Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1913-06-06
PEOPLE TO VOTE ON
$4,000 ISSUE FOR
CITY WATER WORKS
Council Orders Special Bond
Election to Be Held Mon
day, July 81.
MEASURE NOT DISCUSSED.
Campaign Promises to Be Most
Exciting Municipal Fight of
Recent Years.

READ THE MAYORS MUNICH
PAL WATER WORKS ORDI-
NANCE ON PAGE OF THIS IS
SUE, THE ORDINANCE UPON
WHICH YOU WILL HAVE TO
VOTE JULY Fl. ACQUAINT
YOURSELF WITH IT'S PROvI-
-SIONS SO YOU WILL BE ABLE
TO VOTE INTELLIGENTLY.
Regardless Of what editorial pO-
asitiOn 1t takes ON the water works
question, THE WASHINGTON
STANDARD will be glad to pub
lish the arguments for and against
the $15O,OOO bond issue and urges
Its readers to express their views
ON the question through Its col
.umns. This Is YOUR pnper-tell us
what you think about the question
NOW before you.
With only two dissenting votes
those of Councilmen George H. Funk
and r. H. Leupke, the city council
Wednesday night ordered special
election July 81 on the question of Is
suing $150.0O0 bonds with which to
construct a municipal water works
system, pursuant to the plan investi.
gated and presented by Mayor George
A. Mottman during the first five
months of his term as chief executive
of the city.
The ordinance, as passed, is pub
lished on page Of this issue Of THE
WASHINGTON STANDARD under the head
ing of "City Notices"
No discussion was given by the
to the merits of the ordi
nance or the advisability or inadvisa
bility of establishing a municipal wa
ter works, the only point raised during
the more or less heated consideration
of the measure being an argument by
Councilman Leupke against the city
spending $400 or $500 for special
election and in favor of the presenta
tion of the question at the general cleo
tion next fall. #
To this argument the mayor, replied
that the city, by the earlier establish
ment of its own water works system
would in short time save more thar
the cost Of a special election. Coun
Gilman Funk. in explaining his vote
then raised the point that the new
management of the Olympia Water
Works should be given an opportunity
to demonstrate it's ability to make
good as to service and rates before g
competitive municipal system be in
stalled.
The mayor reviewed the history ol
the local water company, touching or
practically the same points as he rails
ed during his campaign for the may
orally last fall, defended his plan as
embodied in the ordinance later pass
ed, and held up SO all could see roll
of papers he said contained the names
of 900 consumers Of water in the city
who had signed an agreement to pur
chase water from the municipal sys
tenn as soon as it is established. These
he said. were 30 per cent. Of the water
users of the city.
On the final passage Of the ordi
nance, Councilmen Elwell, Powe. Tay
lor, Wertheim and Yauger voted In ia
vor of it, Councilmen Leupke anG
Funk against 1t.
The issue, as now before the voters
of Olympia, only $50 of whom, accord
ing to Councilman Leupke, are regis
tered, promises to embroil the city
into one of the most heated municipa
campaigns of any character seen herr
for years. Opposition to the measure
Is still more or less unorganized, bu
according to reports current ON th'
streets a determined fight will %
made against 1t by some Of the leadinf
business and professional men of th'
city.
According to these reports 1t seems
that the principal fight will cente
around the questions of whether th
city can afford to establish such a sys
tenn from the financial standpoint
whether the water in Summit lake i
pure and suitable for drinking pur
poses, especially during the summe
CONTINUED on page 81