THE DRAINAGE QUESTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13778, 17 June 1908, Page 8

THE DRAINAGE QUESTION.

DIRECT REPRESENTATION URGED.

THE ASSESSMENT CRITICISED,

j A .special meeting of the Mount Eden j Borough Council v.as held last evening j to consider the Drainage Bill which is to come before the conference of local bodies on Friday next. There were present: The Mayor (Mr. 0. Nicholson], and Messrs. Tonks. Davis, Woolley, Waraock, Ross, Potter, Hooton, Hudson, Yates, and i Hums. The Mayor, after briefly touching on the various clauses) said the main objection he had to the proposed Bill was the requirement that the borough should pay .something to a drainage board on which' they would have no direct representation. Secondly, he thought the basis of assessment was unfair to the borough, which he thought should only be called on to pay as. far as its own junction with the main sewer was concerned. He failed to see why the Council should pay the administration expenses as far as the main sewer was concerned, for they could not conned with it for some 10 or 12 years. .Most of the administration expenses would be at the door of the. city's reticulation scheme. He considered (hat the moment the Council contributed to the capital cost there should be no further cost until Mount Eden was connected with the main drain. The cost should be very small, at all events. Several members objected to discussing the Bill on such short notice, Mr. Ross expressing the opinion that the City Council was trying to force the Billion the Council, a statement the Mayor combated on the ground-that the City Council had the matter to consider just as the other boroughs had. On the question of the constitution of the proposed drainage lioard there was some discussion. Mr. Hudson thought the Mayor or chairman of each suburban, district should be added to the board. The Mayor moved: "That the contributing bodies should have direct representation." Speaking of the cost to Mount Eden he said the borough'*? contribution, including its share to the main outfall sewer,, would be £120,000, of which £40,000 would be their contribution to the city. The motion was carried unanimously. Clause 21, conferring certain powers on the drainage board, met with considerable opposition, and it was agreed that these powers should be limited. The question of the method of assessment was discussed at some length. Mi. : Hudson considered that it was " a little stiff" that the outside boroughs should have to pay a proportion;.of. .the entire' cost, and not merely that of the sewers they were immediately concerned in. Such a method might- be found more expensive than a scheme conducted by. the borough. The Mayor considered the assessment the best that could be devised. Mount Eden, under the proposed system, would be a great deal better off than Parnell, for instance. The latter borough, whichwas situated much nearer the outfall,; would have to pay its proportion up to Mount Eden's boundary. The borough's• contribution would . not be. a heavy one. The best way out of the whole difficulty, in his opinion, would be a. Greater Auckland. ' Mr. Potter said the fact remained that the ratepayers would have to pay . for it all. 'the reticulation, he thought, could; be carried out much cheaper, by the; borough. '.'■.' '•'-".'"■'. Mr, Warnock: We are not dealing with Greater Auckland to-night. " The. Mayor: It will come to that. Think of the interest for. 10 or 12 years— £2000 per year, equal to a 9d rate. With regard -to,, the administration expenses, it was agreed; on the motion of Mr. Warnock, that the Council should only contribute . while the . main outfall sewer was being constructed. : ONE-TREE FULL ROAD BOARD, The Drainage Bill, was placed on the table, for consideration at the meeting of the One-tree Hill Road Board, last evening. AVhen the question came up for discussion, the chairman, Mr. E. W. Burton, said that the Bill was considerably different from what they had expected from the past conferences. He considered it did not provide for a Greater Auckland, and that practically the city eoumiii.or3, representing about 45,000,. would control a, population of, say. 80,000. '! hi.-, was not a Greater Auckland Bill, but- was rather a Drainage Board Bill, in its worst form, inasmuch as it disfranchised about 35.000 people, and was not exactly in the form recommended by the local bodies' conference. It unfortunately had to be printed before the committee of the conference had discussed it. It- vvas desirable to refer the Bill back to the conference of the local bodies for discussion, before pronouncing finally upon it. Thai course was preferable to referring the matter to the various local bodies singly, in the first instance. The consideration of the Bill was deferred until after it had been considered by the conference of local bodies.

The Archhill Road Board held a special meeting, in committee, in regard to the Drainage Bill last evening. . At. th(! meeting of the Eden Terra e Road Board last night the- chair -man (Mr. J. H. Garrett) stated that he had reeei"-d a copy of the proposed Drainage Bill, but had not yet had time to go through it The Bill will probably lie considered at the next, meeting of the. Board.