PUKAHU REQUESTS

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 146, 5 June 1936, Page 8

PUKAHU REQUESTS

Request for Reduction in Rates

MR. TALBOT’S CASE

"Ratepayers of Ward 4 are in no way endeavouring to avoid any financial responsibilities,” said Mr R. E. Talbot, Pukahu representative on the Hawke's Bay Rivers Board, when asking for a 40 per cent, reduction in rates for Ward 4, amounting to about £720, at yesterday’s session of the Government Committee of Inquiry into Hawke’s Bay Rivers Board matters. Apart from the question of percentage of rates, No. 4 ward endorsed all the submissions made by the Rivers Board.

The full text o( Mr Talbot’s evidence to support his request was as fol lows:—

‘‘The only point which ward 4 could possibly be threatened with flood water irorn the Ngaruroro river is at Roy's Hill. The major protective works weie carried out by the the Pukahu River Board subsequent to the floods of 1893 and 1897 and prior to the Pukahu board being amalgamated with the Hawke’s Bay Central Rivers Beard about the year 19W“The finance for this protective work was provided by the ratepayers of ward 4, no financial assistance being subscribed by any other parts of the rivers district. Since the Pukahu Ri’ er Board was amalgamated with the central board, the latter body has never been called upon t - provide any other protective work at Roy’s Hill, with the exception of carrying out certain fas'ining woik above tn - Fernhill bridge to prevent erosion taking place but this was more to protect the river red below the leinbil] bridge from shingle deposit being carrier from the point of erosion. CAPACITY AT ROY’S HILL. “It has been an established lact,” Mr 'l'uluOt SUlu, "Unit .I.l’ ...-.1,) yeuvS past the bed of the river and banks at Roy’s Hill have been capable of taking all flood waters, and none of the recent floods have caused any anxiety regarding safety at this point. In the Hood of February 2 last Mr TV. GintbIclt, a well-known farmer adjacent to Roy’s Hill, stated that when the flood was at its height and flooding had occurred at I’akowhai the water had not reached the toe of the bank at Roy’s Hill. “The tact that the present scheme adopted by the board does not extend beyond the Fernhill bridge, amply demonstrates the correctness of our above submissions A great portion of th e land in ward 4 is composed ol heavy alluvial flats and the lact that it is accepted as being tree ironi flood increases its actual valuation, and consequently higher value over and above that of land situated in other wards where flooding for many years has been quite well recognised places the ratepayers in ward 4 in the position of carrying an additional burden. This would not otherwise he the case. “To support our submissions outlined herein the total expenditure on the river above the Fernhill bridge during the last 10 years was £2518, or an average of £254 16/- n year, the total expenditure from the whole ward being £350 per annum for the same period inclsuive of the £25-1 16/- a year mentioned above. SURPLUS OF REVENUE. “The total revenue derived from ward 4 during the same period was £l9OO a year, representing approximately £19,000 over the 10-year period, o ran excess of revenue over expenditure ot £15,500 for the period under revuo. “Surely no stronger case can be put forward than the position disclosed by the above figures in support of a substantial reduction in our present rate It is clearly evident that had the I’uka hu River Board not entered into a voluntary amalgamation with the Central Hawke’s Bay Rivers Board we would at the present time be many thousands of pounds in credit and so be able to reduce the rates in our ward to an exceedingly low figure, if not totally discontinuing the levy of any rate lor some years to come. “We therefore submit that under the circumstances it is not expecting too much to ask for a reduction of 40 per cent, of our present rate. “This would amount to a reduction of approximately £7‘2U and would still leave the Pukahu ratepayers to carry a burden substantially in excess ol actual protective work ever likely to be required. ALLOCATION TO OTHER WARDS. “We submit that this may be evenly allocated among the other lour wards an addition of £lBO each, or the position ot the boroughs ami town board may be considered “Hastings borough ratepayers num ber 2830, with a capital value of £3,547,255, as against the Pukahu figures of 999 and £1,328,335. The direct benefits of protection from flooding are at least as great to the ratepayers ol Hastings as to those ot Pukahu, and the indirect benefits to the borough must be vastly greatet, as the prosperity of the borough is directly dependent upon the welfare of its surrounding tanning population. These submissions apply with equal force to Napier borough and Taiadalo Town Board.

“We strongly support the Rivers Board submission regarding rating upon capital values.”