THE BRIGHTON DOMAIN.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20704, 30 April 1929, Page 5

THE BRIGHTON DOMAIN.

QUESTION OF MAINTENANCE.

LOCAL BODIES DECLINE TO CONTRIBUTE.

An interesting position lias arisen in regard to the maintenance of the Brighton Domain, one of the most popular picnic grounds in the vicinity of Diftiedin. The Brighton Domain Board, which lias the control of the area, estimates the expenditure for the present year at £378, and, taking advantage of legislation which came into force on April I last, it has apportioned the amount, excepting £25, which it expects to receive in revenue, on a population basis among five local bodies, the people from whose districts make use of the domain. The amounts which the bodies have been asked to contribute are as follow:—Dunedin City Council, £430 11s 8d; St. Kilda Borough Council, £52 13s 8d; Green Island Borough Council, £l4 fis 2d; Mosgiel Borough Council, £l2 14s 4d; Taieri County Council. £39 14s 2d.

The legislation under which the Domain Board has apportioned the cost is incorporated in the Public Reserves, Domains, and National Parks Act. 1928, which states:—“ In any case where a domain board, having control of a public domain, is of the opinion that portion of the cost of the management, improvement, and maintenance of that domain should, by reason of the fact that the domain is generally used by the inhabitants of the districts of more than one local authority, be borne by the several local authorities of those districts, may serve on the Minister of Lands and on each of the focal authorities a notice setting forth . . . the portion of the animal cost which, in the opinion of the board, should be home by the local authorities concerned.'’ The Act provides that objections must be lodged within two months, and that if necessary a commission may be set up to consider the matter. Each of the Igpnl bodies concerned in the present instance has decided to object to payment, and it seems certain that the outcome will be the setting up of a commission by the Government. In conversation with a Daily Times reporter yesterday the secretary of the Domain Board (Mr A. J. Allen) referred to comment which had been made on the matter by local bodies, and stated that the board had had nothing whatever to do with the passing of the legislation. The first the board knew of the likelihood of the Act being passed was when it received a copy after the first reading from the member for Chalmers on August 13 last. In February th e chairman and the secretary of the board waited on the Minister of Lands in Dunedin and asked him whether the Act was coming into force. The Minister replied that the board would receive a copy of the Act and would have to work according to it. Referring to remarks made at the meeting of the Taieri County Council on Friday last the secretary stated that he could not understand the reason of the chairman of the council in asking Mr MTntosh, the council’s representative on the board, why he did not acquaint the council with the fact that an attempt was being made to have the legislation passed. Cr MTntosh knew no more about the Act that did the other members of the board, and, while it came as a surprise to the members, they all agreed that the public, which was obtaining the benefit from the use of the domain, should, under the Act, be charged for its pleasure through the local bodies. Cr MTutosh was reported to have said that the chairman and secretary had attended to the matter. As a matter of fact neither knew anything about the matter until'the board had received the copy of the Act from the member for the district. The minute book of the board, which was open to inspection by any responsible person conCbTtvcd, clearly showed that the Govern* ment had never been asked for legislation, but it had been pressed for subsidies. During the past seven years the board had received £IOO from the Government, but from the Taieri County Council, which was the local governing body, the board bad received only £5 during the same period, notwithstanding the improvements which had been made and the increased amounts it had received through the. increase in the erection of buildings. During the past seven years the board had spent £SOO on improvements, and from that expenditure the public had received the benefit. It was not fair that, a few people at Brighton should be asked to finxLthe money to provide pleasure for the public as, a whole;. Tlie. Ward -.had by-laws which gave it the, right to charge for the use of the domain, which included the beach, for picnics and th G Parking of cars. The public seemed to do its utmost to evade this charge. Members of picnic parties, after leaving the buses, went into the domain singly, and motorists parked their cars outside the gates, and then went into the domain and made use of the conveniences, including water, fireplaces, and bathing sheds, without payment. The 'Brighton Domain Board was not as fortunate as the Ocean Beach Domain Board, which had a rating area. Mr Allen said he understood that the late Minister of Lands (Mr A. D. M‘Le6d) had offered the Brighton Domain to the City Council through Mr H. L. Tapley, who was then Mayor, but the council had turned down the proposition.