MEMORIAL PARK LEASE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 16 October 1929, Page 6

MEMORIAL PARK LEASE.

PRELIMINABY NEGOTIATIONS.

TBUSTEES SYMPATHETIC.

Last night a special meeting of the Trustees of the Masterton Trust Lands Trust was held, Mr W. 11. Jackson picsiding. The meeting was for the purpose o± opening the preliminary negotiations in connection with the lease of the 'Cameron Memorial Park to the Wairarapa Rugby Union. A round-table conference ensued between the Trustees and delegates from the Bugby Union, who were invited to attend and state theii

case. Trustees present were: Messrs K. Krahagen, J. M. Coradine, T. F. Watson, D. Caselberg, T. Wagg, G. Selby, S. L. P. Free and J. L. Hughes. The Trust’s solicitor (Mr McKenzie Douglas) was also present. The Bugby Union delegation was headed by Mr G. W. Lamb and the secretary, Mr E. McKenzie.

Prior to the Bugby Union delegates being admitted to the conference, Mr Coradine explained the history of the park as far as it affected the Trust. He stated that the Trustees had guaranteed a liability to the extent of £ISOO, and that £4OO had been paid off, leaving £llOO still to be paid. Mr Coradine made it clear to the Trustees that any revenue derived from the park had to "go back again as improvements and in assisting sports bodies generally.

The Trust got nothing out or it, ami m. considered that the Trust should be relieved of the £llOO liability, and reimbursed for the £4OO already paid, before being called on to iia,y anything under any new arrangement that might be made. Mr Douglas, the Trust’s solicitor, outlined the details connected with guaranteeing of the debentures and the various conditions vested in the Trust. He suggested that the Memorial Park Board might be kept in existence, and the Memorial Park leased to them by the Trust Lands Trust at a peppercorn rental. The Board, in turn, could lease it to the Bugby Union at a substantial rental which would enable the Loai d to retrieve the debentures.

After one or two points in regard to the Trust’s powers and liabilities were elucidated by Mr Douglas, the Bugby Union delegates wore admitted. Mr Sellar asked that the proceedings might be taken in committee, but MiLamb did not think that necessary, as they had nothing to hide.

Mr Lamb, speaking on behalf of the Bugby Union, said that tlio delegates did not come with any clear-cut proposals, but wero there with the idea of having a round-table conference on the matter. The Memorial Park, ho said, was the right place for football, as it lent itself for the accommodation of large crowds. The idea the Bugby Union had was that it bo given a lease for 21 years, with the right of re-

newal for a further 21 years at a rental to be fixed and agreeable to the Bugby Union. Mr Lamb went on to say that it was the intention of the Union to spend quite a largo sum in improvements at the Park, including stand accommodation, terracing and conveniences for both sexes. Mr Free: “What steps would you take to protect other sports bodies?” Mr Lamb, in reply, stated that they

had a fellow feeling towards all other forms of sport, and that tho gates would never be locked to any sports body with the exception of professional League football. Mr Sellar said tho Union was prepared to give every protection to tho Cricket Association, and would let it have the ground free. Mr Selby: “Would it be possible for

hockey and Association to be played while the ground was also being used for Bugby?” Mr Lamb: “No, that would not be possible, as we want all tho grounds wc can get.” He could not see how a suitable arrangement could be come to regarding these games, as it would not be possible for n satisfactory arrangement to be come to regarding the gate.

Mr Caselberg said lie would like to hear what terms the Bugby Union had to offer. Mr Sellar stated that they were prepared to pay a nominal rent, pay interest on the debentures, rates and insurance, and do repairs and renewals to buildings. He said that they could not bo bound down regarding the amount to be spent on improvements, but these would be done from year to year as

funds permitted. Mr Krahagen asked if the Rugby Union Avould be prepared to guarantee a specific percentage of the takings on improvements. Mr Sellar replied that this could not be answered right away. Mr W. H. Jackson asked w'hat the Union’s attitude would be to shouldering the Trust’s antecedent liability. Mr Lamb stated that there was no use beating about the bush, and said that there was no hope in the world of that being paid by the Union. Mr Coradine considered that the Trust should be relieved of the finance, and that, the present Park Board should still carry on under the supervision of the Trust. He did not know whether the Rugby Union would look with favour on a part-time lease, say, for the football season, and terms with other sports bodies made without the Rugby Union interfering. Mr Coradine maintained that if a lease w-ere granted the rent should be fixed at £3OO per year, that being their total liability. Mr E. McKenzie said that it would bo impossible for the Rugby Union to pay £3OO a year, as they could not always be guaranteed such a good season as was experienced this year. He stated that a period of years would have to be taken, and an average struck before a fair rental could be fixed. He reiterated Mr Lamb’s remarks regarding the accommodation, improvements, and the protection of other sports. Mr Free personally thought that the Rugby Union should receive every assistance and support at the hands of the

Trustees, but it had to be remembered that the Trust Lands Trust held the park under certain conditions. Mr Free, reading from the deed, said, inter alia, that the land was held for the purpose of a sports ground for the benefit of the residents of Masterton and the Small Farm Area. Ho stated that it had occurred to him that it was doubtful whether the Trust Lands Trust had the right to hand over the ground to a single sports body, and leave it to them to say when other sports bodies should have the use of the ground. Personally, lie would give every encouragement to the Bugby Union, but it had to be considered what devolved on the Trust in the matter. The Union, in effect, asked for the exclusive use of the grouud for forty years, and it was a question whether the Trust would be discharging its duty by doing that. The Trust Lands Trust had taken on a grave responsibility in the property, wisely or unwisely, and it was questionable whether the Bugbv Union should be the governing body over the ground. It was a question which he thought could be settled by tho legal advisers of the Trust Lands Trust and the Bugby Union. Mr Watson said that he could appreciate Mr Free’s point of view, and at the same time that of the Bugby Union. “What did the Bugby Union mean by a nominal rental 1” asked Mr Watson. Mr Sellar: “£3 a year.” Mr Watson: “Arc vou joking?” Mr Sellar: “No.”

Mr Watson, however, thought that the position in connection with tho park might be improved by a lease to tho Bugby Union, and ho did not think there would be difficulty in drawing it up. He said that he, personally, would like to sec the Bugby Union have it so long as other sports bodies were properly protected. Mr Caselberg thought it was only a question of rental, and that the Trust would bo in a better position if the Bugby Union were given the lease. Mr Krahagen said it was scarcely a question of how much the Trust was to get out of it, but what amount was the Bugby Union going to spend in improvements. Ho would have a stated percentage of the takings spent in that direction.

The chairman said that the Rugby Union must remember that tho Trust Lands Trust had to conform to certain conditions in the deed ,of trust, and if these could be held to, ‘then he saw no reason why a satisfactory arrangement could not be made. Mr Selby observed that the future had to bo looked to, and ho thought that planting of trees at the park should be undertaken. A certain amount of this work should be insisted on. Tho matter had to be looked at from a public point of view, as the Bugby Union had in mind primarily a good gate when talking about the building of a

grandstand. Mr A. Johnston, in reply to Mr Selby, stated that the Union’s main object was the erection of buildings,, and tree planting would not bo favoured. Mr Krahagen reiterated his remarks regarding a- stated percentage to be spent on improvements, and a clause of this nature should be inserted in any lease. He moved that the Trust was not opposed to the proposal if suitable

terms could be agreed upon, and suggested that sub-committees be set up by both bodies, and a skeleton scheme drawn up which could be altered if necessary. This was adopted. Later Mr Coradine moved that the

Bugby Union pay to the Trust Lands Trust £3OO a year as a total liability. Mr Selby seconded the motion, which, on being put to the meeting, was lost. It was stated that tho total liability of the Union at present was £175, and members of the delegation did not consider that £3OO could be paid. Mr Free: “The Bugby Union say that a lot of money will be spent on improvements, but it is not business unless some ascertainable sum is mentioned, and till that was done they were only beating the air.” After some further discussion on the rental question, Mr Free moved that the respective bodies appoint sub-com-mitteos, and in consultation with their

solicitors draw up draft agreements, which the sub-committees would place before their own particular governing bodies. He stated that the question was one of torms, which would be acceptable to both parties. Mr Free’s motion was carried, and

Messrs W. H. Jackson, S. L. P. Free and B. Krahagen wero appointed the Trust’s sub-committee to draft the case for the Trust Lands Trust. It was decided to leave the matter of arranging a meeting with the Bugby Union to tho committee. Mr Lamb, on behalf of the Bugby Union delegates, thanked the members of tho Trust Lands Trust for the opportunity of meeting them and exchanging views.