The Hattiesburg news. (Hattiesburg, Miss.) 1908-1917, 1910-03-04
The CITY MAY NOT
ISSUE MORE BONDS
CONTINUED from page one.)

| tSOHllHucu lIOul page OuS.J
enue of the Water Works Plant for
the three preceding years in order
that l might be able to advise wheth-
er or not the $107 100000 Water Works
Bonds could be deducted from the
total outstanding issue for the pur-
pose of determining whether the cleo
ton would have to be ordered in, the
first instance or not. The information
| received was that the revenue of the
Water Works Plant, over and above
the operating expenses was greater
for each year than the interest on the
Water Works bonds. On this infor-
nation l advised that an election was
not necessary as the net earnings or
net revenue of the Water Works
Plant was greater than the interest
on the Water Works Bonds, and that
the Board of Aldermen could proceed
to issue the bonds unless a petition
tax payers protesting against the
bond issue was filed with the Board.
am now informed that the infor-
nation furnished me as to the net
earnings or net revenue of the Water
Works Plant did not consist entirely
of actual money paid into the City
Treasury as revenue from the Water
Works Plant, but that it was made up
in part on the idea that the City was
saving a considerable sum of money
by owning the Water Works Plant,
and that this saving consisted in part
in sixty or more fire hydrants owned
by the City and supplied with water
by the water WORKS plant, and for
which the city did not have to pay any
money, also that it consisted in part
perhaps of the saving of the city on
it's street sprinkling, the water for
which was furnished by the water
works plant, and for which the city
did not have to pay out the money.
This presents a question as to
whether or not the saving to the city
by virtue of its ownership of the
water works plant shall be consid-
cred a revenue of the city as meant
by Chapter 1879, Laws Of 1908.
The language of the statute is that
bonds, the proceeds of which have
been invested in enterprises produc-
ing sufficient revenue over and above
their operating expenses to pay
the interest on these bonds" We
do not find from the city records
that a sufficient sum of money, or
revenue, over and above the operat-
ing expenses of the water works plant
to pay the interest on the water works
bonds has been paid into the treasury
in any one year. The city no doubt
has saved several thousand dollars
each year by its ownership of the
water works plant, but this saving
has not been paid into the treasury
as a revenue, and therefore could not
be used to pay the interest on the
water works bonds.
do not think a saving of expense
to the city can be considered revenue.
It has been suggested that by a
system of bookkeeping the city might
make its saving by virtue of it's owner
ship of the water works, appear as
a revenue. For instance the city has
considerable number of fire hy-
drants supplied with water by the
water works. 1t is suggested that
the city fix water rental for these
hydrants and charge the general fund
with the amount and pay it to the
water works fund, thus putting the
actual money in the treasury to the
credit CT the water works, and show
ing a revenue. It is sufficient an
swer for the present purpose to say
that this has not been done, and that
no such revenue is shown by the city's
records. II it had been done would 1t
relieve the situation? The plan looks
like juggling with figures. The city
owns the water works in the same
sense that a man owns a farm. The
water works is neither an individual
or corporation and can not make
contracts. How could the city and
-