BOUNDARY ROADS

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXXII, 21 October 1916, Page 4

BOUNDARY ROADS

BOROUGH AND COUNTY COUNCILS IN CUNFEiiENCM.

Menioers of th e Hawera County an<l IJorou'rji Councils met- in conference cm", lnursday evening to consider the question of boundary roads. There were present:—Borough Council: The flavor (Mr Dixon) in the chair, Crs. Goodwin, JiiM-reil, Keid, Bone, Hayton, Momss-v and Harding. County Council: Crs. j\ B. "Miirdocii (county chairman). Linn Winks, and Hawken. The Mayor expressed his pleasure at the opportunity, of meeting members of the Hawera County Council in conference, and assured them tha4 it was. the desire of all members of the Borough Council to work amicably with the County Council in regard to the boundary roads. The Council, learning that the suggestions niarje in their memo of lusust "96th did t meet

j.~ g,ui> _ } I no -.^ with the County Councils approval, went further into the matter, and now submitted the following as the basis for an agreement:— Memorandum, Hawera Borough Council and Hawera County Council, re Boundary Roads: Terras'of arrangement between the two bodies. 1. Roads- to remain under the control of the Borough Council The County Council to contribute half the cost of maintenance, repairs, improvement and re-constri(ction. -- Footpaths,, kea-bing and channeli. ;;.; to remain under the control of t!:e J.-orough Council. The County Coitrii to contribute to cost of mairit. Mil uee, repairs, improvement and rv~ t .instruction at the following rates: —(a) on the borough side of the roads the Cb-.mty Council to pay one-third said cost, (b) On the county side of the roads the County Council to pay twothirds said cost. " (c) To the above cost add 10 per cent, for engineering, office, book-keeping, etc. 3. The Borough. Council to submit to the County Council estimates of expenditure upon any piece of work the amount whereof exceeds £300. 4. If the two bodies fail to agree as to any expenditure referred to in the preceding clause, or if either body desires to terminate these arrangements, then, and in any of such cases, either body may serve notice upon the other body of its intention to terminate those arrangements, and either of the bodies may apply to the Governor to set up a Connmssion to decide all questions. Pending the decision of the Governor, or of the Commissioner, the arrangements set out in these presents shn'l ■ continue, except; that any work, the estimate whereof exceeds £300, shall not ii c §one on with save with the consent of the County Council. 5. These arrangements are not tq affect any outstanding claims by body, and are without prejudice to the i-'-ints of both bodies in respect to 6iich claims. I 6. Proper documents to be .executed ■ carrying tnese arrangements into effect.

[ Mr Murdoch thanked the Mayor for expressing the opinion that the Borough. Council desired to work amicably with j the County Council. The County. I Council was also of that opinion; the : town and country were practically one,. j and they desired to work together if' possible. The Mayor had mentioned that the Borough Council was emphatic on one point, and that was that "there* could not be dual control so far as their engineers were concerned. The County Council suggested a committee of the . Borough Council and County Council | with full power to decide on what works should be done on the boundary roads, should be created, and that such committee should, have power to commit their respective Councils. He could not "see why such a■"committee should not ! be satisfactory, as it. was in other parts. !of the Dominion, and under those conj ditions he could not see why dual conj trol should not be workable. Nine- ! tenths of the work done on the boundary roads —excepting big works, would be under £300,-so that under the suggested agreement practically all thework would be done .entii ;ly under borough supervision, and the county would he in an unfair position. The "Council had not yet received any reason "Jroni the Borough Council why their sug- ; gestion was not acceptable. • Th© Mayor said that-their objection to the suggestion was the fear that it would not be practicable for the two engineers to hav.e dual control. Mr Murdoch pointed out that the committee would decid© on what works should be done, and the committee would confer with their engineers. It \vas very improbable that the engineer^ * would come into conflict, because the committee would generally agree that one engineer should carry out any particular work. Cr. Harding remarked that the borough engineer, in' the ordinary courseof his duties, would report to the Council as to any work h e might think necessary to be done on the boundaryroads, and the Council would then refer that report on to the special committee. If the county engineer had any report or suggestions to make, he would do so to his Council, who, likewise, would re- / fer it to the special committee, so that; / either or both reports or suggestions y I would he impartially considered hy th^ committee. "' ' Considerable informal discussion toolc place on the practicability of dual control on the part.of the "respective'engineers. The Borough Council held this to be impracticable and unworkable, and whilst, agreeable to a dual .. committee, stipulated for one engineer, and that engineer should be the borough engineer. The County CounciV could not accept this: they desired theright, on behalf of the special committee, to consult their own. engineer, and" as it was not possible to come to an agreement on this point, which. Mr Mn-ydoch said, was vital to the whole position, no agreement was come to, and the clauses in the memo submitted?' by the borough were not considered. The. tiwo Coxincils will further discuss the position with a view" to arriving at some satisfactory solution.