Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
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.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Details
More Info
Rights
Digital Provenance
Publisher
Transcription
Las Vegas would be to make use of the present pipe line into Henderson; that an expenditure of from five to six millions of dollars for the project appeared practicable, and could be carried by water revenues which would cover bond interest and maturities as well as operating expenses; but that such a sum did not include any appreciable capital allowance for purchasing the present pipe line; that the District hoped to get possession of the pipe line for a very nominal consideration in view of the burdens of the water service obligations now existing which would have to be given priority as to water service; that it was believed that buyers of bonds would much prefer having, as assets for the bonds, title to the entire water facility from the water in Lake Mead to the tap at the consumer's kitchen; but, if such acquisition of title was not feasible, then it might be necessary to devise some irrevocable contract to span the 30-year life period of the bond issue; that, in trying to avoid entering into a lease, or contract, for water, the counsel for the Water District had prepared a draft of a joint agreement into which both the Water District and the Colorado River Commission could enter, subject to the final approval by General Services Administration; that this "joint-agreement" approach seemed to have the nod of approval from informal talks with top officials of the General Service Administration; however, now that Commissioner Cahlan has just stated that in his opinion the acquisition of the pipe line by the Water District was exceedingly remote, the plan prepared for the District by O ’Kelveny & Myers would now have to be considerably revised. Commissioner Cahlan then reviewed the situation with the Commission. He recounted how the Colorado River Commission took over the Henderson properties to prevent their destruction or cannibalization, believing that outside private industries could be attracted to the area and the tax rolls increased thereby; that the State required time to liquidate the properties by sale to industrial concerns needing cheap power and water. Also, that now there are only two of the metal units not leased, although under negotiations, and then full occupancy of the ten metal units will be effected. For that reason, he now recommended that the District bargain at once for from 8 to 10 millions of gallons of water daily from Henderson, which sum he believes is a marginal surplus over expected requirements. He further stated that the three Southern Nevada Commissioners had spent the morning discussing with the Plant Lessees at Henderson the matter of the water facilities being disposed of as separate from the metal units; that the Lessees indicated their disapproval of acquisition of the water facilities by the Water District, but saw no objection to the Water district contracting for the surplus water available to the amount of some 8 or 10 millions of gallons per day. Commissioner Beuhler then expressed his comments on the situation but •f?t ?’A he too new on the Board to have any detailed knowledge of Commission matters as yet. Commissioner Cahlan then questioned Julian Moore, Acting Plant Manager, as to the delivery capacity of the AO-inch pipe line from the Lake. Director Miller stated that the pipe line was built to deliver 40 millions of gallons daily. Mr. Moore was instructed to prepare with the help of the Lessees an estimate of their total daily water requirements for the next three or four years. Commissioner Strong cautioned the group that the design-capacity of any pipe line usually dropped in amount with time and use, and that he did not feel that the 40-inch pipe line was any exception to that rule. He was then instructed by Commissioner Cahlan to inn a test of the delivery capacity of the system and report at the next meeting. He further stated his doubts of the validity of a contract which would run over 18 more years at which time the present operations of the Colorado River Commission, as indicated in a Letter of Intent, should terminate. The two other Commissioners did not believe this hurdle would be impossible to pass. Commissioner Buehler then asked for a copy of the Greeley and nansen report to read so that he could better understand just how the project of the Water District was linked to the water facility at Henderson. The Manager was instructed to loan a copy of the report to Commissioner R nphl (>r.