H.B. River Problem

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 145, 4 June 1936, Page 6

H.B. River Problem

RATING & WARDS Views of Pakowhai Settlers Presented DIVISION OF DISTRICT Division of the Hawke’s Bay rivers district into three rating areas, one for each river, rates collected in any area to be for works in that area, was advocated by Mr T. Mnirhead Crawford before the Government Committee of Inquiry in Napier. The chairman, Mr A, J. Baker, pointed out that the uni versally 'accepted view was that the various phases of the rivers problem are inseparabale, upon which Mr Muirhead Crawford offered an alternative proposal to treat the whole district as one, but he insisted upon the rating being on unimproved values. Mr Muirhead Crawford was present at the inquiry as a representative of the settlers of Pakowhai and of the Hawke’s Bay Fruitgrowers’ Association, which had, he said, from 300 to •100 members. “It can be laid down as fundamental that for utilitarian purposes, liability for rates should be proportionate to the services received,” he said. “Any other method of assessing liability is inequitable, and it is possible to apply this principle to. Rivers Board rating. PUBPOSE OF CONTROL, “The primary and only purpose ct river control is to prevent the land from being inundated, that it may be put to such uses as it is economically fit for. It follows that in a large district such as this, the land will bo used for various purposes and varying de grees of improvelnent will take place.' ’ By its constitution, he continued, the Bivers Board was bound to provide schemes of river control over the whole district. The same principle held good whether it be improvements for a farm holding or the much higher proportion ate improvements in a borough or such concerns as freezing works. Where land was in small holdings and

in residential areas or boroughs, the unimproved value increased and those lands would accordingly pay higher proportionate rates than large holdings used for general farm purposes. That seemed to him to be quite fair, but to rate on improvements over and above that was manifestly unfair. “When once a scheme of protection is being carried out, all manner of de velopments and improvements may take place,” Mr Muirhead Crawford continued, “but the Rivers Board is under no increased liability to find further protection, and therefore has no moral right to increase rutos because of that improvement or development.” SYSTEM OF BATING. Fruitgrowers and owners' of glasshouses were particularly concerned over the rating system. They had small properties with a high ratio of im provements running into perhaps four or five times the unimproved value. Well grown fruit trees, piped spraying systems and packing sheds were of considerable value, and if those were to be rated as they would be under capital values rating, a very high and unjust rate was put on fruitgrowers. Mr Muirhead Crawford also referred to the question of allocation of rates between wards in the rivers district. The present basis was not a good one, ho maintained, us it was at best au approximation of reasonable liability tor rates and also did not take into account the difference in benefits receiv'd by diffrent parts of the same ward.

“The only fair basis is to allocate rates according to the benefits received, and this can only be done by a classification of the lands affected,” be added “This can reasonably be done, and 1 would suggest that the whole rivers dis trict be divided into three rating areas, one for each river, and that the rates collected in any area be for that works in that area. Further, that all land:; within each area be classified accord ing to the benefits they receive. FOUR PROPOSED CLASSES. “This would mean putting lands into one of four classes, according to whether they received most benefit, less benefit, only slight benefit, or no benefit, from the river control works, ami then to be rated on a percentage basis according to what class they were in.” That was quite a practical propositin Mr Muirhead Crawford maintained, ami was at present carried out with lands under the Swamp Drainage Act. As an alternative, however, he sug gested classifications of lands with the whole district as one rating area; oi ns yet another alternative, that rating be over the whole district on the basi, of unimproved values. “At the poll taken in 1932 on the rating question, the unimproved rating was curried by a majority of 417. 11) taking into consideration only those votes cast at the booths in wards 2, and 4 of the Rivers Board’s district, (he majority would have been appro.v mutely Guo lor unimproved value rat ing,” he concluded. “Tn addition to this, tho Tarhdale town district, which Is iu ward 2, did not poll on this occasion, but previously in 1920 carried Un improved values by more than a two Irone majority. This shows clearly that the ratepayers in the Rivers Board dis trict are definitely in favour of unim proved rating.” REALLY ONE SCHEME. Cross-examined by Mr. 11. 11. Holderness, counsel lor the Hastings Borough Council, Mr Mnirhead Crawford said that he agreed that Hastings did not want to reduce its contribution of rates. “The universally accepted procedure in respect of dealing with tho rivers in this district bus been that tho two aro inseparable; the protection works

involved on tho Tutaekuri aro equally involved ui tho work on the Ngarurori»,” said the chairman. Air. A. J. Baker “No body ol engineers, or any individual engineer has ever taken tile view that they should be separated.

“It is a fact that the Tutaekuri work has been carried out iu advance of the Ngaruroro work, but the two are really one scheme. There is no reasonable possibility of dealing with them m the manner suggested. ” Mr Muirhead Crawford: Then 1 offer the alternative of dealing with the district as a whole.

Mr W. G Jarvis (Taradale Town Board): Did the 1911 scheme definitely turn the whole ot the flood waters on to tho northern district, and was that why the scheme was never adopted?

Mr. Muirhead CraMord: Yes. It gave an overflow on tho northern side, and I'm aware that u spillway was provided near “The Pines” to cope with surface water.