I am also appearing on behalf of the New Hogan Dam project. The budget includes $1,800,000 for this project, but we are requesting $3,500,000 for the following reasons: Reason No. 1. The dam is a multipurpose structure and we are primarily and vitally interested in the flood control features. The $1,800,100 delays the completion date to 1964, whereas the $3,500,000 would advance the completion date to 1963. We wish to have that year of protection from another disastrous flood. Reason No. 2. Costs are continually rising and nothing can be gained by a delay. Reason No. 3. Previous testimony before this committee shows the Corps of Engineers capability at the greater figure. Thanks again for giving us your time and sincere consideration on Liese very worthwhile projects. Mr. CARR. Did you have any further introductions to make, Mr. Bull? Mr. BULL. We have Mr. Tom Marnoch, mayor of Stockton, with us today. Mr. CANNON. Mr. Mayor, we are glad to hear you. Mr. MARNOCH. I will be very brief on this. Mr. Bull covered it fully in his report. I want to thank you for your efforts in our behalf the past, and I know you will do everything possible to continue the work we have so heartily needed. With that, I will file the report, with your permission. The document referred to follows:) Mr. Chairman and members of the Appropriations Committee, the city of Rockton is deeply grateful for the action of your committee in past years in appropriating the funds necessary to complete plans and specifications and initiate nstruction on the New Hogan Dam. Last month the repayment contract was signed between the State of California and the Federal Bureau of Reclamation and the first construction contracts are Now being let. This year the administration budget proposal includes $1,800,000 to continue the New Hogan Dam construction, with a completion date of June 1964. We understand that the Army engineers have a capability of $3,500,000 during scal 1961, which would move up the completion date by several months. If your committee sees fit to add money to any of the projects in the budget, we Bucerely hope you will give the New Hogan Dam serious consideration. Another related item, the lower level levee work on Mormon Slough and the Everting canal is an integral part of the Calaveras River flood protection program and $20,000 is included in the general investigation funds of the Army gineers to initiate the survey of this project. We hope that you will see fit pprove this amount. Thank you again for your efforts in the past in behalf of New Hogan Dam and know your keen interest in providing flood protection for the city of Stockton l be reflected in your action again this year. TOM MARNOCH, Mr. BULL. Mr. Chairman, we also have Mr. Harvey Stull, city Councilman from the city of Stockton. We also have Mr. Irving Neumiller, who is attorney for the Stockton and East San Joaquin Water Conservation District. Mr. CANNON. Mr. Neumiller. 54265-60-pt. 4——26 STATEMENT OF MR. IRVING L. NEUMILLER Mr. NEUMILLER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Irving L. Neumiller. I am the attorney for the Stockton and East San Joaquin Water Conservation District. Last year your committee kindly approved as a new start an appropriation of $1,462,500 toward the construction of New Hogan Dam on the Calaveras River in California. For this we are extremely grateful. As a result of this appropriation, the Army engineers are now on the job buying land required for New Hogan Dam and Reservoir. This year an additional $1,800,000 is included in the President's budget and I urge your approval thereof. Such further amount will really get New Hogan Dam off the ground. Thank you for the opportunity to again appear before you for this purpose. I filed yesterday a longer statement and I ask that it be made a part of the record. SACRAMENTO RIVER STATEMENT OF MR. EARL DAVIES Mr. CANNON. Are there any further witnesses? Mr. CARR. The next item involves the Sacramento River major and minor tributaries and explains the increase you will find on page 6. I am asking Mr. Earl Davies, supervisor of Tehama County, to discuss with you briefly the Elder Creek project. Mr. CANNON. Is that one of the tributaries of the Sacramento? Mr. CARR. That is correct, Mr. Chairman, on the west side of the Sacramento River near its upper reaches. Mr. CANNON. You may proceed. Mr. DAVIES. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Earl Davies, representing the county of Tehama, Calif." I am speaking in behalf of an increase of $500,000 over the budgeted amount of $1 million for the Sacramento River, major and minor tributaries project in northern California. The budgeted amount will complete the Cherokee Canal unit of this project, but will not provide for letting a construction contract on the Elder Creek unit, which would prevent a serious and recurring flood problem. Plans and specifications for Elder Creek are essentially complete, and with the added amount, a contract could be let and the work completed in fiscal year 1960-61. In the brief time allotted, I will show the necessity for immediate completion of this work which consists of levees and channel rectification near the small industrial town of Gerber, Tehama County. Eight times in the past 23 years Elder Creek has flooded the vicin ity. High water has caused delays on heavily traveled U.S. Highway 99-W, the main north-south line of the Southern Pacific Railroad, county roads, and dislocations and evacuations in the town itself. Gerber is an important railroad division point. In addition, orchards and croplands nearby have been flooded, causing direct damage, delaying planting and other farmwork. Average annual damages total $81,000. There is another reason why the people of the upper Sacramento Valley seek early construction of the Elder Creek unit. Once completed, the Corps of Engineers can proceed on an orderly completion of other important units of the Sacramento River, major and minor tributaries project. The entire area is developing rapidly, and the need for flood protection has increased more rapidly than foreseen at the time of project authoriaztion. The State of California, under the authority of the State reclamation board, has agreed to furnish lands, easements, rights-of-way and relocation of utilities, for the Elder Creek unit, estimated to cost about $400,000. The Elder Creek unit has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.6:1. It is a wellconceived project, is badly needed, and further delay would only result in further flood damage and possible loss of life. Tehama County earnestly asks your favorablec onsideration of this budget increase. Just a brief word concerning another project in Tehama County. We strongly support the budget item of $50,000 for advance planning and design of the Sacramento River, Chico Landing to Red Bluff bank protection project. Valuable farmland is being eroded away by the river and remedial measures are long overdue. I am submitting resolutions urging these projects from the city of Tehama, the Gerber Levee District, the Gerber Community Club, the Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, the El Camino Grange, and the Tehama County Board of Super visors. The people of Tehama County deeply appreciate the opportunity to appear before your committee, and thank you for the time allotted (The resolutions referred to follow :) "Whereas the need for the Elder Creek flood control project is becoming more apparent each year; and "Whereas most of the preliminaries have been completed as to land acquisition, Basements, and surveys; and "Whereos any further delay can cause the loss of life and property: Now, therefore, be it further "Resolved, That the Tehama County Board of Supervisors strongly recomhend that the $500,000 should be added to the Sacramento River major and minor tributaries project; be it further "Resolved, That copies of this resolution be delivered to the House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Public Works." The foregoing resolution was offered by Supervisor Pryor and adopted by the following vote of the board: Ayes: Supervisors Dale, Davies, Raymond, Pryor, and Armstrong. Noes: None. Absent: None. ATE OF CALIFORNIA santy of Tehama, 88: 1 Floyd A. Hicks, county clerk and ex officio clerk of the Board of SuperFors of the County of Tehama, State of California, do hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by mid board of supervisors on the 28th day of March 1960. Dated: March 28, 1960. FLOYD A. HICKS, County Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. "Whereas there is great flood danger to persons and damage to property from foodwaters on Elder Creek in Tehama County; and "Whereas the engineering has been completed and some land has been acquired for rights-of-way on the Elder Creek levee project in anticipation of the project being included in the President's budget on the Secramento River major and minor projects for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1960; and "Whereas time is of the essence in completing this project: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That the board of directors of the Gerber Levee District endorses the project and urges that the $500,000 eliminated from the budget of the Sacramento River major and minor projects be restored to the budget." The foregoing resolution was offered by Director W. M. Wanee and adopted by the following vote of the board: Ayes: Directors Faniani, Wanee, and Stillwell. Noes: None. Absent or not voting: None. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Tehama: I, Elige Stillwell, clerk of the board of directors of the Gerber Levee District, County of Tehama, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution made by the board of directors on the 28th day of March 1960. ELIGE STILLWELL, Clerk of the Board of Directors of the Gerber Levee District. "Whereas there is great flood danger to persons and damage to property in the city of Tehama from floodwaters in Tehama County; and "Whereas the engineering has been completed and some land has been ac quired for rights-of-way on the Elder Creek levee project in anticipation of the project being included in the President's budget on the Sacramento River major and minor projects for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1960; and "Whereas time is of the essence in completing this project: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That the City Council of the City of Tehama endorses the project and urges that the $500.000 eliminated from the budget of the Sacramento River major and minor projects be restored to the budget." The foregoing resolution was offered by Councilman W. E. Storrs and adopted by the following vote of the council : Ayes: Councilmen Storrs, Gear, and Dutro. Noes: None. Absent or not voting: Councilmen Habert and Ayalla. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Tehama: I, John L. Gear, clerk of the Council of the City of Tehama, County of Tehama, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution made by the city council on the 28th day of March 1960. JOHN L. GEAR, Clerk of the City Council, City of Tehama, Calif. Hon. CLARENCE CANNON, TEHAMA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Works, JOHN L. MORAN, Chairman, Board of Directors. "Whereas there is great flood danger to persons and damage to property from floodwaters on Elder Creek in Tehama County; and "Whereas the engineering has been completed and some land has been ac quired for rights-of-way on the Elder Creek levee project in anticipation of the project being included in the President's budget on the Sacramento River major and minor projects for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1960; and "Whereas time is of the essence in completing this project: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That the Board of Directors of the Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District endorses the project and urges that the $500,000 eliminated from the budget bill of the Sacramento River major and minor projects be restored to the budget." The foregoing resolution was offered by Director Harold Todd, and adopted by the following vote of the board: Ayes: Directors Moran, Todd, and Sutfin. Noes: None. Absent or not voting: Directors Froome and Owens. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Tehama, s8: L, Floyd A. Hicks, clerk of the Board of Directors of the Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Tehama, State of California, hereby certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true, and correct opy of a resolution made by the board of directors on the 9th day of March 1920. FLOYD A. HICKS, Clerk of the Board of Directors of the Tehama County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Tehama, State of California. Mr. CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Davies. Mr. Carr? Mr. CARR. The next item on page 6, where it is over the budgeted tem, is for the Sacramento River, old project. I will ask Mr. John Lather to comment on that. Mr. CANNON. Mr. Luther. STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN LUTHER Mr. LUTHER. Just to briefly refresh your memory, this project consists of about 980 miles of levees along the main stem of the Sacramento River. It was authorized in 1917. Its completion has been. spread out over about a 43-year period. Several years ago a great deal of effort was expended to agree on the remaining portions of that project that would have to be built in order to complete it. That was outlined in a memorandum of understanding between the State and the Corps of Engineers so that since that time the items of work we have been working on are those items set forth in the memorandum. The completion target we have been working toward is 1964, which Would have required an expenditure of in the order of $3 to $4 million ach fiscal year. We have fallen behind that rate. I am here merely to suggest that if it can be done, the budget item of $2,200,000 be increased to approximately $3 million in order to pick up that lag in the completion date of the project. Mr. CANNON. As I recall it, this is a project in which we had considerable trouble on maintenance due to the fact that the public insisted on transgressing on the levees, wearing the levees down, walking on them. Do you recall? Mr. LUTHER. We have had some difficulties with maintenance, although we have a levee maintenance enforcement program in the State where, if the local areas and districts do not maintain in accordance with the prescribed rules, the State steps in and forms a levee maintenance district and assesses the land within those districts. |