upr000091 68

Mr.E.E. Bennett: S\$ Las Vegas, Nevada August 21st, li>52 I attach hereto copy of the Las Vegas Sun which includes a story concerning the meeting of the City Commissioners of Las Vegas, last night and the statement made hy Mayor Baker. I had the good fortune of talking with Mayor Baker during an intermission of the meeting and prior to his public statement on the proposed purchase of the water company. He stated to me that he believed the offer of two and one-half million dollars made by the Water District was a fair offer. He believed, however, that an education campaign should be undertaken at once to explain to the public why the proposed price is a fair price and why there is a difference between the valuation found by the Public Service Commission for rate-making purposes and the offer of the Water District. He commented on this difference last night and said that even though the price of two and one-half million dollars might be reduced in a condemnation proceeding, it was possible that it would also be increased in such a pro­ceeding after a prolonged coir t trial. He stated several times that the time factor was more important than the price and that in his opinibn every effort should be made to either get behind the water district and complete the transaction or have the water company taken over by the City of Las Vegas. I thought Mayor Baker’s attitude was quite favorable to the company. However, City Attorney, Howard Cannon seemed quite bitter over the rate increase allowed to the company and interrupted the mayor several times to inject statements which were not favorable to the Water Company. As a result of Baker’s statement to the Commission the Commission desired to meet with the members of the Water District, Friday afternoon at 3:00 P.M. I don’t know if the Water District will welcome the interference of the City Commissioners•