COUNCIL FINANCE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21471, 20 April 1933, Page 11

COUNCIL FINANCE

RESULTS CRITICISED MAYORALTY CANDIDATE ADDRESS BY MR. MULVIHILL Criticism of tho administration of the Mount Eden Borough Council was voiced by Mr. J. J. Mulvihill, a member of the council and a candidate for the Mayoralty of tho Borough, at a meeting held in St. Barnabas' Hall last evening. Mr. Mulvihill, who is tho official mayoral candidate of the Mount Eden Ratepayers'.Association, was supported on tho platform by the candidates selected by the association to contest seats 011 the council. Mr. W. J. Hammill presided. In criticising the Mayor, Mr. T. McNab, and members of the council who had supported the proposal to amalgamate tho borough with tho city, Mr. Mulvihill said that by rejecting tho proposal at tho poll tho ratepayers had had a fortunate escape.

Reviewing the financial operations of tho council for the past year, he said the estimates, with the actual figures in parentheses, wero as follows, tho under-estimates in tho case of receipts and the over-estimates in tho case of expenditure also being shown: —Receipts: Petrol tax, £2200 (£2877), under-estimate, £077; heavy traffic, £IBOO (£2450), £650; 10 per cent penalty on rates, £350 (£627), £277. Expenditure: Legal and general, £950 (£477), over-estimate, £473; interest payments, £4400 (£2807), £1593. Under the item of "budgetary margin" was shown tho figure of £40,694, as tho opening balance, compared with a closing balance of £30,605, a difference of £4089.

These figures showed, said Mr. Mulvihill, that the council had extracted from the ratepayers £7759 too much. This was equivalent to a 5Jd rate. Disregarding tho jjd, it would be seen that last year they were rated too highly by sd. The position created was equivalent to establishing a reserve fund, and this had been done at the cost of the ratepayers at a time when, like tho present, all that they would expect of a local body would bo that it should not slip back.

Tho estimates made by himself and those associated with him in the council, and moved as amendments, "were as follows, the actual figures again being shown in parentheses:—Receipts: Petrol tax, £2700 (£2877); heavy traffic, £2IOO (£2450); 10 per cent penalty on rates, £7OO (£627). Expenditure: Legal and general, £BOO (£477); interest payments, £3500 (£2807)'.

Regarding the rates to bo struck, were he and his supporters elected to office, he said it would not be fair to commit" the council in advance. "We will promise you the full benefits of interest relief, amounting to 4d," he added, "and relief from the mandatory 5d of last year."

Mr. Mulvihill said his policy regarding water supply would bo to investigate local sources. Regarding relief work, he wished to deny a rumour that he would discharge all men other than married men on drainage v^ork. A vote was passed without dissent expressing confidence in Mr. Mulvihill as prospective Mayor and pledging the meeting to do all in its power to return the Ratepayers' Association "ticket" at the forthcoming election.