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
zo- // *m Omaha - October 27, 1953 / / Mr. E. E. Bennett / (CC - Mr* A, E. Stoddard) Sub ject: Las Vegas Valley Water District Bonds* Referring to Mr. Reinhardtfs telegrams Nos* R-153 and R-155 with respect to court action to determine the validity of the revenue bond covenants and his statement in his R-155 as to the text of the covenants to be incorporated in the bonds: sale of the Public Levee Terminal Revenue Bonds, issued by the City of Kansas City, Kansas. The Union Pacific was the purchaser of those bonds. It may be that the covenants set out in those bonds may be of benefit in the situation we are now considering. For such use as they may be to you if the subject is discussed with you, I am handing you herewith a copy of the following ordinances adopted by the City of Kansas City, Kansas: original action brought in the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas, entitled Stat ex rel. Beck, Attorney General, v. Kansas City, Kansas, et al. The decision is reported in BA- Pacific 2d at page 409* You may not be called upon to rende: any advice in connection with the proposal now pending, but I thought perhaps the foregoing might be of assistance to you if called upon. Some years ago we went through the issuance and (1) Ordinance 30206, and (2) The amendatory ordinance, No. 30239* The validity of these bonds was tested out in an
