A NEW BOROUGH?

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12195, 21 July 1925, Page 3

A NEW BOROUGH?

UPPER HUTT PETITION EVIDENCE BEFORE COMMISSION DECISION RESERVED The final stage of* the* hearing of the petition by the Upper Hutt Town Board, asking that it be constituted a borough, was reached yesterday, when the com* mission heard further arguments for and against, and reserved its decision. Mr W. G. Eiddell, S.M., is chairman of the commission, and associated with him are Messrs Thomas Brook (Commissioner. of Crown Lands) and Mr F. N. Martin (District Valuer, of the Valuation Department). % Mr.P. Levi, who appeared for the Trentham, Heretaunga, and Silverstream Ratepayers’ Association, at the. outset said he would like an opportunity to* suggest the principles which should guide the commission on coming to a determination in the, matter. The position was that a petition showing the desire of some of the people to form themselves into a borough had been initiated. “But," said Mr Levi, "I think I can safely suggest .that what this, commission has mainly to determine is whether the particular district as it is at present, and in its immediate prospects, is suitable for borough control/'; , COUNTY COUNCIL’S SCOPE Mr 'Levi pointed out that a county council’s proper operations -, dealt with farming lands and small villages. He submitted- that the area in dispute a; residential district, as opposed to a farming district, and that the commission, irrespective. of any evidence he might call,-could safety report in favour of-the borough. There could be no objection to a few small farms being included' in the proposed borough. There were gmhll dairy; farms in the city of Wellington. The main objection,, he said, eeefued to come from residents who occupied* houses adjacent to the golf links. The place was going ahead as a residential district, and it would be absurd to exclude the locality objected to. He Submittedvit would be a suitable area to -form into a ; borough. Mr Levi called evidence to substantiate statements. RACING CLUB’S POSITION On behalf of the Wellington Racing Club, Mr H. F. O’Leary said he had been .authorised to say that the racing club desired that portion of its area at Trentharn‘ be included in the new borough,. if the recommendation, was that *a borough be formed. The race club, he said, ,owned at Trentham a total area ofapproximately 340 acres, which could be divided into two portions—an area of hilly land of .approximately 102 acres, afad-a remaining area-of approximately 178; acres pf flat land on , which were the racecourse, the stands, and the various appurtenances to the race club. Counsel said he realised that the desire of the racing club to be included would «t. ohco be met with the suggestion that it was only being don© for the reason that at the present time the area was being rated on thp capital value by the Hutt. County Council, whereas the Upper Huti Town .Board rated on the unimproved value. ' Thetfe ~was no certainty whatever. said Mr that the rating method under the new boiough would be the same as under the Upper Hutt Town Hoard. . There was no certainty that it would differ from the Hutt County Council’s present 'method of rating. There were other reasons that actuated the racing club. In the first place the club hacf a contract* with the Upper Hutt Town Board for a supply of water. If a new b.orough was created it would have control of that water, and the racing club,, whether vin the area or not, would 'still,Rave to make arrangements with the • iie-w local body. The club would'prefer to be a portion of the borough it was dealing with. Again, whatever' system of rating was imposed, the racing club, if in the new area, would ; be a substantial contributor to rates of the new local body, arid it was the desire of the racing club that revenue 1 coming from it should be expended lin the locality. "I am instructed to ask that the flat portion of the racing club's area at Trentham be included in the proposed new borough/' concluded Mr O’Leary. COUNTY’S OBJECTIONS. Mr T. C. A. Hislop, who appeared for the objecting county, called evidence to show that the Silverstream roll contained 79 names. Of that number, only 31 sieved- the petition. The Heretaunga r contained 71 names. Only 15 signed thv petition. In stating the case of the Hutt County Council, the objecting body, Mr Hislop said that tho council did not take up a narrow viewpoint, but was prompted in its action by a desire to preserve its reVenue. It - realised that as time went on and population increased, the form of| government that was suitable for a county was not suitable for a more populated area. An objection was made to the petitions to give an opportunity to any of the residents under the council’s jurisdiction who did not express any active desire, and to put the whole of the matter before the commission in order that it may be fully examined. Counsel first considered the petition of the Wellington Racing Club. Was the area of .178,. acres belonging to the Wellington Racing Club suitable for municipal control J what signal characteristic of municipality was to be found in connection with ttye Trentham racecourse? There was no fixed population, no building area; the area was not roaded: and,, he submitted, it had no characteristic of a town. Accordingly, he contended in no way could it be said that it was an area suitable for municipal control. The racing. dub, he pointed out, benefited by the roads over Which one-third of the people who attended the meetings trav died. Those roads were maintained by tae Hutt County Council. ; Mr Mazengarb: What about the Highways Board? ' Mr Hislop» "The County Council pays contributions to the Highways Board/' What the Racing Club asks, ho said,

was to be taken out of the county, to pay no Tateß to the county, go into another area, and contribute nothing to the oounty's funds. That, he contended, would be establishing a dangerous precedent. "It is merely an attempt from the point of view of a commercial institution—not an improper attempt—to evade taxation,” he remarked. In regard to the other petitions Mr Hislop pointed out that if the areas wore included, in the event of a poll, residents in the Town Board area would be entitled to Vote, whereas only ratepayers in the county would be entitled to vote, with the resulff that the county would be largely outnumbered. The commission reserved its decision.