SMALL POINT AT ISSUE

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 18 June 1935, Page 6

SMALL POINT AT ISSUE

Price Per Acre in Purchase of Aerodrome HAWEBA CLUB’S OBJECTION REPLY BY DR. W. F. BUIST

Interviewed by the “Hawera Star” to-day on the subject of the Hawera Borough Council’s decision to assist in the purchase of a new aerodrome, Dr. \V. F. Buist, president of the Hawera Aero Club, stated that, while the terms and conditions provided more than adequate protection for the borough, the club objected to the proviso that the purchase piece of the property should not exceed £7U per acre. The club could not agree to that condition on the ground that the price to be paid for the land was no concern ot the council.

A request had been made to tjie sub-committee not to fix a limit as the club considered it impossible, and had exhausted itself in the endeavour to secure a reduction of the original price asked as a basis of negotiations, it was feared that after the very careful investigation and consideration by the respective sub-committees of the club and tlie council, and their joint deliberations, that tlie whole scheme would break down merely on one relatively small point *at issue—that of price pci acre. Dr Buist said that naturally he was disappointed that the council had decided to maintain the conditions under which its subsidy would be granted and, in particular, as regards the fixing of a definite price limit of £io per acre at which the property could be purchased. “As I intimated to the sub-commit-tee of the council yesterday, there is no hope of acquiring the land! at that figure,” he said, “especially as the present price which the club has under consideration, and it is certainly above £7O, is a reduction from the original. I also stated to the sub-committee that the club was quite definite in its opinion that the limit of £9OOO, \\ Inch tlie council insisted as the maximum of encumbrances, was quite sufficient protection for the council and it was immaterial what exact price the chib paid for the property. The club still maintains, in contradistinction to the expressions of opinion by the council, that it is buying a property for an aerodrome and not as a farm, although farming operations for the first few years will naturally be the club’s main sources of revenue.” Dr Buist maintained that the chib reasonably should expect to pay a little more than farming values for the land in the circumstances, because of its situation and suitability for the special purposes for which it was reuirecl If the emb thought it competent to* pay a little more, that matter was not the concern of the council. “The chief argument besides the question of nrice at yesterday’s meeting,” the speaker continued, “hedged about what was considered to be reasonable protection both for the club and for the council in tlie event of the club not being able to function the aerodrome for one reason or another. Ample protection was given in Clause 4 and Clause 5 to the council in the event of tho club having to dispose of the property, so much so that the club agreed that the council should receive back the whole of the monies put in up to the date of the arrangement ceasing to operate, whereas in the original draft agreement considered by tho joint committees on June 8 last, any distribution would be oil a pro rata basis according to the amounts then standing to the credit of each. “The chief argument then resolved itself into a discussion of Clause 6 in which the council asked the club to agree that, in the event of the chili going into liquidation, the council would have the right to purchase the property at a price equal to the amount of the mortgages then affecting the i same, whereas in Clause 3 it was considered advisable to introduce a proviso encouraging the club to establish a sinking fund or a fund for the redemption of mortgages on the land,” said Dr. Buist. “The club considered that the rights reserved by the council in Clause 6 would negative any such encouragement and, furthermore, that the council was being unduly harsh on the club lor it was provided that in the event of the club being unable for any reason to carry on, the council would have the right to purchase the property at the nrqount of the mortgages which by this time might have been materially reduced and thereby profit from the undertaking regardless of all the funds that the club might have put into the scheme.” This eventually was overcome by the club agreeing to the amended form of the clause whereby the council would have the right to purchase at Government valuation. One or two other matters were discussed which eventually were cleared up, but the club considered that, in the main, it was giving the council very good protection * for what was nothing more or less than an annual subsidy.

“Having met the, council so far in the agreement,” said Dr. Huist, “the club considered that the matter of the actual price to be paid per lucre should be left in its hands, especially as the difference between the council ancl the club could only amount at the most to a few hundred pounds. It is doubtful, from the club’s point of view, whether the granting of the subsidy at last night’s meeting under this agreement can be taken advantage of simply because of the difference of opinion on the question of price per acre.” A report of the Hawera Borough Council’s discussion regarding the airport appears on page 7.