronglj • barbed ;or the past six years. Ilie matters arose out 0- the discovery that certain areas which were supposed to be in the harbour district were in the early days expressly excluded, although rates were charged in these areas in good faith and paid also in the belie! mat they were due. A ter a discussion at the meeting ot the hoard yesterday it- was agreed that the chairman (Mr T. A Christensen) should interview the Audit Department 011 the matter. Mr Corrigan sugested a remit to the annual meeting of the delegates of the Harbour Boards’ Association urging legislation to straighten out the difreiilty. He said authority could bo secured in the Washing Up Bill. Mr Christensen said that as a general principle- the repayment of rates paid twice was .sanctioned but- this was el retrospective further than a period ■if three years. There was nothing 111 Bating Act to cover the occurrence. There was no precedent. Owing to a ‘Uuv in the Act there was no authority to refund rates' paid in error. There were two ways apparently to get over tin? trouble —to insert a clause in the Washing Up Bill to legalise the proceedings or to effect a compromise by ■living’ and having this validated. Mr Corrigan proposed that the chairman interview fhe auditor general, lay he whole facts before him and to obtain ruling in the matter. If lie could rot ararnge this he would have to put i in fore the Government- and remedy it bv legislation. * ’r Christensen said one of the ratevavc - s Maimed seven years’ remission. Thc original area extended to Pipii i but a compromise had to be made and areas taken out at the back ot Kltliam and Stratford, while the board had to take in a part on the other side of the Waitotara River. Portion ot the area in question was a- kind of no man's land” which was reported in 'BS-j us being of no value. Mr Hoc!£o suggested the board might ot this portion included in its area. He understood there were only eleven ratepayers interested and the total mvol -ed was about £SO a year. The chairman said the land in question was “standing on its end” and it would never he any better. . One ratepayer who used to pay £SS now paid onlv £S. ... • • 1 Mr Flake endorsed this opinion and said that people who put money into that land had been sorry tor it. But. h- said, the board had a duty to them nil and it should try to get the land included in its area. . Mr Corn can said that lie believed ihe original Patea area included the Patea County, Waverlev, •Normanby town districts, Hawera Borough and tlm area to the Ivontiers behind Eltham •nd Stratford. "It really included all Patea County and he did not know vliv portions of this was cut out. Mr Christensen said he feared, there wo-l l be objections by ratepayers to '•Miio- iir lud°d and the weakness was ‘■hat" the area had already been deTho '■ >1 a' derision was that the cliair-m-oi should interview the auditor gen<,rat i n the matter and report to the 1 card. _____