The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1909 THE MAYORAL STATEMENT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2680, 9 December 1909, Page 4

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9,1909 THE MAYORAL STATEMENT.

Not satisfied with the much vaunted statement issued by the Town Clerk, and “certified to by two qualified and independent accountants,” the Mayor has now published one of his own. It is a characteristic document. Mr. W. I). Lysnar is nothing if not enthusiastic, and once an idea takes possession he certainly gives it a whole-souled adherence. Thus it is with the loan proposals. The more lie thinks about them the more .satisfied does lie become that what we all thought was an opti niistic statement issued by the Town Clerk was really a pessimistic document, that should in the interests of the ratepayers be officially disclaimed. The preparation of his own statement must have proved a most exhiliarating occupation for the Mayor, and we can well imagine the glow of satisfaction with which he discovered first a saving here and then another there, that had apparently escaped the vigilant eyes of the Town Clerk and the two independent accountants. One might be pardoned' for suggesting that it is only necessary for the ratepayers to sanction a few more of these schemes for the cost to disappear altogether. It i s difficult to consider this latest statement seriously. If we read the author’s intentions aright, he is endeavoring to show that £75,000 can be saved by borrowing £175,000 in a lump sum and proceeding with all the proposed works simultaneously. Some of the alleged saving is supposed to result by reason of the money being borrowed at 3J instead of 4£ per cent. But no one suggested that the money should be borrowed at 4£ per cent, and it is not a fact, as the Mayor infers, that the whole of the works mentioned by him must he agreed to in order to obtain money at 3£ per cent. If His Worship had been more candid he would have told the ratepayers that the Government limit in this- respect is £IOO,OOO, and at last Council meeting Cr. Pettie pointed out that the cost of sewerage, electric lighting, and waterworks first year’s interest, cover thisb amount. In other words, the tramwiays,- Waimata bridge, recreation, grounds, and road proposals could be left out without in any way interfering with the rate of interest charged. Or to put it another way, if the ratepayers had a separate vote the rate of interest would not be therefore increased so- long as the sum of the items sanctioned totalled £IOO.OOO, and they were sub.seuently consolidated at another poll, as was done in Napier. His Worship says: As the law will not allow separate votes to be given on each item and then to amalgamate the items passed after the poll, the Council has no alternative but to place the proposals before the ratepayers in one issue. Now this is the kind of half-truth that we do not look for from a gentleman occupying the position of Mayor of the town. His Worship knows full well that the Council has an alternative, namely, to submit the issues separately and afterwards amalgamate those which have been sanctioned, and submit them at a subsequent poll. The same lack-of frankness is evidenced by His Worship’s reference to “the present rate of 25,” for he knows full well that the total rates levied in the borohgh, including special rates, amount to & lid. Speaking broadly, the expenditure side of the statement is considerably under-estimated, whilst the revenue is made up on a visionary basis. 11l the past .our roads have cost for maintenance anywhere from £SOOO to £7OOO annually. The official estimate assumes that for the next five years £2500 will .suffice. How this , is going to cover the cost of keeping 40 miles of roadway in order we are not told, but if no more than that amount i s spent the highways will certainly he iu a fearful, state. Practical business ■ "v , VI- : ■■■ '

men, who* know the district, its char-. ' iibtbbii&ics, 'and its possibilities better than can any foreign engineer, have grave doubts as to whether the tramways will pay expenses for the first few years, yet Mr. Lysnar cheerfully accepts the figures put before him, and puts down £923 a year profit from the jump. It is the same all the way through. What does not show a profit is made to show a saving, and between the two His Worship demonstrates to his own satisfaction that in nine years £75,804 will be saved to the ratepayers. And then with characteristic ingenuousness he .appeals to the public and asks: “Can any progressive ratepayer vote against these proposals?” The question is pure presumption, considering 1 that His Worship has deprived the ratepayers of the right to vote directly upon the various proposals. If they are all so sound as he wduld have us believe surely he might have trusted the ratepayers to accept his advocacy and vote for thenf! This is just what the Mayor has persistently refused to do. Instead of giving to each ratepayer the right, to vote in a free and independent manner, for or against each scheme, he endeavors to thrust the lot through for fear some may otherwise be rejected. Again ■\ve ask by what right are His Worship and his majority in the Council preventing the ratepayers from rejecting any proposals they are not satisfied with ? To attempt to force such a budget of diverse schemas through on the back of the popular sewerage scheme is as unfair as it is undemocratic.