LOAN CONVERSION

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18585, 20 December 1934, Page 3

LOAN CONVERSION

CONSOLIDATION OPPOSED NEW -SCHEME ADOPTED COOK COUNTY LOANS A new scheme of loan conversion was adopted by the Cook County Council yesterday afternoon. The m-w scheme effects a total saving of £703 10s 4<l on t-he existing position, but calls for the payment ot £247 a year more than the previous scheme, file plan, however, does not include consolidation, which was- opposed by certain members of the council because they considered that their ridings would not he as fairly treated as others. A statement from the Local Government Loans Board showed that the present annual charges of atl loans it is proposed to convert, amounted to £10.332 18s, and the corresponding total on conversion would he '.£9629 Is Bd, or a total annual, saving of £703 16s 4d. Prior to March 51, 1933. the total of charges''on those loans was £12,350 10s. Notice had been given by Cr. •). Toinhleson to move that the previous resolution adopting a scheme be rescinded. This motion had been held over from previous meetings pending Unarrival of an alternative scheme from the Loans Board.

The chairman. Cr. Charles Matthews, explained that on the previous occasion some members were opposed to consolidation. The new proposals provided for conversion without consolidation. Cr. Toinhleson said that the new scheme satisfied him. Tlie county clerk. Mr. F. T. Robinson, said that the secretary of the Loans Board 1 had promised details of another scheme for this meeting, together with explanatory notes. However, the explanatory notes had not yet come to hand. On the scheme, now put forward, the council would be losing £247 a year, compared with the previous proposals adopted by the council.

Cr. M. T. B. Hall : But the interest payments will be no greater.

The county clerk: That is so, but the sinking fund payments are greater. The chairman : This also provides for the Harbor Board payments. The chairman did not think the Spence and Mossman’s bridges loan would benefit, for to pay off the loan in the time provided would take too much annually to clear off the loan in nine years. Cr. Toinhleson said that under the original -proposals seven ridings would he helping to pay debts of the other four. The council carried Cr. Tombleson’s motion to rescind the previous resoliition, and it- was decided also to adopt the new scheme, with the exception of the conversion loan for Spence and Mossman’s bridges. The proposals put forward by the Loans Board were :

No. 1 conversion loan.—Special loan of £153,000, plus main highway bridges loan of £6000; premiums due, £72j>3 14s 9d; less cash payments, say £233 14s 9d; total, £165,000; redemption principle, term .32 years; annual contribution of £1560 to the sinking fund. No. 2 conversion loan.—Pakarae riding loan of £7700. less £2OO as sinking fund accumulated; total. £7500; annual,, redemption, term 20 years'; annual contribution of £6O to the sinking fund. No. 3 conversion loan. —HangarqnTahora (Steele’s) No. 4 loan, £5000; premium, £2Bl 18s; less cash payment of premium, £Bl 18s; total. £5200; annual redemption term, 32 years; annual contribution of £6O to the sinking fund. No. 4 conversion loan.— Kaiti drainage loan. £4000; less accumulated sinking fund at June 1. 1935, £1167; total, £2833; instalment principle, term Sji years; half-yearly instalments of £92 10s lOd.

No. 5 conversion loan.—Spence and Mossman’s bridges loan, £1400; premium of £35 18s 9d due on this loan payable in rash from sinking fund ; flat loan system, term nine years, with annual contribution to sinking fund of £125.

No. 6 conversion loan.—HangnrqnTiniroto. part, loan of £500: flat Joan, term 21 years; annual contribution to sinking fund of £6.