MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18818, 5 March 1931, Page 13

MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS.

To the Editor of the “ Timaru Herald.” Sir, —I view with some disquietude the attitude taken up by a section of the Council to His Worship the Mayor. A Mayor is appointed by the ratepayers as the leader of the Council, and is held largely responsible for its policy and actions. As the people’s appointed leader the Mayor (Mr Angland) should have the respect, support and help of every member of the Council in carrying out the important work of the Borough, and the trivial but distracting opposition of some councillors has done much to hamper and clog the wheels of progress. I, with the majority of ratepayers fell that certain councillors have allowed personal animosity to cloud their vision, and have forgotten the common good. At the last meeting of the Council, five councillors left the meeting, simply because the Mayor insisted on the reading of certain correspondence. Supposing the Mayor was wrong in placing before the Council the legal position in regard to the vexed rate question in deference to the wishes of certain councillors, were they doing their duty in leaving the Council meeting, when important works were to be considered such as finding work for unemployed, etc. If sufficient councillors had not ’-emained behind, to form a quorum the business of the Council would have been held up, and many men who have now work to go to, would have suffered because of the petty difference of opinion in regard to the reading of a letter explaining a legal position of great interest. I feel proud of the Mayor for the honourable attitude he has taken up in regard to the rate question, and I believe he has the support of the larger body of ratepayers, many of whom expressed their approval by paying their rates as usual, knowing the extension was illegal. Honourable citizens uphold the law of the land, and if those in high positions in public life do not show a good example, what can be expected of the people? Is it a satisfactory excuse for breaking the law to say that the law may be altered some day? No. The fact remains that the law stands and the action is illegal. A certain class of the people do not need any encouragement to put off the payment of just debts; too much deferred payment and time payment is the ruination of many, and it is questionable if the putting off of the evil day gave any real relief for times were harder when the new date arrived.

Then there is the question of the Mayor’s honorarium. Here again we have another matter which has caused much useless discussion, and I would respectfully suggest that as the honorarium is not a salary, but a gift to the Mayor to help to cover the out-of-pocket expenses pertaining to his position, that the amount be paid in quarterly instalments, commencing at the beginning of each year of office. What is the use of giving the amount at the end of the year when the payment would be useless for the purpose for which it was intended. A clever man may become a Mayor, but he may not be a millionaire, and the honorarium is very often necessary, particularly in a country like New Zealand, where many workers aspire to leading positions. In conclusion, I would suggest to Councillors, to drop the party spirit and petty bickering, and in these difficult times put their hands to the plough and show an honest endeavour to get back to prosperous times. —I am, etc., PROGRESS. [We think we ought to point out to our correspondent that the Borough solicitor in a written opinion furnished to the Mayor, on January 11, advised: “We are of opinion that the Council may legally rescind the resolution already passed;” on the other point, the borough solicitor did not advise that the proposed etension of the date carrying the imposition of the ten per cent, penalty was illegal. As a matter of fact, the Dunedin City Council extended the date without the least fuss, and without consulting anyone.— Editor of “The Timaru Herald.”]