Tacoma’s Water Commissioner Says He’ll Stay—and He Won’t Take a Raise
H. J. McGregor denies rumors of resignation, turns down a higher salary, and vows to finish the city’s water supply and power plant.
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.
Commissioner H. J. McGregor will not resign, and he says the published reports that he was considering such a move are entirely unfounded. Neither will he ask for more salary.
He is going to stay by the job, if all goes well in the future, until the present plans for getting an adequate water supply and the building of the power plant are completed.
The commissioner even has opposed an increase in his own salary. Recently, when some salaries were being boosted and the increases were submitted to him, with his own raised from $100 to $250 a month, he drew his pen through his own increase and struck it out before recommending the schedule.
“I did, some three weeks ago, receive an offer of $300 a month to take charge of an irrigation project over the mountains which would last about two years, but I never said anything about it and I have no intention of resigning to take it. I have not asked for an increase in salary either, nor will I do so. I believe the commissioner in Tacoma is paid far less than in any other city, and the office should be paid more, but I took the place at the present salary and I could not conscientiously ask for more. If, at any time, I am not satisfied with the pay, I could quit, but I have been honored with the confidence of the people and I feel it my duty to go ahead and try to carry out the things I have projected.”
“I took the place at the present salary and I could not conscientiously ask for more.”
Public power and water were flashpoints in early Tacoma, and McGregor’s refusal of a raise while promising to finish the city’s utility plant reads like a civic trust argument. The details of the office have changed, but the question—who pays for infrastructure, and who gets credit for refusing the perks—has not.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.