upr000208 179

Sr* J e ff ora: #3 Aeg* 86, 1935, la view of the fact that the cry fo r municipal ow­nership of water f a c ilit i e s has died down, and i t is going to he otar re sp o n sib ility to provide su fficien t water fo r the city* I believe the proper solution for oar water problems here is to d r i l l another w ell* ®e have not yet had an ac­curate estimate made of the cost of d r illin g such a w ell, hut based on the cost of the w ell d rille d in 1986 i t should run between s ir and seven thousand d ollars. V©r the past three summers, we have been just "getting by", and the additional w water which would be available from another w ell should take care of the demand during the summer months,, prevent a revival o f the municipal ownership advocates, and in addition provide su fficien t water to properly irrig a te the Ranch* le are at present earning approximately 11% on our investment, in addition to paying 84^Tof the cost of operating the water f a c ilit i e s west of the railro ad track, and It would certainly be to our advantage to continue this arrangement* . t I f the ra ilro ad company does not wish to incur the expense of an additional w e ll, the cost could be borne by the has Vegas hand and Water Company, and same credited to our Capital Account, thereby reducing the percentage of our earning on investment. Our Auditor’ s o ffic e i s required to submit an annual report to the Hevada Public Service Com­mission, showing our operating expenses and revenues and our investment and these reports are available to public inspection. I learn that on two d ifferen t occasions, advocates of municipal ownership here in Las Vegas have called bn the Public Service Commission fo r copies of our reports, and other data. The reason I am bringing th is subject up at the pres­ent time is so that consideration May he given to including the cost of an additional well in the 1936 Budget, Yours very tru ly , cc-Mr. F.H.Knickerbocker WALTER R* BRACKSh, Vice President*