UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.
Digital Provenance
Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room
Publisher
University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries
Transcription
The cross examination by the City Attorney indicated that he was attempting to drive home two principal points: 1. That the separation of water production from water distribution results in inefficient^"and costly operation. 2. That the Railroad makes excessive bills upon the Water C ompany for water furnished. Mr. Wehe*s testimony was based upon his original report and a supplemental report which has been recently prepared by him containing the aetual results of operation for the year 1950 and an estimate of the results of operation for the year 1951. I am enclosing three copies of the Supplemental Report ,2. <Gppies of the Supplemental Report are -astso being sent to I h<=> H ^ Messrs. Hulsizer^ Sutton and Bockes. We expect to complete our showing at the next hearing and hope that it will be possible to have the protestants conclude their showing at the same hearing. Wm. Reinhardt Ends
