FATE OF OPUNAKE WHARF

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 2 December 1933, Page 5

FATE OF OPUNAKE WHARF

BOARD’S POLICY DISCUSSED. RIGHTS OF RATEPAYERS.. OPPORTUNITY FOR PROTEST, “That if any section of ratepayers is dissatisfied with the proposed action of the board to dismantle the whari and calls a public meeting. the hoard will be only too pleased to attend and give any additional information required and to abide by the decision of that meeting” was the text of a resolution passed by the Opunake Harbour Board at its monthly meeting last evening following a discussion on the fate of the Opunake wharf. Air T. P. Hughson, whose notice, of motion at the previous meeting to rescind the resolution “to dismantle the wharf” had lapsed owing to his non-attendance, said that despite the fact that the notice of motion had been dealt with he felt that something should be done. He noticed that at the last meeting members had criticised his actions in appealing to the Town Board and the Retailers’ Association for support, but as a ratepayer interested in the harbour project he had felt it his duty to appeal to them. He also understood it had been stated at the meeting that further notice of motion would not be received, but though he doubted whether that could legally he done he would not press the point. . With a view to obtaining an expression of public opinion, which, he considered desirable in such an important matter. he would move that the hoard call a meeting of the ratepayers of the harbour district to discuss the demolition of the wharf. In the oast the board had called public meetings to consult the ratepayers on matters that w r ere not nearly o,f so much moment, and he held that it had a- right to consult the ratepayers before taking any action in such an important matter. He would reserve any further statement for such a public meeting. In seconding Air G. Prosser said he would abide definitely by the decision reached at a ratepayers’ meeting. ’MfEPAYERS' NOT DISSATISFIFr The chairman (Air J. S. Hickey) was emphatically of opinion that there was no reason to deviate from the opinions expressed at the last meeting. There was no necessity for the hoard to call a meeting on the subject as the ratepayers were perfectly satisfied with the proposed action. If not any group had a perfect right to call a meeting as had been done before, though he could not see that their proposal to salvage the wharf was any different to the hundred and one things local bodies had to* do. The board did not propose to make a wreck of the harbour, but was endeavouring to salvage what it could;, and it should be obvious to the critics that nothing else could be done. If any substantial .section of the ratepayers was dissatisfied with the proposal and wanted the wharf to fall down, or to under take further expenditure in maintaining the wharf, it could appoint someone to the hoard in his place as he would not remain for five minutes However, until the ratepayers express ed dissatisfaction he would take it that they did not want any alteration. Hi; opinion was that the ratepayers were not dissatisfied.

WOULD RESIGN AT ONCE Mr W. A. Sheet said the board already bad decided on a- course of action and to call a public meeting would look like weakening. If a. meeting were held and there was a- strong feeling in favour of retaining the wharf he was prepared to abide by the action of the ratepayers, but he would at once get off the board. Mr Sheat said the Town Board as a local body had no right to criticise the actions cf another local body elected by the ratepayers tc; deal with harbour affairs. The letter from the Retailers’ Association as representing the opinions of a group of ratepayers had been acknowledged. Hi considered the only way to obtain a true expression of opinion from the ratepayers was to take a poll, and give all an opportunity to vote, but no one would suggest going to that expense. It was obvious that the board must save what it could from the wreck. He was satisfied from his contact with the ratepayers that most of them had their minds-made up in favour of the board’s policy. Mr Hugh son 1 did not agree that Mi Sheat had accurately gauged the feelings of the ratepayers. He was certain that the ratepayers would not be willing to have the wharf, which cosi a lot”of money, demolished when it could be saved for a few pounds and might be utilised iii the near future. The ratepayers had a right to be consulted. and he certainly thought the’ should bo. He felt ,however, that the majority of the board was "against his opinion. IN HANDS OF RATEPAYERS Mr Hickey said the matter was entirely in the hands of the ratepayers who could call a public meeting, but he was satisfied that nine out of ten dm not want the wharf. He moved: ‘lhat if any section of ratepayers is dissatts tied with the proposed action of the board and calls a public meeting the board will he only too pleased to attend required.” . . and five any additional information. Mr"Sheat:' Add ‘‘and to abide by their decision.” - The chairman agreed to that addition and the motion was carried.