WAIOMO PARK.

Thames Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 17570, 8 March 1929, Page 4

WAIOMO PARK.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Before taking up this matter, I would like to ask you, Mr Editor, whether your report of the last Borough Council meeting was correct. If, as I assumed, it was correct, why are my remarks characterised as careless, Intentionally misleading, etc. Take the following, which is copied from your report of last meeting, in which the Mayor is reported to have said: “For their information, the Borough is getting 12 acres for £I2OO. That is two blocks, one of 3£ acres on the seaward side and another of 11S acres on the hill side. Of this, it is likely that three acres will be sold to freeholders, who are at present leaseholders.” Let your readers study that statement, and then judge for themselves whether my remarks were careless and misleading. It may not have been misrepresentation on the Mayor’s part, but it was good enough to “bluff” Cr Morley, judging by his remarks subsequent to the Mayor’s explanation. Why, even “Hikutaia” admitted that the HI acres on the bill are going to cost £9OO, and after asserting that my observations on the

finance of the matter are all wrong, goes on to explain just how the Waiomo Committee intends financing "' their deal. As far as I can see, he does it in exactly the same manner as outlined by me, in my previous letter, even to the sale of the three acres at present held by leaseholders* Your readers will have noticed in that part of the Mayor’s explanation quoted above, that he also referred to the selling of these three acres. If it was not actually stated that the Council could effect this sale the Mayor certainly conveyed the impression that, the Council’s liability would be reduced thereby, but, of course, if, as Cr Bryan suggests, I am not gifted with, ordinary intelligence, which means not having a legal mind, it is quite possible I gained a false impression. However, Mr Editor, the ratepayers will be grateful for the full statement of facts *as outlined in the leading article of Wednesday’s “Star.’' Would it be claiming too much to suggest that its rather belated appearance has been influenced to some extent by the “discreditable” opposition expressed in these columns? Thanking you, and apologising fcr having taken so much space.—l am, etc., “OBSERVER." Thhmes, March 6, 1929.

[f “Observer” carefully reads the leading article of Wednesday’s “Star** he will find the answers to all bis questions. The Mayor’s remarks at the meeting were taken down in shorthand.—Ed., Star.]