Norwich bulletin., 1910-12-16

terms Of two gears each. Each year one democrat and one republican are elected under $ system of minority representation. and tine court of com
 mon council sends iu from their body
 the fifth member, who represents tns
 political control Gf fhs city.
 fH March, IS11 the board of conn
 fniHRiDners reported to the court Of common council regarding the great increase iu the use of city water, and
 calling attention to ths fact that the capacity of the present Watersneds controlled bg tne city had been reach
 ed, and also directing attention f0 the available sites as sources Of BUDDY
 which the board had considered. They announced that through the advice and opinion of their engineers they had concluded to pUrchsse the lands for an
 increased water supply at the place
 known sB Stony brook, and estimated
 the cost of such q development incin9-
 ing pipe line to Washington square, af
 4Z97, 900.
 The common council approved their
 action. and two hundred and ten acres
 Of lands, which waB about tWO-tnlr1s
 of the amount required. Was then p1r-
 chased at that place. COngsnt Wag
 obtained from the state legislature for
 the city Of Norwich tO i8sps sSJ5sDgD
 bonds for water development.
 The action Cf the water board Wa9 based upon the reports Df Charles 4.
 Allen of Worcester, William T. Rich-
 ards of New London and Chandler h
 Palmer of Norwich and Percy I. Blake of Boston also reported plan
 ln favor of the Stony brook site Toese
 engineers who are among the best n
 New England, considered the various
 sitee available, and their reports were
 unanimously in favor of the Stony brook prOpOFitiOn.
 In the meantime the citizens Of
 Norwich approved the law passed Dg the legislature authorizing and ern-
 towering the city tO issue @5JD.Go1 of
 bonds for the purpose Of improving
 the supply
 In January. 1900. the water Of Fair view reservoir reached 2. point one
 hundred and aeyentY-three inches be- low full pond. The board Of water
 commissioners decided that immediate
 action was necessary for temporary re- lief. Artegian wells were started on
 the Meadow brook watershed. but CO.,
 pious and continued rains brought re-
 lief in an additional supply and the
 project was abandoned.
 Charles F. Thayer was elected mayor
 in 1900, with q republican council In November Mayor Thayer appointed
 special committee to present plans for an additional water supply. and ss-
 cured the services of Hill, quick 6z AL i len to Investigate and report on the same. They reported in favor Of Pease
 DEDDk, III Lllt LDHsL bA J<-D04lfyAA~ nlAs
 that watershed could be developed for
 $500, GOO. The board of water cornuis- siOners investigated the expense Of the
 Pease brook plan with their own eugl-
 neers, who reported that t would cost S655, 900, without considering land
 rights clearing of basin. removal Of cemeteries and cOmpenss ton for mil rights affected by the diversion Of tke water. and on Sept. F. 1901, the board rescinded and annulled the resolutions
 which they had passed to establish . reservoir on Pease brook.
 On Nov. 1, 1901. the board of water
 commissioners again transmitted to the
 court of common council Q resolution approving the reservoir at Stony brook.
 By the deciding vote Of Mayor Thayer. action upon the same was deferred. On Dec. 2, 1901, Mayor Thayer aG- dressed the common council, and asked
 for the appointment of a committee 10 ; investigate the water question. The committee was appoint ed Several hearings were held, and a majority
 vote of the committee recommended
 the development of Stony brook. This report was accepted by the council on Feb. p, and 1t was voted to issue the bonds to carry out this plan, the bonds
 to be signed by the senior alderman Calvin H. Frisnie, and the city treas urer. The mayor. the usual authority
 to sign in such cases, being hostile t0 the proposition, his signature could moi be obtained
 On March 3. 1902. Mayor Thayer addressed the council, urging them 70 halt on the Stony brook project. for it would unnecessarily burden the city with debt. The council voted on the matter and voted for Stony brook. Tn conjunction with the water board. the council went ahead with the natter 1 The bonds were signed and the water board were on the point oL making contracts and beginning the work
 when an injunction was brought but few weeks prior to the city election
 It was handled as 2 political proposi- tion, based upon the honest differences of opinion which existed among the
 citizens, and the mayor won out in the election. The new council, which was controlled by the mayor, voted 10 res
 cind action. and finally ordered the bonds burned.
 Since that time the water question has rested. 1t being the opinion oL
 many citizens that Norwich never would see light in the water question until F'airview reservoir ran dry. It became apparent at the beginning of this year that Norwich was hearing d crisis. The reservoir has not filled
 for two years. Seasons Of minimum rainfall were proving true the state ments of the capable engineers who had told the citizens of Norwich that 1t was useless to waste money on the Meadow brook watershed, as it had l been developed to nearly, if not quite. it's full capacity. Three engineers were paid thousands of dollars for their opinions, which were disregarded un-
 der the political handling of the mat ter. After stony brook was voted down
 the ideas of citizens who claimed that there was plenty of water on the Fair view and Meadow brook watersheds prevailed, and Norwich went ahead
 and expended nearly S100 GOO enlarging the dam at FairView and building dam at Meadow brook. which has been with
 out avail. and the situation has con
 tinued as bad as it was before the
 money was expended.
 When Mayor Thayer took office for the fifth time he organized the six democratic members of the common council. who were elected, and him
 self. into an executive committee, which is 8 majority of one in the council practically making dummies of the republican side of the council He soon took action by getting their assent to the Pease brook proposition,
 and called the water board into con- ference with his executive committee The water board agreed with the eN- ecutive committee. as it seemed to be the only eNpedient. and it was realized by certain members of the water board that the city must have water. One member was entirely opposed to PeaSe brook, and did not vote on the matter Another member was pot in favor of Pease brook. hut he voted for if in order to get the question before the public, ss ne believed the necessities