Omaha daily bee., 1907-02-22
COUNCIL HAS A WARM TINE
Debate Over Water Works QUeititn
Becomes Acrimonious at Times.
VOTES TO REscIND ITS FORMER ACTION
Letter from Manager of Company Pre-
cipitates the TroubIe-TSiersted
Valuation Not Unal-
terabIe.


terable.
The differences of opinion existing among
the councilmen as to the best methods to
pursue in securing an adjustment Of the
water works question Resulted in an ex-
ceedingly stormy session of the city coun-
ell yesterday afternoon. The 'retort cour-
teous" was passed freely among the MEM
bers and at one time It looked as IL there
might be a personal encounter between
Chairman Wallace of the special water
works committee and one OF the council
men, who took exception to some Of Mr..
Wallace's insinuations
The reading of a communication from
General Manager Hart of the water works
company precipitated the trouble, and
Councilman Wallace's ire was further
aroused when by a vote Of to the coun-
Gil reconsidered its action Of Monday night
in adopting the following resolution of
Wallace and then ordered It laid on the
table:
Resolved. by the city council of Council
Bluffs, That II be the sense of the council
that the special water committee acting
for this body shall in its negotiations with
the Council BLUFFS City Water Works COM
pany consider the value of the water plant
cess of the valuation placed upon said
plant by our consulting engineer and ex-
pert, w. Kiersted, namely, $5OO,9S.
Letter from Manager Hart.
The communication from Manager Hart
was as follows:
We regret very much that the council
has thought best to accept its experts APP
praisement an arbitrary figure, which
the water works committee must use In
its negotiations with the water company
for purchase and contract This action of
the council as we understand Ii limits the
water committee to buying the water plant
at exactly the one-man appraisement OF
adopting a rate schedule based upon this
set valuation. 1t is beyond our ability to
rch act me en- tSe 5a OF on
view of the fact that the expert who fixed
this value says in his letter of February
16 1907, that some items OF this inventory
are based upon meager data, etc." and 81
can see no reason why Mr.. Alvord and
should not agree upon questions of fact
relating to quantities and having so agreed
there is no reason why we should not cor
rect our respective estimates accordingly"
These statements of your engineer would
Indicate that the question of quantities may
have been enormously estimated by both
him and Mr.. Alvord and as quantities have
as much to do with the value of the plant
council I'm thus arbitrarily fixing the price
has gone even farther than It's engineer
did in his appraisement.
Ii was stated in the council on Monday
evening that Mr.. Alvord's estimate of the
value of the works was made some two
weeks after the value fixed by Mr.. Kiersted
was made public. This is not true, as
preliminary figure of Mr.. Alvord was given
this company on January T. the same day
that Mr.. Kiersteds valuation was made
public.
Whatever delay there was after that was
caused by the holding back of the details
of the report. These details were wanted
80 that the valuation on the different parts
of the plant might be arranged so that
they could be compared understandingly by
others than expert persons.
Mr. Alvord was requested to classify his
values In the same manner that had been
followed by Mr.. Kiersted, all of which Mr..
Alvord did. so far as possible, at consid-
more comprehensive understanding of the
persons who took the trouble to compare
The principal delay was occasioned by
the inability of this company to obtain a
copy of Mr.. Kiersted's report to submit to
/ tr; Alvord as form for the arrangement
nd classification Of his data upon which
was to fix the values as found by him.
MIR Aivords principal values were found
before Mr.. Kiersted's report was known
1 to the public or to the water committee.
Unfortunately the progress of this ques-
| lion toward settlement is seriously
| checked by this refusal on the part Of the
council to consider any figure except the
! one given by Mr.. Kiersted and the further
refusal on the part of the council to have
the eity's engineer confer with the conf
panys engineer as to quantities that may
have been figured In error.
The water company still stands I'm the
same position on the question of contract
| or sale as 1t did when on August q. 1905.
| II made proposition to the city council to
| sell Its property to the city at such price
as might be agreed upon by a board of
appraisment selected by the city and com
been adopted and used heretofore without
exception by other cities in settling like
problems. or on the other hand If the city
city in the matter OF contract or rates,
granting the city the right to purchase
at any time II should find itself able.
willing to Come Half Way.
This proposition was accepted by the
council on October %, 1906, and after that
some progress was made toward the carry
ing out of the requisite steps toward the
making Of contract for a tentative fran
chise and eventual purchase. These efforts
on the part of the special water committee
conclusion al the time the Board OF Alder
men changed and the new special water
committee met and repudiated all acts OF
the former council as well as the acts of
the former special water committee Since
that TIME the water company has done all
conclusion satisfactory to city and COMPANY
| alike. AS evidence of the truth of this
statement you have only to read the last
lew lines OF your experts report i'm which
he says and l take occasion TO express
my appreciation of the facilities and as
ertntendent of the water works in he
physical property"
always
mas been willing to do its full share Of
the giving as well as It's share OF the tax
Ing and there must be some give and take
In all bargains however small or however
large. Under the circumstances II would
not be unreasonable to hope that the coun-
Gil would be able to see that the share and
security holders OF the water comnany
would not be willing TO accept a valuation
Tar below the appraisement Of the expert
that the company had employed 10 0nd
the real value OF its property or would thew
De sahsfled with a price that the CITY q
sApsrt himself says may be subject TO
The water company does not want n
understood that II has any criticism to
make OF the honesty of Mr.. Kiersted's re-
poIl, put on the contrary IL wishes to con-
sIatuIhte the city on its good fortune in
naVlhg received such comprehensive and
consclentiously prepared statement The
water company does, however want AZ
understood that il believes that the citv's
engineer Is Just as human as the comma nv =
( engineer and hence just as liable 10 error,
IL Is the earnest wish of the water com
pany that the council will see M 10 recon-
slider Its recent action and take some FOR
ward step toward the ultimate saftienoent
/ OF the water question.
The motion to reconsider was carried nv,
the votes Of COuncilmen Fleming. Hendrix.
knudsen. Maloney and smith Councilman
wallace having the support alone Of Coun-
Gilman founkerman. Councilman Olson.
who voted I'm favor of the resolution Mon
day night, was not present yesterday after
noon.