OTOROHANGA AND POWER.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1415, 13 October 1923, Page 5

OTOROHANGA AND POWER.

COUNTY COUNCIL FAVOURS TK AWAMUTU SCHEME. RESULT OF INVESTIGATION. RATEPAYERS URGED TO PETITION POWER BOARD. A special meeting of the Otorohanga County Council was held yesterday for fhc purpose of receiving the report of its delegates on the recent proceedings of the hydro-electric committee, all the members being present. Before tJhe business was proceeded with the representative of the Waipa Post inquired whether the presence of the press representatives was in accordance with the wish of the meeting. He asked this question as so far all the proceedings in connection with the question had taken place in camera, the press not being admitted. The chairman (Cr Potts) said !he hoped the press representatives would remain, and Cr Lurman moved to that effect. —The motion was carried. Town Board Deputation. A letter was read from Mr Phillips asking that a deputation from the Otorohanga Town Board he received, in order that the Board might put its case in favour of the Waitomo scheme before the meeting. The chairman said he thought that such a deputation was unnecessary. As a matter of fact, he was of opinion that after the delegates’ report had been received it should be referred back to the committee as a whole. To this Crs Young and Teasdale agreed, the latter stating that it would be a slur on their delegates to receive deputations before the reports had been received, Cr Lurman objected, and said he thought it advisable to hear the Town Board delegation. Tt seemed to him that they wished to keep out information that might be of use to them. The chairman: I’m going to put it to the meeting. Cr Lurman: I think that this meeting should never have been called, and I protest against its having been called, as it was waste of ratepayers’ money.

Cr Potts said as far as waste of money was concerned, he was out of pocket himself in cash (to say nothing of his time) in connection with the electric power committee. Cr Manson said it appeared that Cr Lurman wished to shove one report down their throats and ignore the other. Cr Lurman: It was agreed by the committee that the report of the majority would be accepted. Cr Young said he had tried to remain neutral, but still if the county, as a whole, agreed on a certain thing, he would of course support it. Cr Lurman said he thought it looked as if they were trying to hide something. Cr Potts: I have nothing to hide. The matter of receiving the proposed deputation is in the hands of the meeting. Cr Lurman said he thought the Council was being directed by an outsider. Members expressed surprise at such a suggestion, and disclaimed any idea as to who Cr Lurman referred to. Cr Hill explained as a delegate that, seeing that the sub-committee of five had disagreed, and when they of the minority heard that the majority was going to report, they of the minority decided to report also; and that meeting was, he understood, called to consider the same report. As regarded the proposed deputation, Cr Young said he thought no harm would be done by receiving the deputation, and he moved lyCr Teasdale seconded, and the motion was carried. Town and Country Interests. The clerk was then asked to read the report published by a portion of the sub-committee in favour of the Waitomo scheme. The meeting then adjourned for lunch, and upon resuming the Town Board deputation, consisting of Messrs F. Phillips, E. Closey, and R. Bell, waited on the Council.

Cr Phillips explained that as a majority of the inquiry committee had | declared in favour of the Waitomo ! scheme they thought that the time was j ripe to ask the Otorohanga County Council to fall in with the scheme. If the town and county ratepayers were united they could get the power from Te Kuiti, but if they did not agree then the Town Board people would be able to get a supply from Te Kuiti for their own town. They asked the co-operation of the Council to get the end aimed at. He hoped they would have the Council’s support. Mr Closev endorsed w!hat Mi' Phillips had said. Their object should he to assure enthusiasm among the ratepayers, and to obtain this it was for the Council to be enthusiastic itself. They must have definite support to win their way. Cr Young objected to Mr Phillips saying that three of the inquiry committee were opposed to any scheme whatever. Mr Phillips said that the three referred to were Messrs Hill, Rogers, and Sanson. This Cr Sanson contradicted, as did Mr Hill. The latter said that at first lie had slated - he did not think the time ripe for any scheme, but he had cnanged his mind, and was in favour of the Te Awamutu scheme, from which they would be able to get power at short notice. Cr Young thought it was difficult for the Council to show enthusiasm as suggested by Mr Closev. seeing that the electric power committee had-not shown concrete enthusiasm themselves. The deputation then retired. The clerk read the report" of the county delegates, as presented by Cr Sanson. The report is as; follows: We, being members of the Otorohanga hydro-electric committee, hereby su'rmit the following report and recommendation, viz.: 1. That the Te Awamutu scheme offers a complete and satisfactory service. almos f imme- & diatelv available, to every ratepayer in Otorohanga town and such portion of the Otorohanga county as may be

sufficiently developed for reticulation. 2. That the remaining portion of the Otorohanga county not inc’uded in the first scheme can be served in successive small areas if necessary as soon as warranted by increased population and development; no rating liability will be incurred meanwhile. 3. That the present development and revenue of the Te Awamutu power district, and also the rapid increase both in number of consumers and demand for current, are entirely satisfactory, and that further great increases may be confidently expected. (Note. —The reticulation of the inner area is complete. and no further borrowing is anticipated; the connected load has increased recently from 981 k.w. to 1174 k.w., and applications are coming in rapidly; also, the revenue increased from £9263 for the year ending March, 1923, to an estimated £13,000 for the present year.) 4. That the Waitomo representatives failed to submit any evidence to support the statement that the first cost was excessive or that work was faulty and inferior. 5. That a rate, if required, will he negligible and for a short period only. 6. That the cost of additional current to Te Awamutu Board would be £8 per k.v.a., with no minimum load, as against £lO for the first 200 k.v.a.. with 250 minimum, at the new point of supply at Te Kuiti. (Note. —A saving of at least £4OO per annum, as compared to the Waitomo scheme; equivalent to interest on additional loan of about £7000.) 7. That cost of administration, etc., would be comparatively low, being shared proportionately; propably 15 per cent of total cost of Power Board. 8, That all answers to questions submitted to the Te Awamutu Power Board were quite satisfactory. 9. That the whole of the loan money, except £2500, share of transmission line, would be spent in Otorohanga district, and coultr not be diverted elsewhere. 10. That representation on the Te Awamutu Power Board would be satisfactory because the majority of the present members represent areas similar in every way to Otorohanga town and district. 11. That it is essential to keep Otorohanga county intact; if-the county were divided be- : tween two power boards complications , would result and the development of; the district would be impeded. 12. j That association with a well-developed i and highly-productive district like Te Awamutu is a safe and desirable pro- [ position. Waitomo Scheme: 1. That the Wai- ; tomo scheme will be slow in coming, j and does not provide for a supply of : current to the greater part of Otoro- ; hanga district, although it is included * in the rating area. 2. That the sub- ! sequent supply of current could only ; be secured by (a) floating a special loan over the whole original area, in- j eluding Te Kuiti (which is impossi- j ble) or (1)) floating a special loan over ' the smaller area to be served, thereby making it liabe for an additional rate (two rates). 3. That liability for rates with no current available would be unjust to the ratepayers affected, and, ; further, would prevent the influx of j new settlers and seriously delay the development of the district. (Note.-- ; The parts of the district affected include the following roads and reticulation: Waitomo and Haurau Roads. 41 miles. Pirongia Road. 4 miles; Kio Kio (two roads). 5 miles; Mangaorongo and districts, 14 miles; Whawharua, Road, 4 miles; Tahaia Road. 35 miles; Otewa and district. 31 miles; total, 42 | miles; all included in Waitomo pro-; posed rating area and liable for rates.) ! 4. That expert evidence showed con- ; clusively (a) that the estimates of i cost of lines and other works (£40,000) , submitted by the Waitomo provisional , power board are absurdly insufficient for requirements; (ID that the direct i current supply system at Te Kuiti 1 would require to be converted to alternating current to suit the Government supply, at heavy cost to the Power Board; (c) that the statement ; that the Te Kuiti stand-by plant would ! effect a saving of £IBOO per annum or j any appreciable part of it is not cor- i rect, and contrary to the regulations . of the Public Works Department; (d) ; that the stand-by plant would require ; to be altered to suit alternate current, j and in any case would be quite useless to any part of the district except the borough of Te Kuiti in case of a breakdown. 5. That cost of current with new point of supply would be much greater than with Te Awamutu. 6. That proportional share of administration ,etc., would be compaiatively high 50 per cent share total cost of Power Board. 7. That the borough of Te Kuiti is now fully developed, and comparatively little increased meand for current or increase to revenue can be anticipated. (Note.—Even with its higher charges for both light and power, on a capitalisation of only £16,000 the Te Kuiti scheme shows a profit of approximately £IOOO only. If the charges were made uniform with those of other boards, and the capitalisation increased to the necessary £60,000 or over, together with very much increased administration costs, the extra annual expenditure would be very much greater than any revenue in sight.) 8. That no evidence was submitted to support the claim that various day power users would connect with the scheme. 9. That the. estimated revenue for the Waitomo power district is greatly exaggerated. 10. That the contention that the Waitomo scheme could be carried out without recourse to rating is unsupported by evidence and quite contrary to fact. 11. That any advantage that Te Kuiti borough scheme might claim as against a district scheme would entirely disappear immediately the borough scheme became merged with a district scheme. 12. That Te Kuiti would dominate the Waitomo Power Board, and loan money could be diverted for Te Kuiti’s benefit if required. 13. That the Waitomo scheme can be carried only by using a Te Kuiti majority to out-vote Otorohanga objectors, and' that this would be injurious to the relationship between Otorohanga town and country. Recommendation.—That this committee recommends that, taking into consideration the uncertainty existing in regard to obtaining continuous supplies of coal and oil, it is expedient that an electric supply be now obtained and that the necessary steps be taken immediately to approach the Te Awamutu Electric Power Board with the intention to reticulate and supply cur-, rent to Otorohanga town and to any

part of Otorohanga county which can show sufficient development and prospect and in which the ratepayers are desirous of joining with the supply. Engineers’ Reports Criticised. Cr Lurman: All I can say is the report is not worth the paper it is written on. (No response.) Cr Teasdale, as a member of the Te Awamutu Power Board, then read the following criticism on the engineers’ reports referred to and published by the supporters of the Te Kuiti scheme: “ The report is a very unfair one, as these engineers are comparing a township of some years’ use of electricity, where they get, on their own showing, 48 consumers to the mile, as against a newly-formed concern like Te Awamutu Power Board of 2.8 consumers to the mile in March last, and which is only just ‘ cutting its teeth,’ and has, after two years’ supply, grown from zero to an estimated revenue this year of £13,000. Again, they take our revenue for last year on a growing consumers’ list as opposed to an established concern, where the consumers have been users for the whole year. Did they join up 981 k.w. in the first two years? No. 'How many years has it taken them to join up the load they have, that is, 590 k.w.? The unit loss is high in Te Awamutu in its present initial stages on account of the number of country transformers in use, but this loss will be greatly reduced as consumers come on and the transformers get more fully loaded. They cannot justly compare their figurds against ours as the two cases are not parallel. When they extend to the country they will have to go in for country reticulation like ourselves, and then their line losses and also their interest and sinking fund on capital cost will throw a very different complexion on things, and come out more like our figures, and perhaps worse. However, it does not suit them to let the public nito their knowledge. If they can put up their construction at present-day prices at£499 per mile, which includes cost of buildings, sub-stations, and operating plant, they will then have something to be proud of. We deal with our towns and country as one concern, but if we had, say, Te Awamutu, isolated, it would give as good, if not a better, record than Te Kuiti, taking into account the age of its scheme j against theirs; in fact, I don’t think j it would be necessary to consider ages as we would show very favourably | now. They give our connected load as ; 9SI k.w., but forget to add how fast j we are growing. Our load is now 1174 I k.w., and this is only general in- | crease, and does not include the dried j milk factory of 100 k.w. Again, we had 49 milking motors on in August j last year, and this has now increased j to 220, with about 20 more waiting, j and new applications coming in every j few days. The above says nothing of house-lighting applications waiting j all over this area. Can they show | their load increasing at such a rate? j The figures shown by them regarding revenue require explanation to the effect that they have omitted from our receipts the sum of £2llß for rates collected. With the addition of that j amount and sundries our total revenue was £9263, as against the figure thpy show of £2145. By including rates in our revenue we had a credit on the year of £l3B, instead of a debit of £I9SO. I consider the total should have been shown, as the charges for some office expenses, some of the sal- ; aries, printing, stationery, and- aid- j vertising in connection with collecting j the rate are included in the total an- I nual charges of £9125, all of which ! they have put against sales of current. \ As regards the load factor, which they admit to be good, and better than that of Te Kuiti. they excuse Te Kuiti a snot being fairly stated on account of non-development of night load, but they do not credit us with only partial development of all loads, so how much better will we be when we get even half our possible load on and the concern has a couple more years, of existence! I notice under the heading of light, heat, and power that they giev our rates as Bd, 3d, and 3d respectively. f suppose it suits them ! to make our charges appear as high as they can, but these figures need correction —and here it is: Hose light- j ing. Sd per unit, commercial lighting, J 7d per unit; beating, 3d, 2d, and lJd; i power. 3d, 2d, and lid; cow plants, £6 per horse-power and 3d, 2d, and lad. The last two, as you know, are 3d for the first 80 units, 2d for the next 120. and lid for all over 200. In conclusion, f might state that if laymen are to be gulled into thinking that a board with a country area (and su'ch a sparsely-settled area as that between Otorohanga and Te Kuiti, which would have to be connected) can give the same rosy percentages of gains and losses as Te Kuiti (a' compact area) then their day of reckoning is surely coming.” Discussion by Councillors. Cr Lurman said he was sorry the minority report bad been put in as it was full of untruths and mis-state-ments. He had several times argued the matter out with Mr Murphy, and he had come to the conclusion that he was a great juggler. Cr Young thought there had been a lot of side-tracking, and referred to certain statements in Mr Vickerman’s report as being incomplete and in some cases misleading. Delegates’ Report, Adopted. After further discussion the following motion by Cr Hill was submitted: “ That the report presented by the majority of the county delegates in favour of the Te Awamutu scheme be adopted.” . .. , . Cr Young seconded, saying that he though neutral! felt constrained to support the wishes of the majority of | the Council. , . . . i Cr Potts said that the people m his ! riding, whether they were in the inner j area or not, were all in favour of the ! Te Awamutu scheme, i Cr Lurman said he had done bis I duty in the matter, and cared for no ! man. .. , ! Cr Hill: Yes. I quite agree with that remark. The motion was carried, Cr Lurman entering an emphatic protest. ! Recommendation to Ratepayers. I Cr Hill moved further that it be a ! recommendation to the ratepayers to 1 immediately take the necessary steps

to petition the Te Awamutu Electric Power Board to reticulate such portions of the county of Otorohanga as may be desirous of obtaining power. This was seconded by Cr Sanson and carried, all voting in favour with the exception of Cr Lurman, who entered a second emphatic protest.