OPUNAKE HARBOUR

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 23 August 1929, Page 3

OPUNAKE HARBOUR

FURTHER BORROWING OPPOSED. i RATEPAYERS’ ASSOCIATION FORMED. VI(IILANCE COMMITTEE ELECTED Sixty-four residents of the Opunake Harbour district assembled at the Opunake Town Hall 'last evening in response to the, invitation of Messrs .T. D. Conaglen, IV. A. Sheat, J. C. O’Rorke, D. \Y. Hickey, G. H. Looney, E. S. Foreyith. E. Julian, and M. O’Brien, convening a meeting of rate- I payers opposed 1 to further borrowing in j connection with the bairbour scheme, j

A number of addresses were given to I the meeting, which subsequently ap- < pointed a vigilance, committee and decided on ( he formation of a ratepayers’ association. 'Mr Conaglen was elected as chairman of the meeting. “This is a very important meeting,” said Mr Conaglen in inviting discussion. He. recalled a meeting held in the hall two years previously, when the board had been asked to stop the work on the harbour. A sum of £25,000 had then been spent. This had since been augmented to £55,000, no notice being taken of the public request. Now it was proposed to a.slc sanction of a further loan of £20.000 and it was essential, in the chairman's opinion, that the ratepayers should take united action to oppose further expenditure.

BOARD -MEMBER’S VIEWS. Mr J. S. Tosland, a member of the board, gave a brief review of the position during recent years. While owing to tile altered position 'he was not at present altogether in sympathy with the opposition, he, as a ratepayer, personally was vitally interested in the question o!f preventing wasteful expenditure. A mistake at present would ho fatal. The ratepayers already had a heavy harden and any further load was to ibe avoided if such was possible. He referred to the public meeting

held oh November S, 1925, when information was given by the late engineer to the board (Mr F. M. Corkill) and it was decided to request a report from the Marine Department on the scheme before expending anything further or it. Though the resolution was adopted by the substantial] majority of 64 tc 16. the steps were not taken by the board The speaker and others • had taken action and the engineer of public works (Mr F. W. Furkett) had paid a visit early in 1926 to interview the board and ascertain the objections tc the scheme. He had reported to tlic Marine Department and practically advised the abandonment of the scheme; but it was only after considerable trouble that the speaker was able to have the report released' prior to the board eletcion, A ticket was. set up in opposition to the board, and in the countv the opposition polled nine to one, but in the town the residential vote more than offset the vote of the country people. As ai result only one member of the opposition was elected. PETITIONS TOi PARLIAMENT

Subsequently 160 ratepayers signed a petition against further expenditure on the harbour scheme. A counter petition was circulated and presented bv the board. When the evidence came to be taken lon thei borrowing of the additional £SOOO the notice given tQ. the ratepayers’ representatives in opposition to I the expenditure was too short to enable. them to be in ‘Wellington. The I speaker had telegraphed to the memi ber for the. district and requested him to put the evidence before the department-, but the Local Bill had gone through and t he- hoard obtained, author- . ity U> expend the. amount, despite the opposition.

The speaker had since become a member of the hoard arid could not now oppose, the scheme definitely, as he felt he was in the position of a trustee lor the ratepayers and; thought that in new of the altered position they should have the opportunity of deciding for themselves. The figures of working, costs, as furnished to the public, works engineer bv the late engineer to the. board (Mr Oorkill) had since been shown to be. over estimated. Out of the. £56,000 spent only i"2 1,00(1 had been, expended on the mole and wharf and it appeared it could be completed for the extra £‘20,000. Bv doing so a certain revenue could be expected. ; ..... . !

FURTHER INQUIRY UIUJER. lint before anything was decided he would advise that independent opinions be obtained' -from experts, such as. an independent harbour engineer and a shipping expert. It; was desirable that stroll opinions should come from qualified persons who had not been previously concerned in the matter on one side or the other. If such a report was against the completion of the scheme it would' be time to scrap it and make up their minds to use the New Plymouth' harbour as the port of the district. Until lie had further advice of the nature mentioned he was neither definitely for or against the proposal, concluded Mr Tos'land. Mr W. Lambie expressed the hope that the meeting would foe able to arrive at some definite decision awl

not prove indecisive, as had been the case at a. recent meeting at Pihiina. Til© chairman.: I will take a motion if one is proposed. Mr C. O. Edmonds said the ratepayers of the district might be divided into two classes, those who did not wish

to s-ee- further expenditure incurred hut- at; the same time desii’ed to lessei the burden in any way possible, am those who wanted the scheme complet od at any price, believing that a- cer tain amount of revenue would accrue a s an offset of the interest and sinking fund charges. MERGERI WITH NEW PLYMOUTH Referring to the attitude of the board of which the chairman (Mr T. P. Hughson) was the mouthpiece, Mr Edmonds drew attention to newspaper correspondence in which the .board chairman had signified willingness to consider anj suggestions, but had declined to entertain a proposal to merge the Opunake harbour district with New Plymouth, when that was -put to him. In t'he opinion of Mr Edmonds it was on that occasion the duty of the chairman tc

at least go into the matter with bis colleagues and set up committees to bring down a report. It might be contended that a merger with New Plymouth would be advantageous from the point of view of Opunake only r , but investigation would show that New Plymouth would have an additional £1,000,000 as an asset in the event of its requiring a loan for development work and would also take over reserves bringing in £3OO a year. The freight on slag from Amsterdam was 27s 6d a ton to Auckland and was

11 the same to ’Wellington. It could rease onably be expected that it could be 11 landed at New Plymouth at the same <- price. The rail charge from there to ° Opunake was 6s lOd and the cost of e transhipment from the larger ports to a Opunake did not appear to be a save ing proposition on that figure, said Mr a Edmonds, in discussing arguments ade duced by the board concerning suggested ed savings in freights, e 1 HARBOUR. PROPERTY SALE a After further reviewing the conteno tions of the hoard concerning ultimate 3 saving t.o the ratepayers by the com - > pletion of the -harbour scheme, Mr Ed--3 monds suggested that better results 3 with no risk at all of charges in respect 1 of a further £20,000 could be obtain--3 ed by closing down the works and dis--3 posing of the cranes, other gear, tim- . her etc. The material might be expected to realise £SOOO which, invested at 6j- per cent., would bring in £325. The substitution of a rate collector for l a harbourmaster would enable a sav- > ing of about £IOO in salary and the • hanbourmster’s residence could be let 1 at a rental of at least £4O yearly. Thus a revenue of approximately £SOO would accrue. Mr Edmonds further suggested t'hati the board should be asked to resign and contest an election with six candidates selected by the meeting, the latter being pledged to oppose further borrowing and support a scheme such as he had outlined, together with the merger with New Plymouth. “At present we are paying some £-1200 in rates, £2600 of which comes from the. county and £I6OO front the town ratepayers,” said Mr W. A. Sheat in calling attention to the hoard’s offer of a 10 per cent, reduction in rates. If, contended- Mr Sheat, the supposed 10,006 tons of cargo did not materialise the ratepayers would not get the reduction, and if the imports fell below 7500 tons there would not he sufficient revenue to meet the expenses of the proposed £20,000 loan which ratepayers were being asked to risk. CHALLENGE TO CHAIRMAN.M neb had been said about (lie indirect saving (o the, district, but the greater portion of that would, in the speaker’s opinion, be to the benefit I of people outside the district. .He publicly challenged Mr Hughson to show that a saving of £1 a ton or even 10s a ton average would accrue. The whole of the hoard’s position was based on uncertainty, as they did not know what the saving would be. Many of the traders whose imports figured in the 10,000 tons would not want their figures to he disclosed to Mr Hughson personally. He made a comparison, as published in his letters to the Press, of several of the smaller ports, which, he contended, showed that the estimate of 10,000 tons through Opunake was in excess of what could reasonably be ex- i pected. He would defy the chairman : of the hoard to compare Opunake with • any port serving a similar district and ] show that the latter carried like the volume of trade anticipated j for Opunake. lie would not mind paying his share towards the scheme if lie thought it would prove of any real benefit to the district, hut he could not see that it , would prove so or that any good purpose could he served hv ativ further inquiry into the matter. Supposing M the port was completed, it would he '' 1

- g ■ 3= ■ fa . 1, necessary to get the whole of the n trade practically from New Plymouth d down to Hawera, and back to Eltham ;- in order to secure revenue to equal the charges. Even assuming that the e port received 10,000 tons of freight, g it would make a reduction, of only 10 per cent in the rates, if no increase in costs occurred. The -costs, however, could he expeet■cd to increase. Immediately the L _ volume of trade went up—if it did so ’ —further expenditure would he incurred in liai-bour work and probable ’ addictions to the staff. If revenue was received clear of the present charges it was problematical whether it would go wholly to meeting the interest and * sinking fund. - SYSTEM OF ELECTION. 0 He considered that the present syss tem of election of the hoard was im- ° fair. On the rating values the repre- ■■ sentaives of the county district should - be four in six at least. He approved g the suggestion of Mr Edmonds for a merger with New Plymouth and sugv" gested, further, that a vigilance comj mit tee should be set up.. * Referring to the franchise system “ mentioned by Mr Sheat, Mr Tosland 5 said he had always maintained 1 that the district ratepayers would be satisfied if they could secure the ward system. He had advanced that view to the Public "Works representative, but * nothing had resulted, and it would g apparently be necessary for a deputa--3 tion to the Prime Minister before the f introduction of the ward system could 3 he hoped for. “We want to prevent any further r expenditure on the harbour scheme in the future.” said Mr G. H. Loonev in moving t-liat- a committee of six he set up by the meeting to watch the interests of the ratepayers. He would oppose the suggestion of Mr Tosland ' that further expert opinions be ob--j tained. The scheme had', in .his 3 (opinion, been a mistake from the .> start, and it was useless endeavour- .! ing to push it further. 6 Mr W. Lambie asked that- Mr ; Looney would name the men proposed . for the committee. COMMITTEE APPOINTED. Mr Edmonds suggested that the six appointed should also be requested, to contest seats on the board should the hoard resign as a result of the.present meeting. _ . Opposition to that suggestion was expressed by Mr Lambie. Mr J. S. Hickey, who seconded the motion, considered it would be inadvisable to definitely appoint candidates for the board from the meeting, a<s probably there were other suitable men who had been unable to he present. _ The motion was carried on ■ the voices without dissent. As the nominations totalled eight, it was unanimously decided to increase the committee to that number. The following were elected: Messrs J. S. Hickey. G. H. Looney, A. Good, W. A. Sheat. C. O. Edmonds, E. M. Reynolds, J. D. Conaglen and D. Smart. On the motion of Mr A. Good, seconded by Mr A. Allan, it was decided to form a ratepayers’ association, subscription being fixed at ss. A considerable proportion of the meeting immediately paid the fee. At a subsequent meeting of the committee Messrs Conaglen and Edmonds were appointed chairman and secret ary respectively.