Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

Letter from E. E. Bennett (Los Angeles) to Calvin M. Cory (Las Vegas), December 22, 1950







Discussion of the defeat of bills to overturn the metering prohibition and efforts to have a future bill passed. "80-8, 83-4, 80-5-Gen" written at head of page in red pencil.

Digital ID


Physical Identifier

Box 24 Folder 80-8 LV Valley Water Dist., report on water supply


hln001298. Union Pacific Railroad Collection, 1828-1995. MS-00397. Special Collections and Archives, University Libraries, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Las Vegas, Nevada.


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 ( or contact us at?

Standardized Rights Statement

Digital Provenance

Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

Digital Processing Note

Manual transcription





Los Angeles - Dec. 22, 1950 Mr. Calvin M. Cory - Las Vegas: (cc: Mr. Oliver A. Thomas - Reno Mr. Wm. Reinhardt - Los Angeles) As you know, the Las Vegas Land and Water Company for some time has been endeavoring to have the law prohibiting the installation of meters in cities of certain size repealed, this law being found in Section 6112 of the Nevada Compiled Laws, 1938 pocket part. In 1947 we had introduced Senate Bill No. 93, by which we had initially intended to repeal that portion of Subparagraph 13 of Section 6112 which prohibited the installation of meters and the second proviso relating to municipal water companies. We initially ran into a lot of opposition from the Reno delegation and from various womens clubs and garden clubs and from Assemblyman Ryan himself. Also, for your information, we got very little, if any, help from inhabitants of Las Vegas. Finally, we ended up with a proposed bill, copy of which I enclose. This bill was not satisfactory to us as we would have preferred an out-right repeal of prohibition but I finally agreed to it because I thought we might be able to pass it. You will note that the bill vests in the Public Service Commission the right to permit the installation of meters after a finding that there is unnecessary waste etc. Even this bill died on the vine. It is my understanding that the Las Vegas Valley Water District would sponsor a bill to repeal this prohibition and I wish you would discuss this matter with Bill Coulthard, who is Secretary of the District, and draw up a bill repealing the last two provisions of the first paragraph of Section 6112. We can start with that and then see what we have to finish with. Mr. Reinhardt is very anxious to have such a bill introduced very early in the session and in view of the opposition we had at the previous session, it might be that we will have to do some trading. Mr. Calvin M. Cory Page 2 Dec. 22, 1950 The Reno delegation was particularly opposed to the bill and as you know, they have quite a bit of strength in the legislature, and as I said, the various garden clubs claimed that the installation of meters would retard the improvement of the city by gardens, flowers etc. However, the main thing is to get the bill introduced containing an out-right repeal of the two provisos referred to and then start working on it. I would like to have this in Mr. Thomas' hands when the session opens and I suggest you prepare a draft of the bill along the lines I suggested and send it directly to him, with a copy to me, and we can start from there. It will be necessary for you to give this matter your early attention. I think it better for obvious reasons that the bill be introduced as a bill of the district but if they will not go along with the earlier commitments, we will have it introduced ourselves. E. E. Bennett Enc to each