BREEZE AT BOARD MEETING

Putaruru Press, Volume XXI, Issue 1239, 17 July 1947, Page 6

BREEZE AT BOARD MEETING

CHAIRMAN AND DEPUTY Thames Valley Drainage Affairs The customary calm in which business of the Thames Valley Drainage Board is conducted at monthly meeting's was broken last week when a sharp exchange occurred between the chairman, Mr. F. E. Hughes, and deputy-chairman, Mr. W. W. Dunn. Recording liis vote against the confirmation of the minutes, Mr. Dunn referred to a letter he had written to the chairman prior to the meeting. He objected in that letter to his vote being recorded in the minutes of a special meeting, supporting a motion which thanked the chairman and Mr. R. TV. Andrews for their work in clearing out the office following dismissal of the former clerk. Mr. Dunn had asked that his vote should be recorded against the motion, stilting that at the time it was put he had been thinking of another subject. Mr. Dunn further alleged that the chairman and Mr. Andrews undertook the work without authority of the board, contending it should have been done by the* special committee set up to deal with the emergency situation, consisting of the chairman, Mr. A. J, Luxton and liiinself.

Considered An Insult “In my long experience of local body work this is the first time I have been asked to alter the minutes before they have come before the board,” declared Mr. Hughes. Such a letter amounted to an insult, and if Mr. Dunn thought he (the chairman) would consent to alter the minutes he was mistaken. Mr. Dunn: I thought it possible the minutes were not made up. In any case, the report requested some time ago by Mr. Brown has not been given yet. Mr. Hughes: I have told the board that this position will be cleared up at the proper time, and have made a public statement to that effect. Regarding the authority under which Mr. Andrews and I cleared out the office safe, I would like to ask Mr. Dunn what difference there is between that and Mr. Dunn coming into the office to see the auditor. Mr. Dunn replied that he had gone into the office not to see the auditor but to see another member on personal business, whereupon Mr. Andrews stated that he was the member referred to, and he had been in the office at the request of the auditor, Mr. Kane. “ I do not think it is generally known that, but for Mr. Andrews, unravelling the board’s affairs might have taken a great deal longer,” said Mr. Hughes. “ Mr. Andrews wrote to the auditor before I did.” Mr. Dunn said ratepayers wanted to know what the emergency commit--tee had been doing, and Mr. A. AVratt said the committee'had had power to co-opt other members. Mr. Dunn com plained that the committee had never been called together beyond doing a few things “ which any school, boy could have done.”

Chairman Within Rights “ As chairman of the board I have certain rights,” declared Mr. Hughes, “ and I was quite within them in taking the action I did. The safe was in a terrible mess, and ft was at the suggestion of the auditor that it was cleaned out.” Mr. Dunn then said he had gone to tlie chairman in the previous November with information that the clerk had been appropriating board property, and asked why no action had been taken then and why lie had been bound to secrecy. The .statement was made by Mr. Dunn that he and Mr. Andrews had gone to Hamilton to see the auditor, but had been unable to meet him. Following that they had gone to a solicitor’s office, and after a letter had been drafted Mr. Andrews bad sighed it and sent it to the auditor.

Should Follow Business Mr. Luxton: The motion to which Mr. Dunn is objecting was passed without dissent. If a member is following the business as h. should be be should vote ats ins- toiion if he is not In favour :sS > “ I have no regi st* - ty thing I have done,"’ sail Mr Aiirhes. “All my actions have teen in the best interest.!! of the hoard inis affair has riv&n me a. gtst ( deal of work and has been to joke. No action of mine that has ctc-nf any harm, apart from hinting Mi. tlunn’s feelings, nor any (joint oe. wh cb the board’s interests have been damaged.” Mr. Dunn brought forward the matter of the bank authority which had been made out following the former clerk’s dismissal. According to the form in which it was made, only tlie

chairman and tlie acting-treasurer. Miss D. Crompton, had authority to sign cheques. Thsi- i\us a brief discussion, in tlie course ol which Mr. Hughes said he had beer under the impression that the authority implied the same condition' as previously, that any member

of the board and tlie treasurer could sign cheques. After perusing a copy of the authority Mr. Hughes agreed that apparently an error had been made and undertook to rectify it. The whole discussion then lapsed, with Air. Dunn recording liis vote against confirmation of the minutes.