companies and municipal corporations throughout the State, in order, if it should be concluded that the policy of the City should continue to be what it is now, namely, that of municipal ownership, that the City may be able to continue that policy, which in the past has approved itself to the minds of the citizens, and which an investigation of the subject will show is becoming more and more general, not only in this country, but in Europe. All citizens of the Empire State realize that the commercial supremacy of New York City is at times threatened by Western rivals, and that there are indications to-day that unequal burdens rest upon the Metropolis of the Western Hemisphere which in certain directions are unquestionably impeding its development. The prosperity of the Empire State is intimately interwoven with the prosperity of the City of New York. A more liberal policy as to the acquiring of water has been adopted by other large cities of the country than, for some reason which it is not easy to discover, has been adopted as to New York. If such a liberal policy is not adopted with regard to the City of New York, it may perhaps be the case that New York will be obliged to enter into a contract with a private company for its water-supply, which will ultimately impose upon it a greater financial burden than it might be obliged to assume if it were enabled to own and operate entirely its own waterworks. Briefly to resume, the intention of Assembly Bill No. 759 is to give to the City power to condemn water-rights which are not now used by a village, town or city, and which may not hereafter become reasonably necessary for the purposes of such municipality. It is further the intention of such bill that such necessity should in each case be determined as a question of fact by the Supreme Court. By granting the powers of condemnation to the City of New York provided for in Assembly Bill No. 759, the Legislature will give New York City powers which, while not so great as those granted to other cities and private water companies, will at the same time enable the City to own its own water-supply if it shall be deemed proper to continue that policy. The very recent Skaneateles cases (161 N. Y.) do not apply. It was therein held that a village could establish its own waterworks under the General Village Law, although a private water ompany was already supplying the inhabitants of such village. Such cases would be pertinent if Assembly Bill No. 759 becomes a law; but even then, New York City would be under larger restraint than is a village under the General Village Law, and the rights of all cities, towns and villages of the State would be carefully guarded. We have shown that private water companies now have the right to enter upon the necessary sources of water-supply from which all cities, towns and villages in the State derive their public waters, to condemn the water-rights thereof, and to sell the waters to the City of New York for the private benefit of such companies; and that, by virtue of Section 472 of the City Charter, the City of New York may be compelled to buy those waters from such private companies. We, therefore, respectfully submit that the only effective measure of protection for such cities, towns and villages is to put New York in a position in which that municipality will be able to get its water supply without dealing with a private water company under such restrictions to be applied in the discretion of the Supreme Court, as will protect the rights of the other municipalities in the State; and we respectfully request that your Honorable Committee will favorably report Assembly Bill No. 759 immediately. Very respectfully, THE MERCHANTS' ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK. GENERAL CONTENTS: SECTION V. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON MUNICIPAL FINANCE AND PUBLIC POLICY. PART I. Conclusions and Recommendations. I. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS. II. RECOMMENDATIONS. PART II. Water Supply Finance. 1. COST AND REVENUE OF THE CROTON SYSTEM. II. COMPARATIVE COST OF WATER SUPPLY BY CONTRACT AND III. THE FINANCIAL RESULTS OF PUBLIC, AS COMPARED WITH IV. CONSTITUTIONAL REGULATION OF MUNICIPAL WATER FINANCE. PART III. Objections to Water Contracts with Private Companies. I. GENERAL OBJECTIONS TO A WATER CONTRACT FOR THE SUP- 11. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO THE RAMAPO CONTRACT. PART IV. The Public Financial and Statistical Records of the City's Water Supply System. |