The San Francisco call., 1909-12-01
PROCEDURE FOR
WATER SUPPLY
YET UNSETTLED
Supervisors in Conflict Over the
Method of Submitting Bond
Propositions to Public
City Attorney viii Insist That
Sierra and Spring Valley Be
Hitched Together

veloped among the supervisors as to
the best method of procedure in the
water controversy. The majority is in
opinion as final. and. in accordance
Herewith, TO submit the three PROPOSE
tions, one for the Sierra source, another
for the Spring Valley system and a
third for the combination of the two,
A minority has appeared which favors
definite action on the Lake Eleanor
and Tuolumne river project. without
present regard for Spring Valley. This
plan the city's legal advisers pronounce
unsafe.
Ralph McLeran. a member of the
public utilities committee, is strong in
the belief that the election scheduled
FOR December %, in which the Sierra
system alone is the issue, should be
carried through as originally planned.
He prefers the risk of invaMdating the
bonds TO the danger of losing the
mountain rights altogether.
FEARS COMBINATION
L believe" said McLeran yesterday.
that we should go ahead with the
election for the Sierra project and let
the Spring Valley offer wait If we
submit the three propositions at this
time. there is great danger that all will
be lost. In that event we may be de-
prived of our rights in the Hetcb
Hetchy valley and at Lake Eleanor.
That viii leave US in worse position
than ever. On the other hand, if we
g. ahead with the $4,000, 900 bond is
So for the Sierra system, it will surely
carry. II the bonds are declared ille-
gal at least we shall have clinched our
rights under the GARFIELD permit. An
other election can then be held at
which the alternate propositions can
be considered.
I can not see that we are bound to
submit the Spring Valley offer It was
made only after the other election had
been called. According TO that view,
Spring Valley could have come in on
the eve Of the election with an offer,
and we would have been compelled TO
call the whole thing off It does not
seem reasonable that the charter should
allow this. II may be good law that
we must submit the Spring Valley
offer. but it is not good sense
QUESTIONS THE POLICY
City Engineer Marsden Manson
agrees mainly with McLeran- Although
he believes in the eventual acquisition
Of Spring Valley he regards it as bad
policy to offer IL 10 the voters at this
time
Let US go forward with the Sierra
system bond issue" said Manson, :and
take our chances with the courts We
r1frF Enrfncr N111exr hcf0~a ha Ia
at a later election. If necessary we
can then amend the charter and cancel
the unnecessary bonds issued for the
Lake Eleanor and Tuolumne river dis
tributing plant I do not think we
should take the risk of losing our
rights in the mountains"
Manson is thoroughly familiar with
the Spring Valley properties and has
already devised a united system which
Will incorporate ii into the Sierra
scheme He estimates that with a COM
paratively small expenditure he can
bring into the city 100000 gallons
a day This is about 5,0O0,000 gallons
IN excess of the average daily consump-
ton On hot days the city has used as
high as 100000 gallons.
J. H Dockweiler, the consulting en-
gineer, is checking UP the Spring VAL
ley holdings. Each part will be listed
and numbered so as to be available in
deed Of transfer should the munich
pality make the purchase.
WILL STUDY THE ISSUE
The commercial bodies have already
given consideration to the subject and
VIII discuss it during the coming
weeks. A meeting was held yesterday
of the representatives of the various
organizations and the decision reached
that the issue should be studied closely
upon its merits free from political in
huences. Those in attendance included
Dames McNab of the chamber of COM
nerce, Andrew NJ Davis and c. X Nc
9ntosh of the Merchants association.
T. c Friedlander of the merchants ex-
change, Arthur Briggs of the state
board of trade. Andrea Sbarboro of the
Manufacturers and Producers associa-
zion, A. A. Watkins Of the board Of
trade and Samuel G. Buckbee of the
San Francisco real estate board.
Each association will take up the
szaatter separately and make known its
Views.
Supervisor James A. johnson. chair
man Of the public utilities committee.
will wait for the opinion of the CITY
attorneys Office before recommending 2
any change of plan. In the event the
three propositions are TO be submitted.
the election set for December % will be
called of and the issue presented Jan
nary 9.
LEGAL PHASE OF QUESTION
The city attorneys opinion will be
ready today or tomorrow. It was pre-
pared by Assistant City Attorney
Thomas E. Haven after a conference
with City Attorney Long and Judge
Lindley.
We hold" said Haven. that it
would be unsafe TO submit the Sierra.
proposition without the Spring Valley.
Personally I believe it the part of
wisdom to adopt the combined pro-
9ect. This viii give us plenty of
water for a great many years to come.
IT is unthinkable that the people would
be willing 10 have the streets torn up
from one end Of the city to another for
new distributing plant Then there
are $4,000 service connections to be
made, all Of which the Spring Valley
has. We acquire so much valuable
property by the purchase of Spring
Valley that I am strongly in favor of
st. When we argue in court for low
Spring Valley valuation, it is for rate
fixing purposes. If we attempt 10
condemn the property. we should have
10 value differently. In rate fixing. we
take the real estate up as simply
watershed. For purposes of condem-
nation, the company would have the
right 10 claim real estate values. This
would make a great difference Take