upr000090 69

Las Vegas - November 26, 1952 ¥ 23-l-C ’ : J. Mr. E. E. Bennett-Los Angeles cc: Mr. Wm. ReIiInIh ard?t Mr. R. L. Adamson |0| Referring to your letter of November 24, 1952, File \ 80-11 enclosing draft of new proposal by the Las Vegas Valley Water District to purchase the water production and distribution facilities, etc.,Las Vegas. followI inhga ver evriesviioenwse:d the proposed draft and suggest the 1. Eliminate the word "at" in the last line of page 2. 2. Sub-paragraph (d) page 5* Eliminate "to serve Hyde Park" as the facilities in question are being installed to serve property other than that in Hyde Park. Sub-paragraph (d) page 5*. Reference to "Rule 9-A Contracts" in the last line should be "Rule 9 Contract^. \ Sub-paragraph (e) page 5* i n N ASse cttihoe nR a2?i lrloyiandg Cwoem$pta nyo f owtnhse Sshoompe Glraonudn disn yT], •* ~^as described in this Nsub-paragraph, you may desire to includV Section 27 in the area to be subject to the covenant. 5. Sub-paragraph (f) page 6, Sub-paragraphs (a) to (e) enclusive enumerate the land, facilities and benefits to be conveyed to the Water District in consideration for the payment of #2,500,000. As sub-paragraph (f) provides for further consideration It should be set forth separately and not as a sub-paragraph. 6. Sub-paragraph (g) page 6. In addition to sums deposited by subdividers which are subject to refund, we have numerous contracts under which the subdividers, at their own expense constructed the water lines and conveyed title to the Water Company pursuant to agreement by the Water Company to refund cost of such mains. It appears to me this sub-paragraph should be set- forth separately and not as a sub-paragraph and should read substantially as follows: "It is agreed that you have outstanding contracts whereby certain Subdividers or Applicants ?