A COUNCIL CONTRACT

Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume XXII, Issue 7283, 24 October 1925, Page 2

A COUNCIL CONTRACT

WSIHI BEACH SANITARY SERVICE WORK LET TO MEMBER LEGAL ASPECT RAISED “If the contract which the Waihi Borough Council proposes to enter into regarding the beach sanitary tervice is proceeded with its legality will be disputed." This statement was made by Mr J. B. Beoche, solicitor, in a letter which was before the Council at its monthly meeting on Thursday evening. Mr Beeche went on to say that he had been consulted by a borough ratepayer with regard to the proposed con* tract. He understood the Waihi town smitary service contractor bad submit: ed an offer for the work entailed in the beach service at the request of an officer of the Council, and that after his offer had been discussed by the Council one of the councillors made an offer which was accepted. The circumstances were such that the Municipal Corporations Act appeared to have been violated, and in the event of (he contract being proceeded with its legality would be tested. Cr. Paterson, in moving that the letter be received, said he was satisfied that the Council had got a good offer. Or. Philpot failed to see where the Council was liable.

Or. Callaghan : That is a matter for a legal opinion. Or. Robinson said that to put things in order he would second the motion. AN OPINION TAKEN The chairman intimated that the Town Clerk had obtained a legal opinion on the matter from Mr Martin, solicitor to the Municipal Corporations Association. At his suggestion the correspondence with the Municipal Corporations Association was then read, and went to show that on October 12 the Town Clerk wrote to the secretary of the association at Wellington regarding the position. He stated that the Council owned a reserve at the Waihi beach on which a number of cottage sites were leased, the cottages being occupied from about December Ito Easter each year. It was necessary for a sanitary service to be carried out during the time mentioned, and also for some public conveniences to be attended to at the cost of the Council. Hitherto the contractor employed on the town service had done the work, but the arrangement did not prove as satisfactory as might be wished, and it had been decided this year to have the work performed by someone else. The Council’s pans, horse and dray would be used. A member of the Council had offered (u) to carry out the service and collect the payments as between the tenants and himself, and (b) to carry out the work of emptying the public conveniences free of charge to the Council. No payment of any kind was to be made by the Council, although its plant would be used. Was the councillor debarred by statute from undertaking the work, and if he did undertake it would he be disqualified from holding his seat on the Council 1 To this the secretary of the Association replied by telegram, stating that in his opinion the councillor would not bo disqualified, but that the contract was liable to be set aside at common law on the grounds that the councillor was contracting with the Council. Or. Philpot said that if there was a contract it must bo in writing. Cr. Morgan contended that if a person bad a right to do the work then it constituted a contract. From what -he had gathered, the councillor proceeded, the fees collected doing a four months’ period, last season amounted to £2lB, and in these circumstances t seemed to him the Council was giving away a pretty good thing. He also pointed out that a large number of pans to be used were not the property of the borough, and if these receptacles were claimed by the owner the borough would have to find about 150 pans. POSITION OF CONTRACT

Ur. Robinson said the previous speaker had emphasised what the borough was giving away. He, howver, would point out that in any case the borough would have to provide pans, and be did not think the borough was going to lose by the transaction. Or. Lockington said the Council had already arranged with Or. Pipe to carry out the service at the beach, and to his way of thinking the only question to be decided was whether the Council was within its legal rights in

giving the work to Ur. Pipe, j Or. Pipe said he would like to draw attention to the fact that there was nothing binding on the part of the Council, and in the meantime the Council had agreed practically unanimously to give him the job. Should there be any dispute about the matter he would contest it right up to the hilt. He was going to give a good service and time would show the amount of money the Council would save with the service under his control. Cr. Paterson was satisfied that the j service could only be carried out satisfactorily by one who was in actual residence at the beach. The motion that the letter be received was then put to the meeting and carried, the chairman and Cr. Butcher-voting against it. Or. Morgan declined to vote on the ground that a point of law was involved which, ho contended, was more than the Council could unravel.