OTAKI BOROUGH.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 20 September 1928, Page 7

OTAKI BOROUGH.

im CONCEIVED SCHEMES. ’’ THE COMMISSION'S FINDING. No. I. The full text of the report of the recent Otaki Borough Commission is now available, and, apart from the general questions involved regarding ' rating on /farm lands in Boroughs, it ideals with - Otaki's special problems very critically. Summed up the Com'mission's recommendations are as follows: '■■■■. (1) That the sewerage 1 * and water schemes were far In excess of requirements. (2) That all lands excluded since 4921 -be re-included subject to classification and differential rat- ’ ifcg. 5 (3)-tThat the Borough Council's differ |to agccqpt r a cash payment df -26 {per cent (£861) from the Government to wipe out outstand‘{liigihiatiTipß rates {,(£3444) be adoptv«d. ‘ (4) That all native hand not occupied by the owners be . vested iii “the ; Ikaroa Maori Land Board. (5) That the Board of Health require the Borough Council to complete the sewerage scheme and if they negiect the Board to do so ; (6) That the Borough be classified into < three ' classes and rated according to the benefits received. In view of the general interest in the enquiry the text of the report will fce.,.published in the Chronicle -in sections ,7daily until complete. The first pairt deals with the water and 'sewer-. ■ age schemes, and the excluded lands 'and isfas follows: •‘The 'Commissioners held eight public sittings in Otaki and two in Welling-j ’6on, aiid : took evidence^at considerable length; They also at various times -visited the * vicinity of the whole of the -area now or formerly comprising the Borough of Otaki, and obtained ex'tensive evidence and information from aumerous Government Departments in the '.City ■ Of Wellington. The Commissioners further carefully perused all available reports - in ■ connection with the Borough of Otaki, and particularly .those having reference to the inclusion and exclusion of lands in and from the Otald, Borough. Enclosed herewith (schedule A) are fall notes of the evidence (with apr pendiees and exhibits) and of addresses taken by the . Commissioners at; the public sittings of the Commission. In* the years 1907 (vide New (Zealand Gazette, 1907, p. 1195) and 1910 (vide New Zealand Gazette, 1910, p. 42 ‘ ; were lodged praying for the • constitution of a ' borough ■ at Otaki, ' Neither petition was acceded to. FORMATION OF BOROUGH. In the year 1912 an area comprising the Town of Otaki and some adjoining ■ land .(vide Exhibit 1, and New Zealand ;GaZette :1912, p. 2731) was constituted a town- district, and it became a town -district apart from the County of Horowhenua in 1914 (vide New Zealand {Gazette, 1914, p. 1149). On 4th March, 1919, the ratepayers of the Otald Town District adopted, by 132 votes -to 44, the system of rating on the unimproved',, value (vide New Zealand Gazette, 1919, p. 840). In’the year, 1920, on a further petition to constitute a borough (vide New •Zealand Gazette, 1920, p. 2396), a Commission was appointed which recommended the formation of a borough comprising the then Otaki Town District and portion of the adjoining '■County of Horowhenua. Certain objections were received and considered by the Commission, but there does not ’Appear to have been any eonsidrable active opposition to the proposal from persons whose lands were recommended <to-he included in the borough area. On 12th January, 1921, a poll was taken «n the proposal to constitute a borough • - the. area: fixed by the CoramissiMon. . ; The. vaHdi votes ’ cast were 291 for the proposal and 117 against it. The Borough Of Otaki was constituted OH Ist March, 1921 (vide Exhibit 1, and New Zealand Gazette, 1921, p. 568). , It will be clear from a perusal of ’ the evidence that in the very year the borough was constituted, the Borough Council embarked by way of special loans upon costly and ill-conceived : schemes for waterworks and 'sewerage, far in excess of the borough's requirements. The special-rating ■ area for each of these loans is (he whole borI ough as originally ■ constituted, and’ the special rates have -been made aiic( levied on all lands within the borough in proportion to their values. LOANS BOARD TOO LATE. The apparent ease with Which large sums of money were borrowed by tne Borough Council for schemes which were not -fully, investigated, by it demonstrates the- necessity for the exercise in such cases of the powers which were later conferred by the Local Government Loans Board Act, 1926, oh the Lbeal Government Loans Board. The water-supply was obtained from f.he upper reaches of the Waitohu Stream, and can readily be availed of by every part of the borough. While this water is of great utility in the business and residential areas of the ■ borough, and especially in the seaside areas during the summer months, it is of comparatively little use to many of the occupiers of farm lands, particularly those which have been excluded from the borough. PATHETIC SEWERAGE POSITION. The great, and to some extent useless, cost and the presept pathetic position, of the. sewerage scheme will be snore fully considered in Connection with the Board of Health requisition preferred to in paragraph (6) of Your Excellency's commission. • Bu^s■* to state that the schdme was designed to serve only a, limited por- ' tion of the borough—mainly the central portion,- and it was never intended to bring the sewerage west of the . business; sections terminating, roughly, ■3rt ;ibe rear of the post office. It is .therefore clear that a special- • rating .'area should have been set up, 4nc&ding-,only such properties as could ! {jbe served by, the-works for which the ioiin/w&e. raised. - ‘lt. wpulcl appear also that, by the creation of a special, area* comprising I IT-'- „ ■ ■ ’

the -whole borough, .ratepayers outside Ihe arOa to ' be' served' are'deniel a •right of objecfcio;n to iaclusioa in the speclal-ratlig axOa, their -only remedy being to vote against the whole proposal—a remedy which;is not an,effective one. Your Commissioners recommend that the foregoing remarks and the position of these special loans of the Borough of Otaki should be brought to the notice Of the Local. Government Loans Board constituted under the Local Government. Loans Board Act,. 1926, for that Board's consideration. If the sewerage scheme is to be completed, the'moneys to be raised’ should be a charge only .-upon the -lands Within the area to be served. PETITIONS FOR EXCLUSION; {In 1 July, 1925, two petitions were lodged praying for the exclusion of certain freehold and leasehold lands from the Borough and their inclusion in the County of-Horowhenua. The Borough .Council lodged objection ■to proposed exclusions,, and Commissions of . Inquiry were appointed to report on the matter. The Oominissiohs, by a joint report of -15th December, 1925, above referred-to, recommended, the exclusion of an area of 223 acres and 8 perches, being, portions of sections 1, 2 and 3, Waitohu Survey District, which area was, prior to the formation of the borough, in the Horowhenua County, and did not form part of ihe town district. Effect was given to the recommendations by Order in Council dated 2nd August, 1926 (vide New .{Zealand Gazette, 1926, p. 2405, and Exhibit 1)In the year 1926 two further petitions were presented praying for exclusion, principally of the lands’ the subject of the two' petitions, referred to in the foregoing paragraph, and the Commissions appointed to report ’on these further petitions recommended, by * - their ‘ report dated Ist December, 4926, the further exclusion of certain of these lands, whereby the remaining lands in the borough would be divided into two portions-—namely, the arfea largely business and residential, from the, post office eastward, and the beach residential area along the sea coast; Tasman Read, forming a link between such two portions, to remain vested in the borough. Ciders in Coun eil dated 22nd March, 1927, giving effect to 1 these recommendations as from Ist April, 1927, Were duly gazetted (vide New Zealand Gazette, 1927, p. 940, and Exhibit 1). ' Doubtless the persons the exclusion of whose lands from the borough was effected in manner aforesaid anticipated relief in the amount of rates to be paid by them. They did not, however, receive it to the extent anticipate<\, for the Borough. Council, in purported exercise of section 23 of the Local Bodies' Loans Act, 1926, increased the special rates levied on the excluded properties as securities for loans; The alleged necessity for the increase was the failure of certain owners or occupiers in the; borough, notably Natives, to pay their rates. There appears to have'been no legal impediment to the' action of the Borough Council in increasing these rales —at all events, until an adjustment of assets and liabilities was made pursuant to section 145 of the (Municipal •Corportions Act*, 1920, and the regulations under that Act /New Zealand Gazette, 1921, p. 2243). There seems to be no legal provision compelling the local authorities to make an adjustment, or, indeed, for Your Excellency to do so, except upon the written application of any of the local •authorities directly affected, and your Commissioners therefore respectfully suggest the amendment; of < he regulations by omitting from tf.ragraph, 53 thereof the words ‘‘upon the writ-ten:-'application' of any of 'he local authorities directly affectd by such constitution or alteration," and adding, after the words "the Governor-General may," the words "if lie thinks lit." In the month of July, 1927, a petition was received from E, H. Letts and R. B. Anderson, and in the month of August, 1927, a fuxdher petition from certain adjoining owners—F. Kilmister, I. Kilmister, C. O. Tiplef, I. L. Tipler, and F. G. Letts—in each case praying for exclusion of their lands from the borough. Notices respecting these alterations were duly gazetted (vide New Zealand Gazette, 1927, p. 2837), and formal*objections to the exclusions prayed for were received from the Otaki Borough Council and from the Horowhenua County Council. In the month of September, 1927, the Otaki Borough Council, through its solicitors, Messrs Harper, Atmorc and Thomson, foiwarded a petition, pursuant to section 133 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920, praying for the reinclusion in the borough of all the' lands previously excluded therefrom. 1 EXCLUDED LANDS SHOULD BE RE-INCLUDED. Your Commissioners, after very full consideration of the evidence, and the reports of all previous Commissions in I reference to the question, of what lands should or should not be included in the borough, .are of the opinion that, having regard to the statutory test of suitability for municipal control (which is, in the opinion of your Commissioners, the proper test), and subject to the recommendations hereinafter contained in reference to adjustment of the incidence of rating and classification, the area defined and described in the schedule to the Order in Council of Ist March, 1921 (New Zealand Gazette, 192 i, p. 568, and vide Exhibit 1) should be the area of the borough, and accordingly that any land excluded from the borough since its constitution in 1921 should be reincluded therein. ~ Your Commissioners make this recommendation for the following reasons; — (a) It seems to the Commissioners that the railway.-on the east, the Riverbank Road and the old course of the Otaki River on the south, the highwater mark of the sea on the west, and the Waitohu Stream, the Okl Coach road and the boundary (unaltered since the constitution- of the borough) between the Old Coach Road and the railway on the north are the confines of the area best suited for the control as a municipality • of what is now, and it would seem must for at any rate some years to come remain, with the exception of a small and fairly compact business area, a sparse'iy inhabited borOugh. (b) The Cojamissieners'are unable to

recommend that the division of the borough into two sectors linked together by borough roads carrying omnibus service, light, and water (vide Exhibit 1) is 'in‘ nature of things productive of convenience or equity in municipal control. (c) In the opinion of the Commissioners, the principal feature of the statutory requirement is not the nature Of the use ! made of the land in ques-' tion, but whether such land can or cannot be more conveniently and equitably controlled by a borough by reason of its situation and the services which are or can be afforded the. occupiers by a borough. The whole of the area referred to in paragraph (a) above derives its services from the borough, and must continue so to do so long as the borough exists, notwithstanding that part of such area may be excluded from the borough and included in the County. (d) The principal cause of the desire for exclusion was and is the inordinate burden placed, after the eonstitur. tion of the borough, on farm lands for rates in respect of special loans for water, of which the farming section of the community receives little benefit, end sewerage, in respect of which that section does not now receive any benefit and in the future is unlikely to receive any direct return or benefit. A further cause is the fear of increasingly excessive borough rates in the future. THE SEAL TEST. (e) It will be seen from the notes of 'evidence taken (Exhibit A, pp. 40, 51) that requests from further owners than those above referred to for exclusion of lands’ from the borough were made to the Commission. These persons have not- petitioned in the manner provided by section 132 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920. Your Commissioners consider that t|iese requests, as well as the two petitions received in July and August, 1927, and now under consideration, indicate a, growing desire and endeavour on the part of landowners or occupiers in Otaki to bo out of the borough and the heavy rating on the borough areas. As the Commissioners have indicated, they consider exclusion on these grounds basically wrong, the statutory and proper test .being whether the lands are suitable for control by a and not whether the owners should be permitted, on the ground of ' hardship, to leave the borough and thereby escape a certain amount of the heavy rating which is the direct result of the borough's past extravagance. The result of such a course being permitted would be to increase the difficulties of the borough, as its area, its ratepayers, and its source of revenue are from time to time decreased. RATING MUST BE ADJUSTED. While your Commissioners consider that local government as a borough is the form of local government best suited to the requirements of the whole of the briginal borough, area, they are also of opinion that careful and conservative control of the borough's finances is necessary for some years to eoihe. Moreover, although your Commissioners are of opinion that the area ,of. the original borough, which is the security for all its loans, should be preserved, they recognise’ the undoubted hardship which has been caused to certain classes of owners in the borough arising out of expenditure on tho borough's sewerage and waterworks. Mr. Luckie, on behalf of the leaseholders, freeholders, and petitioners for exclusion abovementioned, repeatedly stressed this hardship, and Mr. Atmore, for the Borough Council, very properly admitted its .patent existence. It is not disputed that had the cost of the sew-; erage works been placed upon the special rating area to be benefited thereby, and had the payment for water been assessed more in proportion to the service rendered, the ratepayers referred to would have escaped considrable rating in respect of interest and sinking fund on these important loans. In that event also the demand for exclusion would probably not have arisen. . It follows, therefore, that if some form of adjustment of the incidence of rating can be made, the broad effect of which will be to seeucr an adequate measure of relief to the owners of farm lands now or formerly in the borough, justice will be done to those persons without application of tho undesirable remedy of exclusion from the borough.