ST. KILDA BOROUGH COUNCIL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18509, 21 March 1922, Page 8

ST. KILDA BOROUGH COUNCIL

The regular meeting of the St. Kilda Borough Council, held last evening, was attended by the Mayor (Mr J. W. Dove), Crs Teller. Garbutt, Seddon, Stenhouse, Ross, Carolin, Mercer, Adam, Longworth, and Ritchie. Tho St. Kilda Fire Brigade wrote applying for the half-yearly grant.—Granted. A ratepayer wrote complaining that he had been charged with ICs for an outside water tap which lie did not possess. He had paid the amount, and asked for a refund.—Refused. Mr J. 11. Hutton wrote asking for a rebate of rates on his property in Kennedy street, the house having been empty since June last to February 14. Tne rates amounted to £7 15s lid.—Refused. The Otago Rugby Football Union wrote offering £8 8s for the use of Alexandra Park for football purposes during th© winter season. —Offer accepted. In connection with a case brought in the Magistrate’s Court bv the council against a ratepayer for breaking the by-law regarding a building permit, the solicitors wrote that, in view of the dismissal of the claim and to prevent anv future misunderstanding it was desirable that an addition to an existing building should be so made as to comply with the by-laws. The case had been dismissed on the ground that the evidence had satisfied the magistrate that the addition had been bona fide, and consequently came within tho exemptions covered by paragraph 210 of the by-laws. No doubt the magistrate had been influenced by the fact that a permit had been granted by the late town clerk, and this naturally disposed him to hold that the work was within the bv-law, and that tho structure was a bicycle shed, and not a. not follow that anyone who applied for a permit for a similar addition in future would receive a permit. In the solicitor’s opinion, when there was any doubt, a similar application' should be refused.—A lengthy discussion of an elaborate description, extending even to the functions of the Health Department in connection with fowl runs, followed, without any motion being moved; one member, at least, of the council meeting with more than usual clemency at the hands of the Mayor, owing to his frequent transgressions of the rules of debate. He spoke repeatedly, when he had only the right to speak once, even with a proposal before the council.—Presumably the communication from the solicitor was received. Mr H. W. Lanham wrote_ complaining that a letter received 'bv him from ’ the council was evasive. He again made a special application for a permit to do certain repairs to a building m Calder street. — Tho Mayor ruled that the application was out of order. It would be refused under bvlaw 205. —It was resolved that the solicitor’s opinion be obtained on the subject. The Mayor, referring to this matter, slated that an application had been refused by the borough inspector. The owner had subsequently applied to the council for a permit, and a motion granting the application had been ruled out of order by him as to grant it would not be complying with the by-law, as the proposed extension would be less than sft from the boundary. The question that arose was: Was his ruling in accordance with the standing orders, and in conformity with the by-law. Further, what jurisdiction had the council with regard to enforcing, modifying, or regulating anv or every application put before it. Still further, by what mode of procedure did the council exercise its authority.—lt was agreed to submit the two first questions to the solicitors for opinion.