Amalgamation Proposal.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 611, 23 May 1891, Page 2

Amalgamation Proposal.

[TO THS EDITOR.! Sib, —I am pleased to sea the interest taken in the question of the amalgamation of the official management of the three local bodies. This fact proves that there is something in it. Tbe first thing I will remark is that those members who have lately been investigating the accounts, and who therefore should know most about them, all agree and strongly urge the question on the ratepayers, feeling convinced that when put into working order, a much better state of office business will result. I venture to commend this to the careful consideration of the ratepayers of the Borough. I am sure that the Borough has every need to make all savings possible consistent with efficiency. The reduced value of property, and hence the falling off of revenue, makes it imperative for the Council to economise where possible. A few figures will prove. The Borough revenue for last year from all sources was only £2290 5s Id. The special rate was only £640 Seeing that we have to pay interest ot £6OO a year, sinking fund of £2OO, and our interest on overdraft last year was £l6O, that means that wa shall have to take out of onr general rate this year to make up the deficiency in the sinking fund £l6O, and interest on overdraft at least £l6o—totalling £320 to be taken from the general revenue, and assuming ths rates to be the same for the current year as for the past we shall have under £2OOO to expand on Borough purposes for the whole year. Thess are facts. I feel that when the accounts are gone into for the present year we shall have so little left for permanent improvements to our streets, not to mention building foot or any other bridges, that ths fear of any serious trouble arising between any of the three taxing bodies may be dismissed so far as tbe Borough Council is concerned. And as I have before stated, all such questions will disappear when once reduced to practice. There is nothing like bringing these doubtful questions to working order to test them. The late unfortunate instance of mismanagement is no fair example to urge againet a trial ot a proper working system. And now I may jnst make one remark with reference to the mammoth taxing machine, the Harbor Board, for now I think the most sanguine advocate of Mr Thomson’s harbor works must admit it to bo nothing more. The river is almost silted up, and all we can do is to pay the rates for nothing more than a river silted up. Surely In this condition of things we ought to put the screw on, and see if a better state of office management cannot be brought abont, and thus make all the amends we can to fhe ratepayers. The river we cannot bring under control, but the office can be improved, and is it to be wondered at that those who have seen through tbe late serious loss should have thought of suggesting improvements F I admit at once that there does appear to be some objection to the combination of the three offices, but I feel that great improvements and a very large saving will result when such a plan is carried out, I have no hesitation in asking the ratepayers to carefully consider the plan—l am, eto., J. Towklst.