Information
Digital ID
upr000105-256
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.Mr. iii Eeiah&rdt 4. September 3 0 * 1952 1 think the forcings things should be dons immediately. if at all. As promptly .«s possible the :.\?U b Company should also divest itself of all industrial lands and other properties ejtcspt the water department at Lae ff|i| now owned by it in the States of ffeveds and California. These could be transferred to an appropriate subsidiary. 1 realise that it might take longer to accomplish this than to accomplish the transfer of the water production facilities from the fallrosd to the tVUt* Company. However X think the entire plan should be proTeased as p ro m p tly &us possible so as to leave in the ownership^©* the iJfUJ Company/only the water production and distribution system" at las ¥«®&s# . <1 am proposing the foregoing on the assumption g a t the ultimate sale of the water production and distribution system by a separate water company to the District would not result in substantial Income tax disadvantages. This, of course, ia a matter which should be carefully considered by the appropriate departments before the plan above Is adopted. H 1 - Bennett