STREET LIGHTING

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22463, 6 July 1936, Page 12

STREET LIGHTING

LEVEL OF CHARGES

POWER BOARD'S DEFENCE CURRENT AT COST PRICE The case for the Auckland ElectricPower Board's street lighting charges to local bodies was summarised on Saturday by the general manager, Mr. It. H. Hartley, in reply to criticism by the One Tree Hill Borough Council, which has asked the Auckland Suburban Local Bodies' Association to take the matter tip with tho board. Most of the street lighting systems in Auckland, said Mr. Bartlev, had been installed at a time when interest rates were high, and it was probable that the cost had been relatively greater than that of earlier or later installations in other cities. The capital charge levied on each local body was calculated separately upon the actual installation cost incurred by the board on that body's bc-half. The rate of interest charged was an average of the rates payable upon loans raised by tho board in the period when the work was carried out, and tho same applied to the sinking fund payments. This method of charging had been adopted because it was practically impossible to traco the money to any particular loan. Benefit of Savings

Separate records of lamp replacements and general maintenance expenditure were kept, and each local body was charged accordingly. Current was supplied at actual cost, as shown by the board's annual balance-sheet. This figure, which last year was .9670 d a unit, represented the price paid to tho Public Works Department, plus administration costs, the board's share of the cost of maintaining the King's Wharf stand-by plant, and certain other charges. A local body was given the benefit of whatever savings were made in these various items, and it was admitted by tho One Tree Hill Borough Council that the charges made upon it had been reduced by 36 per cent in tho past three or four years. Originally all street lighting had been on a basis of a fixed annual cliargo for each lamp, according to typo and hours of burning. The board, however, had realised that this method of charging was not altogether fair, especially when additional lamps were installed in streets that were already lighted. Of its own accord it had freed tho local bodies from their contracts and had brought in a new system of charging, based on the actual cost of providing the service.

No means of Comparison

Regarding comparisons that had been made botweon tho charges in Auckland and in southern cities, Mr. Hartley said that so far as ho was aware there were not available such full statements of account as would enable a proper comparison of costs and charges to be drawn up. It had been stated recently that the electricity department of one leading southern muni-" cipality was to supply all street lighting freo of charge. Air. Hartley said tho statement by a special committee of the One Tree Hill Borough Council, that the cost a unit of power in Auckland was 10 per cent lower than in Christchurch, was news to him. He had always been under tho impression that the Public Works Department's charge to Christchurch was the lower. Even assuming that the charges were the same—and the Auckland figure was certainly not the lower of the two —the Auckland board had to find an additional 28s a kilowatt-year of maximum demand to meet the charge for maintaining the King's Wharf plant. In any case, it could not be contended that tho charge of .9679 d a unit to the local bodies was excessive for any kind of lighting.