OCR Text |
Show -3- approved in December of 1928, is necessarily at a standstill until the Secretary signs the required power contracts, for, under the Act, no appropriations could be made before that time. I have now signed such contracts and made it possible for this work to proceed. But before doing so, not only did this Department wait until the states had had an opportunity under section 8(b) to compact on or before January 1, 1929, as the law allows, but I delayed my action until April 28, 1930, or thirteen months, after taking office, in the earnest hope that the states would be able to work out their problems. Last June, as in the proceeding March, under the auspices of this Department, a conference between the states was called for that purpose and every assistance given them by the Department and its bureaus to that end. It was fruitless. Nevertheless, I did not accept that failure of the states to come together as being final, nor did I, by proceeding immediately with the power contracts, as I might have done, foreclose them from agreeing on the power question. Instead, four months later, I, on October 19, 1929, announced a tentative allocation of power and a price for power and a price for the storage of water, and set November 12 as a hearing date for any protest. Every attempt was made to bring Arizona to the conference table and give her an opportunity to be heard on the points mentioned above. Not only was a formal notification extended to your state on October 23, which you acknowledged on October 30, but, in addition, I telegraphed you on November 4, and wrote you on that date, and wrote you again on November 7. In the latter letter I said, "As I wish to make no final allocation until after this hearing (November 12) and desire to give all parties an opportunity to be heard at that time, I wish to again formally advise you of the date and of the invitation to Arizona to be heard." Nevertheless, |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : California exhibits. |