Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CITY MARKETS

LEASES EXTENDED PRESENT RENT SUSTAINED / INTERESTS OF RATEPAYERS OPPOSITION BY LABOUR •The much-discussed question whether the leases/of the City Markets should do extended for a considerable term of rears was /settled by the City Council last evening, when the proposed extension to 1965 was adopted by 14 votes to 8, the minority consisting of the official Labour section. A tender was received from Turners cud Growers, Limited, for the lease of Block A of the city market building, the annual rental offered being £3I4S Is 3d, the present rental. This was the only tender. Turners and Growers advised that/its tender was made on behalf of the several lessees of Block A. It was the intention of each of the present lessees to take new leases from the council of the separate areas at present leased by them.

No tenders were received for the lease of Block B, known as the petrol station site.,

The town clerk, Mr. J. S. Brigham, reported that tho tender of Turners and Growers, Limited, was in order for acceptance by the council. By agreement between the present tenderers and the council the present lessees undertook to tender at least the present rental, which they had done. This rental would continue to April 2. 1939. Tho rental for tho following 10 years was to bo fixed by arbitration and by tho same means for tho next 16 years, the lease expiring on June 28, 1965. Rents and Capital Charges "With respect to Block B, for which s no tender had been received, the conditions of leasing provided that the present lessees were to tender only for Block A, and if their tender were accepted, they undertook to take a lease of Block B from the end pf the prosent term (June 9, 1948) to June 2S, 1965, if called upon by tho council, at a rental to be fixed by arbitration. This would have the effect of making the expiring date of both blocks contemporaneous.

The Mayor, Mr. G. W. Hutchison, r.oved the adoption of the recommeniation of the Finance Committee. Mr. W. T. Anderton moved as an amendment that the matter bo deferred for two years, but this was ruled out as being a direct negative, as was a further amendment by Mr. Anderton that it bo referred back to the committee. j In opposing the motion Mr. Anderton said he believed this lease was against the interests of the citizens of Auckland. He said the terms were such that others were not able to tender. This rental was not sufficient to pay interest and sinking fund on tho building, and if the motion were carried the council would be making a gift of about £250 a year to this firm for 33 years. The object of the market should be to bring the producer and consumer close together, but if they accepted the tender they would vote to help a monopoly. He suggested they should let the lease expire and create an open municipal market to meet the needs of the producers and consumers. Monopoly Denied

Mr. E: J. Phelan said he had consistently opposed any alteration to this lease, and he thought it was unreasonable to ti<? up the market for 33 years. He thought it unreasonable to fix the leases so far ahead and the tenants should be compelled to carry on at the present terms until the expiry of the original lease. He contended the council had no legal right to vary the lease as was proposed. Mr. G. Grey Campbell said the proposal was a business-like one and the interest/ of the ratepayers were being safeguarded. On the question of a inonopoly, it was n fact that the present tenants of the market building had strong opposition from another source and -t was-open to the council to establish municipal markets or for any firm to go into the business. The arrangement was heing made to ensure that the council would not receive a lower rental tind all knew that rental values were not what they were ten years ago. The citizens were being protected in even' way as to what might he the future value of these premises. Mr. J. A. Mason said ho knew of no precedent for rearranging a lease six years before its expiry. The lessees had never/ been in da nger of being ejected at the end of the term. Purpose of the Markets

Mr. D. Donaldson considered the term the lease, arid its conditions. Mere, fair and reasonable to all concerned and to the benefit of the ratepayers. Mr. A. J. Entriean said attempts to Pet. up a public market in Auckland had failed. The present markets had been built to house the auctioneering firms who had occupied the old market near the Town Hall and to divert produce traffic, to the waterfront. The present site was not suitable for a public market. Mr. J. . Yarnall objected to intcVference with the lease and suggested the.matter might be left for a couple of years to see whether better terms could be obtained. Mr. A J Rosser advocated delay in the hone of bettor times. Mr. T. Bloodv forth, in supporting Lhe motion, said the tenants of tho old markets had agreed to move because a 30 years' lease had been promised them. It was found la tor that so long a term could not legally be granted, and they had to be content with 21 vears. Mr. E. F. And rews opposed the motion. A Moral Obligation The Mn yor said none of the objections raised were new. He would strongly recommend the adoption of the committee's report for several reasons. When the present leases were signed an undertaking had been given to the lessees that there would be no difficulty over renewal, and the council, therefore, had a strong moral obligation to them. To reject the present proposal would be to reverse a recommendation of the previous council, which had made an agreement with the lessees. Mr. Hutchison assured the ratcpavers that the renewal would be in their very ''est interests. The removal of the present tenants at the end of the term would cause the value of the premises to depreciate so much that it would be impossible to get anything like the present rental. The arbitration provi*'ons assured t.licit the ratepayers would have the benefit of any future appreciation of rentai values in Auckland. On a division, tho committee's recommendation was adonted by 14 votes to eight/' The nv'-ority consisted of Messrs. Mnson, Yarnall, Bailey. Rosser, Andrews', Sayegh, Anderton and Phelan.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19330602.2.142

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21507, 2 June 1933, Page 11

Word Count
1,100

CITY MARKETS New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21507, 2 June 1933, Page 11

CITY MARKETS New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21507, 2 June 1933, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert