Evening star., 1926-03-16

-
policy in respect to equitable owner.
ship Of the plant based on money con-
tribution toward the cost OF construc-
ton. The local community. composed
Of taxpayers and water rent payers,
was compelled to become a large part
owner In the phantom the half and
half basis so far as the cost Of the
Lydecker tunnel and other plant-eX.
penditures from taxes were concerned
and with the local community in.
creasing its percentage Of plant own
ership by application Of water rent
surpluses over the cost Of mainte.
nance to development of the plant. es-
pecially the distribution plant.
Recent figures of relative equitable
ownership of the water supply plant
are interesting. Water Department
figures up to June 30. 1925. of expendi.
ture on construction of water supply
plant. including water collection, fl.
tration and distribution, show expendi.
lures:
2. District ttaxpayeerrs,.... 5.o1S.SS3.S1
8. District trent payers}..... 22.OO2 S96.42
S36. 1926. .e4s 81
The original aqueduct expenditure
by the Nation approximately three
| millions) had supplied free water to
the United States for 81 years and had
deteriorated so much in these years
that its value as an asset OF the new
compulsory partnership was greatly
deprecated from the original cost and
was left as comparatively small as.
set Of new partnership ownership.
The Nation today retains legal title
to the whole OF the water supply
plant. but only q small fraction Of
the equitable ownership. based on
relative contributions Of money to
construct today's water supply plant.
While the Nations equitable owner.
ship Of the plant has thus been re-
duced to a small fraction, the National
Government has continued to be q
large water consumer us per cent?.
and a consumer which pays nothing
for its water.
Since 1890 the tendency has been to
decrease the Nations relative per.
centage Of equitable plant ownership:
~ The new 60.40 ratio. substituted
in 1922 for $3.50. has increased every
year the percentage Of contribution
Of local taxpayers toward the total
plant expenditures, and In the end
with the depreciation to the point OF
disappearance Of the value Of the
$3,oo0.0oo original plant) the District
will own In equity nearly all the plant
las taxpayers and water rent payers),
and will be at the same time the only
part owner who pays for water con.
sumed. By every increase Of water
rent the amount OF surpluses from
water rents over cost of mainte-
nance correspondingly increases, and
consequently the Districts owner
ship percentage based on the invest
ment Of surplus water rents In the
distribution water plant will be COR
respondingly enlarged.
It Is thus to be noted that here.
after the United States, paying only
40 per cent of the tax contribution
for water supply development (or less
under the iump-sum plan). and pay
ing nothing whatever in water rents
surplus toward the upbuilding Of the
water supply system, will steadily de.
crease in its percentage Of equitable
ownership In the water supply plant
for collection. filtration and distribu.
ton, with the inevitable result that
In time the District community as
taxpayer and water rent payer will
own in equity nearly all OF the water
supply plant and will at the same
time pay in taxes and water rents
nearly all Of the cost Of water works
operation and extension, while the
United States, with its equitable plant
ownership reduced to 4 negligible frac-
ton Of the total. will have oil Of the
free water it wants to use, q paradoxt-
cal, inequitable result.