upr000089 101

\ m 3 ** It is also note* that the offer of the water District is paragraph ji| embraces (among other things) *all nd&Sf tloas end betterments, including the ayde Perk additions and bet­terments as the easts exist as ctf September 1# 1938** According to the wording quoted, the value of ail additions and betterments as of the date stated would become the property of the Water Bis- triot without extra payment therefor regardless of where lose ted $ therefore, the slgnlfieanee of the mesial reference to the Hyde Park facilities is not understood* fhe Hyde Park project is now in course of approval end Involves an estimated expenditure of #60,30® to cover the Instal­lation of 11,073 ft* of cast iron pipe of various sines; there­fore. since no work has been performed on this project to date there is no portion of it involved in the purchase offer of #8,300,000* If this project is taken over by the District, since it will be constructed after September 1, 1938 it appears that it* a cost should be paid far as an extra, in the same manner pro­vided for acquiring all other additions and betterments* In this connection, you w i n recall at the conference referred to on page 1, you stated that the Hyde Park facilities would be constructed at the expense of the Water company* Tour statement was no doubt predicated on the third paragraph of Mr* Reinhardt** letter of September 19, 1938 to Mr* atoadard, copy to you, which readst •The amount of #187,600 shown as being deducted from the original bid la the amount of our appropriation for the completion of the Hyde Park additions ana better­ments* Utls cost under the bid as shown in paragraph lettered (e) is to be borne i&oXly by the water company." j , 0 ^ the amount of #187,600 represents the estimated cost of ? the facilities authorised under W*0. Ho* 3013-IA. referred to on hereof* the Hyde Park facilities are estimated to cost ,300, which, as stated above, have not yet been formally auth­orised* Since the proposed purchase contract provides for con­structing the facilities authorised under W«o* Ho* 3016—X*& at an estimated cost of #187,600 entirely at railroad expense and does not mention the Hyde Park facilities, it seems that in the para­graph quoted above Mr* Reinhardt intended to refer to the facili­ties authorised under w*0. Ho. 6015-i a instead of to the Hyde Park facilities not yet authorised* Will you please confirm the above understanding and also confirm that m portion of the estimated cost of the Hyde Park facilities Is included in your appraisals*