Walla Walla Questions Paying Twice for Water Rights
City officials and the press lock horns over a costly, potentially unnecessary land acquisition for a municipal gravity water system.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The water question remains the paramount issue in Walla Walla. The need for a better supply is conceded, and there is little opposition to the proposed gravity system from Thomas springs, provided there is enough water to support the city's growth for the next twenty-five years. However, the plan to purchase half of the Thomas ranch for twenty-five thousand dollars is questionable. Evidence suggests the city already owns all the subterranean water rights on the ranch—rights for which the old water company previously paid ten thousand dollars. Ownership of the surface land grants no additional water rights. The city council has wisely authorized the mayor to hire a competent, independent hydraulic engineer to verify the volume of water available, specifically warning against hiring dubious 'experts' of the type previously involved in local contracting scandals.
“It is just possible that the water company paid ten thousand dollars for a gold brick.”
Public control of water rights remains a critical issue in the modern West. This 1903 debate over whether the city should pay a premium for land just to access water it might already own echoes modern-day disputes over utility privatization and infrastructure spending.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.