Los Angeles herald., 1905-05-31
MAY Be FORCED
To REMOVE PIER
LONG BEACH THREATENED
WITH LITIGATION
TITLE TO SITE QUESTIONED
Ordinance Proposed Whereby City Is
Secured In Possession on Ger
tain Conditions, Which Are
Bitterly Opposed
TITLE TO SITE QUESTIONED
Special to The Herald.

Special to The Herald.
LONG BEACH, May 30.-1t is not
unlikely that within the next few
weeks proceedings will be Instituted
not only to stop work on the new $780,
600 convention hall started on the beach
but also to compel the removal Of the
100000 pier.
The first hint of this came at the
meeting of the city trustees yesterday
and 1t was the Seaside Water COM
pany of Long Beach which gave 1t.
The company is really a part of the
Long Beach Water company, which has
for some time been in more or less
thinly veiled controversy with the city.
At the last charter election Long Beach
declared for municipal ownership of a
water plant and since then the trustees
have proceeded with that end In view.
and always in opposition to the plans
of the water company. request for
permission to raise rates In the city
was refused and an officer Of the COM
pany was recently arrested for not re-
pairing the mains of the company ac-
cordng to the views of the city street
superintendent. Mayor r. A. Emo.
leader of the municipal ownership
party, which controls the trustees, has
declared that no proposition to buy the
Long Beach company out would be en-
tertained and has expressed preference
for the offer of the Alamitos Beach
Water company.
In spite of opposition the Long Beach
company persisted IN its advances to
the city, offering it's entire plant and
system, valued at $S5O,OOO for $65O,0Oo.
When the trustees chose the east side
the Seaside Water company and H. P.
Barbour, who own the Ocean Pier
tract on the beach east of the pier and
below the bluff, entered a protest
against the erection of the convention
hall in front of their property on the
ground that it obstructed their view,
affirming in effect that the pavilion had
no right there.
The protest dropped out of sight and
nothing more was heard Of it until
Monday when it followed close on the
heels of the water agitation in the
shape of an ordinance drafted by City
Attorney F. A. Knight, ratifying an
agreement which assumes that Pine
avenue ends at the bluff, not at the
waters edge, and that, therefore, the
approach is built on private property
belonging to the Seaside Water COM
he Co .t1f
facing the convention hall site, and
that the Seaside Water company has
the right to order the removal of the
pier approach and to stop further work
on the convention hall.
The ordinance goes on to stipulate
that the Seaside Water company will
give an easement which will secure
forever the city of Long Beach in pos
session OF the pier approach and con-
vention hall site on condition that the
booths on the west side of the pier are
removed and the Seaside Water COM
pany permitted to build a pavilion on
that side as a private enterprise with
entrances from the pier, using the pier
as a street.
1t is said that the trustees stand four
to one against passing the ordinance
In that case there is practically nc
doubt that the Seaside Water com
pany will make fight in the courts OF
the state for what it believes to be iti
rights. It's official claim that the city
of Long Beach uses the land under the
pier approach only through the suffer
ance of the water company and tina
the company can at any time force the
removal of the approach.
1-<S