DALLINGTON TRAM.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17595, 27 September 1917, Page 7

DALLINGTON TRAM.

SPECIAL RATE DISCUSSED

BOARD'S POSITION CHALLENGED. A meeting of ratepayers in the Dallington special rating area ivae. held last night in the Linwood Schoolroom to consider matters connected with the special -rato levied by the Tramway Board.

Mr TV J. Jenkin; who presided over a good attqndance; said that tho Avonside Burgesses' Association had met the Pondalton and Papanui people, and finally had deputationised the Tramway Board, with tho result that the rates had been lowered twice Nevertheless ft was folfc that the district was not getting justice. Mr A. F. Wright, of Cashmere, had consented to attend the mooting to explain the effect of recent Supreme Court derisions, and it appeared that the board had been wrong in permitting the creation of a special area within the original tramway rating area.

Mr Carter said that ho had always opposed the dual loan, and would move —-''That, owing to the- injustice that this special district .receives at the hands of the Tramway Board, a committee bo set up to go into tho matter and confer with representatives from other special districts, and report what comhined action shall be taken to remove our disabilities," In the beginning, about 1906, tho new board had induced various districts, including Avonside, to vote for the tramway system on tho promise that they would receive trams, and the route then proposed was from Cook and Ross's corner along Armagh Street to Dallington and ultimately to Bunvood. Mr H. P. Herbert, in (seconding the motion, said that lie had absolutely opposed the present route, which had been engineered solely by tho Dallington people, but the board had no moral or legal right to ask the ratepayers who were' already in the original area to form ii special area; and the Special Loan Act had been 'misused, as it was never intended to apply to a district, in the original loan area* Other extensions had been made without special areas, and £195.000 of capital expenditure had already been spent iu the main area without special areas, or reference to tho ratepayers, merely for the. benefit of favoured areas. Tho hoard's balance-sheet showed that the deficiency on the Sumner and North Beach lines for sis years was over £30,000. Tho remedy for all the trouble was to merge all areas into one greats district, for" all the "lines were complementary. If a'man wanted to go to Dallington he paid threepence, but of that the district was only credited with a penny. Tho Dallington section, of sixtv-fonr chains, was the shortest in the 'city, and to the Dallington terminus one travelled forty-four chains less for threepence than ono travelled on the Warrington Street line for twopence. Mr A. F. Wright said that he did not know the conditions upon which the line was laid down, and his presence did not necessarily endorse the views expressed, but there were facts common to all areas. One would gather from tho rating of special areas that, the board was very penurious and could hardly make ends meet. The Cashmere rate, < owing to agitation, had been reduced .from £1052 to £459, but the Ifwd had declined to mak? tho concessions retrospective. Cashmere held that it- had been illegally rated for £2OOO or £3OOO. notwithstanding that the Cashmere Hills had made tho whole line-"tho most, lucrative in the city. Tho Cashmere residents had decided to tako a test caso to tho Court, of Appeal; Speaking of tramway figures Mr Wright said that the renewal fund up to the present was £121,000, of which only £16,000 bad. bef n spent on renewal.*,, while £105,000 war, invested in thovundertaking .and producing no -interest. It was-invested on lines in competition with Dallington. which might redn eo tho 'Dallington takings, although the Dallington ratepayers hud not been consulted* about tho expenditure. The board had written off preliminary expenses to tho amount of £60,000. and had invested in the undertaking at interest £172,000. Tho whole of the reserves, invested in the undertaking totalled £290.000, and the. total reserves, including writings off,, wero £358,000. These reserves, on a'capital expenditure of £709,000 in tho short period that tho tramways had been running, showed that tho system was most lucrative. Personally ho thought, that while the city was in need of sewage extension, for instance, such huge rc'scrvos might be diverted for the purpose. Tho special rating areas in Christchurch had already nir'd £'7Boo in rates, in addition to -which, thev were loaded with a debit of £5320. Ho held that the special" areas were part and parcel of tho central system, and it had been - held in the Wpdcstown case' at Wellington that unless there was n deficiency in the central-area the extensions could not ho rated. In tho Karori caso it had been hold that unless there was 'express statutory authority the board had no right whatever to rate for depreciation and renewals without first providing for interest and sinking fundj/ that was to say, that anything earned over and above oper 7 atiug expenses must go in payment of interest and sinking fund, and the board could only rate for the balance. Indirectly, however, the board had rated Cashmere and Dallington for depreciation and renewals. In conclusion Mr Wright exhibited'the copy of a Bill promoted in 1913 by the Tramway Board-providing that any special area '•'theretofore or thereafter created" could be rated not only for interest and sinking fund but for depreciation and renewal. This had been blocked. motion was carried, and a local committee was set- up. A voto of thanks -w.is accorded Mrl Wright,