Page images
PDF
EPUB

protect the interests of the State of California in and to the waters of the Colorado River system; and

Whereas as evidenced by the said two resolutions of June 2, 1954, of the Colorado River Board, said Board opposes said pending legislation for the reasons and to the extent as in said resolutions indicated, and this body feels that said Colorado River Board is justified in its position: Now, therefore,

On motion of W. L. Powell, seconded by Joe Rodriquez, there is hereby resolved as follows:

1. That we do hereby express our confidence in the Colorado River Board of California as representing the interests of California as to the Colorado River system and the waters thereof.

2. We do hereby expressly approve said two resolutions which are hereto attached as the action of said Colorado River Board, and authorize the city clerk to mail copies of said resolution to all California Members of Congress. Passed and adopted this 21st day of June 1954, by the unanimous action of this body.

[SEAL]

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRAWLEY, COUNTY

OF IMPERIAL, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

By PAT WILLIAMS, Mayor.

By CHARLES A. WARREN, City Clerk.

RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS POSITION OPPOSING PENDING LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING THE FRYINGPAN-KANSAS PROJECT IN COLORADO AND ITS RESOLUTION OPPOSING PENDING LEGISLATION RELATIVE TO COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECTS

Whereas two resolutions have been called to the attention of the chamber of commerce of the city of Calipatria, county of Imperial, State of California, copies of which are hereto attached and which have been passed by the Colorado River Board of California on June 2, 1954, opposing S. 964 and H. R. 236, and S. 1555 and H. R. .449, 83d Congress; and

Whereas this body is familiar with the organization, functions and activities of the Colorado River Board of California and its representation of California in connection with matters relating to the Colorado River system; and

Whereas said two resolutions oppose Senate bills 964 and 1555 and House of Representatives bills 236 and 4449, 83d Congress, which bills would authorize that certain project in Colorado designated at the Fryingpan-Arkansas project and would authorize a Colorado River storage project and participating projects, more particularly set forth in said bills; and

Whereas the State of California has a vital interest in the waters of the Colorado River system and said Colorado River Board was authorized and created and provided for by the Legislature of the State of California as an agency to protest the interests of the State of California in and to the waters of the Colorado River System; and

Whereas as evidenced by the said two resolutions of June 2, 1954, of the Colorado River Board, said board opposes said pending legislation for the reasons and to the extent as in said resolutions indicated, and this body feels that said Colorado River Board is justified in its position.

Now, therefore, on motion of William H. Sorenson, seconded by Harry Momita, there is hereby resolved as follows:

1. That we do hereby express our confidence in the Colorado River Board of California as representing the interests of California as to the Colorado River system and the waters thereof.

2. We do hereby expressly approve said two resolutions which are hereto attached as the action of said Colorado River Board, and authorize the secretary of this body to mail copies of said resolution to all California Members of Congress.

Passed and adopted this 16th day of June 1954, by the unanimous action of this body.

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE CITY OF CALIPATRIA,

COUNTY OF IMPERIAL, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

By GORDON B. BARRINGTON, President.

By R. M. CHAPMAN, Secretary.

RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA AND ITS POSITION OPPOSING PENDING LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING THE FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT IN COLORADO AND ITS RESOLUTION OPPOSING PENDING LEGISLATION RELATIVE COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECTS

Whereas two resolutions have been called to the attention of the City Council of the City of Westmorland, County of Imperial, State of California, copies of which are hereto attached, and which have been passed by the Colorado River Board of California on June 2, 1954, opposing S. 964 and H. R. 236, and S. 1555 and H. R. 4449, 83d Congress; and

Whereas this body is familiar with the organization, functions, and activities of the Colorado River Board of California and its representation of California in connection with matters relating to the Colorado River system; and

Whereas said two resolutions oppose Senate bills 964 and 1555 and House of Representatives bills 236 and 4449, 83d Congress, which bills would authorize that certain project in Colorado designated as the Fryingpan-Arkansas project and would authorize a Colorado River storage project and participating projects, more particularly set forth in said bills; and

Whereas the State of California has a vital interest in the waters of the Colorado River system and said Colorado River Board was authorized and created and provided for by the Legislature of the State of California as an agency to protect the interests of the State of California in and to the waters of the Colorado River system; and

Whereas, as evidenced by the said two resolutions of June 2, 1954, of the Colorado River Board, said board opposes said pending legislation for the reasons and to the extent as in said resolutions indicated, and this body feels that said Colorado River Board is justified in its position: Now, therefore, on motion of Councilman Stuart, seconded by Councilman Martin, there is hereby resolved as follows:

1. That we do hereby express our confidence in the Colorado River Board of California as representing the interests of California as to the Colorado River system and the waters thereof.

2. We do hereby expressly approve said two resolutions which are hereto attached as the action of said Colorado River Board and authorize the city clerk to mail copies of said resolution to all California Members of Congress. Passed and adopted this 14th day of June 1954 by the unanimous action of this body. [SEAL]

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WESTMORLAND,
COUNTY OF IMPERIAL, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

By BEULA A. RUSSELL, Mayor.

By ELIZABETH HUFFINER, City Clerk.

RESOLUTION No. 9780, OPPOSING SENATE BILL 1555; HOUSE BILL 4449; S. 964 AND H. R. 236 OR SIMILAR LEGISLATION PENDING IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

Whereas the city of Burbank is vitally dependent upon a water supply obtained from the Colorado River; and

Whereas the Colorado River storage project as proposed in S. 1555 and H. R. 4449 and the Fryingpan-Arkansas project as proposed in S. 964 and H. R. 236, now pending in the Congress of the United States of America, would jeopardize the water rights and the water supply of the city of Burbank, Calif.; and

Whereas the aforementioned projects would inflict on the taxpayers of the city of Burbank and on the entire Nation an unjustifiable burden: Therefore be it Resolved, That the enactment of these project bills is against the interest of the city of Burbank and should be opposed; and be it further

Resolved, That the city council of the city of Burbank, Calif., respectfully request the representatives of the State of California in the Congress of the United States to oppose the enactment of the above-mentioned bills or any similar legislation and that copies of this resolution be forwarded by the city clerk forthwith to the Hon. William F. Knowland and Hon. Thomas H. Kuchel, United

States Senators, and to all the California Representatives in the Congress of the United States.

[blocks in formation]

I, Naomi G. Putnam, city clerk of the city of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the council of the city of Burbank at its regular adjourned meeting held on the 25th day of June 1954 by the following votes:

Ayes: Councilmen Bank, Blais, Hilton, and King.
Noes: None.

Absent Councilman Jolley.

NAOMI G. PUTNAM,

City Clerk.

RESOLUTION of the Board OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIF.,

JUNE 15, 1954

On motion of supervisor Featherly, duly seconded and carried, the following resolution was adopted:

Whereas the county of Orange in the State of California is vitally dependent on a water supply obtained from the Colorado River;

Whereas the Colorado River storage project bill (H. R. 4449), now pending in the Congress, would jeopardize the water rights and the water supply of the county of Orange;

Whereas the Colorado River storage project would inflict on the taxpayers of this county and the Nation an unjustifiable burden: Therefore be it

Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, That the enactment of the Colorado River storage project bill is against the interests of the county of Orange and should be opposed; be it further

Resolved, That the county of Orange respectfully requests the representatives of the State of California in the Congress of the United States to oppose the enactment of this bill or any similar legislation.

Ayes: Supervisors C. M. Featherly, Willard Smith, Ralph J. McFadden, Heinz Kaiser, and Willis H. Warner.

Noes: None.

Absent: None.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

County of Orange, ss:

I, B. J. Smith, county clerk and ex-officio clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, Calif., hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the said board at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of June 1954 and passed by a unanimous vote of said board. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 15th day of June 1954.

B. J. SMITH,

County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange
County, Calif.

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF PASADENA OPPOSING FEDERAL LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECTS

Whereas the city of Pasadena is dependent on a water supply obtained from the Colorado River; and

Whereas the Colorado River storage project as proposed in S. 1555 and H. R. 4449 and the Fryingpan-Arkansas project as proposed in S. 964 and H. R. 236, now pending in the Congress, would jeopardize the water rights and the water supply of the city of Pasadena; and

Whereas the projects aforesaid would inflict on the taxpayers of this city and the Nation an unjustifiable burden: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the enactment of these project bills is against the interest of the city of Pasadena and should be opposed; be it further

Resolved, That the city of Pasadena respectfully requests the representatives of the State of California in the Congress of the United States to oppose the enactment of the bills aforesaid or any similar legislation.

EXHIBIT D

RESOLUTIONS OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC POWER ASSOCIATION, MAY 1954, OPPOSING THE USE OF THE COLLBRAN FORMULA AND EXCESSIVE SUBSIDIES TO IRRIGATION

RESOLUTION NO.

8.-INTEREST COMPONENT-COLLBRAN

FORMULA

Whereas the American Public Power Association, composed of the principal locally owned public power systems of the United States, has a direct concern in the standard of financial operations established for Federal power projects, as any public discredit resulting from uneconomic Federal power policies reflects in a degree upon the locally owned public power systems; and

Whereas the American Public Power Association disapproves the Federal power practice of diverting from the Federal Treasury the interest component of revenues derived from the power investment portion of Bureau of Reclamation projects, and using the interest so collected for retirement of capital amounts invested in irrgation projects instead of for paying interest on the resulting national debt; and

Whereas the Collbran formula proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation indirectly effects the same result, by postponing the commencement of repayment of the irrigation investment until the power investment is first retired, and is equally unsound; and

Whereas in the aggregate the sums involved in diversion of the interest component and Collbran formula would require the replacement through added taxes of many billions of dollars for the numerous reclamation projects now proposed, and

Whereas this association has been on record since 1946 as not opposing a reasonable subsidy to irrigation from power revenues, but insists as a matter of principle and sound economics, that any irrigation subsidy believed to be in the public interest should be clearly set forth and be specifically recognized and approved as such in authorization of the project by the Congress; and

Whereas as stated in this association's statement of power policy, total capital costs paid from power revenues shall not exceed the amount for which a comparable supply of power could have been developed had irrigation not been one of the purposes of the project: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the American Public Power Association condemns these practices and recommends that they not be employed in future Reclamation Bureau projects. This recommendation is made in the best interests of the American taxpayer, of the public power industry, and of the public it serves. Adoption of such a reform would avoid a concealed subsidy, the benefits of which go to only a limited number of persons at the expense of the Federal Treasury.

RESOLUTION NO. 8 (A)—EXCESSIVE SUBSIDIES TO RECLAMATION

Be it resolved, The American Public Power Association is opposed to the increasing burden which is being placed upon the power users in order to subsidize irrigation projects. In some projects recently proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation the irrigators are required to pay less than 15 percent of the costs allocated to irrigation, and the power users are required to pay more than 85 percent thereof plus all the costs allocated to power. In other cases the subsidy to be exacted from the power users would amount to the equivalent of nearly $100,000 for each 160-acre farm. This practice is not in the public interest.

This association's declaration of "Federal power policy" states that when irrigation is one of the joint purposes of a project, power revenues may be used to pay that portion of the capital costs properly chargeable to irrigation which is beyond the ability of the irrigators to pay, but that the total capital

costs to be paid from power revenues shall never exceed the amount for which a comparable supply of power could have been developed had irrigation not been one of the purposes of the project. This formula concedes fair and adequate subsidies to irrigation from the power users. If a reclamation project is sufficiently meritorious to justify greater subsidies, they should be fully disclosed, and paid from the general treasury.

(Copied from Public Power, vol. 12, No. 6, dated June, 1954.)

CITY OF SAN JACINTO

RESOLUTION NO. 448-A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, RESPECTING SENATE BILL 1555 AND H. R. 4449 IN RESPECT TO STORAGE WATER PROJECTS IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN

Whereas the city of San Jacinto is vitally dependent on a water supply obtained from the Colorado River;

Whereas the Colorado River storage project as proposed in S. 1555 and H. R. 4449 and the Fryingpan-Arkansas project as proposed in S. 964 and H. R. 236, now pending in the Congress, would jeopardize the water rights and the water supply of the city of San Jacinto;

Whereas the aforementioned projects would inflict on the taxpayers of this city and the Nation an unjustifiable burden: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the enactment of these project bills is against the interest of the city of San Jacinto and should be opposed; and be it further

Resolved, That the city of San Jacinto respectfully requests the representatives of the State of California in the Congress of the United States to oppose the enactment of the above-mentoned bills or any similar legislation.

Moved, passed, and adopted at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of San Jacinto, a California municipality, duly called and held on June 30, 1954. Dated June 30, 1954.

Attest:

W. M. KOLB, Mayor, City of San Jacinto.

MARGARET D. BELTZNER,

City Clerk, City of San Jacinto.

RESOLUTION No. 54-91-EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO H. R. 4449

Whereas the city of Santa Ana, Calif., is vitally dependent on a water supply obtained from the Colorado River;

Whereas the Colorado River storage project bill (H. R. 4449), now pending in the Congress, would jeopardize the water rights and the water supply of the city of Santa Ana;

Whereas the Colorado River storage project would inflict on the taxpayers of this city and the Nation an unjustifiable burden: Therefore be it

Resolved by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana, That the enactment of the Colorado River storage project bill is against the interests of of the city of Santa Ana and the county of Orange and should be opposed; be it further

Resolved, That the city of Santa Ana respectfully requests the representatives of the State of California in the Congress of the United States to oppose the enactment of this bill or any similar legislation.

Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana at its regular meeting held on the 21st day of June 1954.

COURTNEY R. CHANDLER, Mayor.

Attest: [SEAL]

ERMA KEELER, Clerk of the Council.

RESOLUTION No. 2595

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE OPPOSING S. 1555 AND H. R. 4449 AND THE FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT AS PROPOSED IN S. 964 AND H. R. 236, NOW PENDING IN THE CONGRESS

The City Council of the City of Torrance does resolve as follows: Whereas the city of Torrance is vitally dependent on a water supply obtained from the Colorado River; and

« PreviousContinue »