Page images
PDF
EPUB

I also desire to submit for the record a letter addressed to me, signed by Herman O. Bowman, mayor of the city of Rossville, Ga., dated April 25, 1946.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the letters will be inserted in the record at this point. (The letters referred to follow:)

MARCH 23, 1946. Lt. Gen. R. A. WHEELER, Chief, Corps of Engineers, War Department,

Washington, D. C. DEAR GENERAL WHEELER: In an Associated Press distpatch from Washington appearing in the Rome, Ga., News Tribune on Wednesday, March 20, 1946, concerning the Rossville-Chattanooga flood-control project, Col. J. H. Stratton, of the Army engineers, is quoted as having said "rights-of-way for levees and flood walls have been obtained in the Chattanooga area, and work can be started there. Negotiations are still underway in the Rossville, Ga., area. Colonel Stratton said if the Rossville rights-of-way are not provided, levees could be turned back into high ground above Rossville instead of being extended to below that community.”

You doubtless are advised that in the pending civil functions appropriations bill the Senate has inserted the follow proviso which I apprehend will remain in the bill when enacted :

"Provided further, That in connection with the Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Rossville, Georgia, flood-control project, the State of Tennessee or local subdivisions thereof shall furnish the rights-of-way for the entire project.”

I have a letter from the mayor of Rossville, Ga., Mr. H. O. Bowman, concerning parts of statements said to have been made by Mr. M. Z. L. Fuller, secretarytreasurer of the Chattanooga flood-control district, to the effect that he proposes to have a levee placed along the Tennessee-Georgia line in such a manner that all the backwater from the Tennessee River which would ordinarily be in the basin of the Chattanooga Creek will be backed up into and cover a part of west Rossville.

I do not understand that any changes of this type can be made in the Rossville-Chattanooga flood-control project as authorized by Congress without prior approval of Congress, but in view of the statements reported to have been made by Colonel Stratton, as above quoted, I would like to have information from you as to whether it is felt that any such plan as advocated by Mr. Fuller or as suggested by Colonel Stratton can be adopted without further congressional authorization. Very truly yours,

M. C. TARVER, M. C. Copy to Mayor H. O. Bowman, Rossville, Ga.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE,

Nashville, Tenn., March 28, 1946. Hon. HERMAN O. BOWMAN,

Mayor of the City of Rossville, Rossville, Ga. DEAR MAYOR BOWMAN: In accordance with our telephone conversation yesterday, there is enclosed a map showing the location of the proposed levee for the protection of Chattanooga, Tenn., and Rossville, Ga., from Tennessee River backwaters and Chattanooga Creek floodwaters.

As discussed with you yesterday, the plan provides for a levee along the Tennessee River front and a connecting levee to extend along the floodway and terminate at high land a considerable distance west of Rossville, for the diversion of Chattanooga Creek waters. Dry Creek, which drains the Rossville area, will continue to flow in its old channel and into Chattanooga Creek and those interior drainage waters will be pumped over the levee into the Tennessee River during flood times. This will give the Rossville area equal protection with the Chattanooga area and will not require the installation of levees in the vicinity of Rossville. Since there has been an apparent misunderstanding concerning the effect that the plan will have upon the Rossville area, it will be appreciated if you will write Congressman Tarver immediately expressing your views as stated to me, in order that a correct understanding may be had of the situation. To further that purpose, a copy of this letter is being sent to Congressman Tarver.

If this office can be of any service to you in this or other connections, please do not hesitate to call on us. Sincerely yours,

READING WILKINSON,
Colonel, Corp of Engineers,

District Engineer. Copy (with enclosure) to

Hon. M. C. TARVER,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

APRIL 4, 1946. Hon MALCOLM C. TARVER,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. TARVER: Reference is made to your letter of March 23, 1946, concerning the Chattanooga, Tenn., and Rossville, Ga., flood-control project. In your letter you state that you have received a letter from Mr. H. O. Bowman, mayor of Rossville, concerning parts of statements said to have been made regarding a proposal to have a levee placed along the Tennessee-Georgia line in such a manner that all the backwater from the Tennessee River which would ordinarily be in the basin of the Chattanooga Creek will be backed up into and cover a part of West Rossville. You also mention a press dispatch from Washington appearing in the Rome (Ga.) News Tribune on March 20, 1946, in which a representative of this office is stated to have said that rights-of-way for levees and flood walls have been obtained in the Chattanooga area and that if the Rossville rights-ofway are not provided, levees could be turned back into high ground above Rossville instead of being extended to below that community. You request information concerning the matter.

All of the Department's flood-control activities must be undertaken in strict accordance with authorizations by Congress. The project for flood protection at Chattanooga, Tenn., and Rossville, Ga., was authorized in the Flood Control Act of August 18, 1941, substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers contained in House Document No. 479, Seventy-sixth Congress, second session, which includes protection for Rossville, Ga., equal to that recommended for Chattanooga, Tenn. The protective works proposed for Rossville, Ga., as described in House Document No. 479, would consist of a levee approximately 7,000 feet long, a drainage ditch 6,000 feet long, two street modifications, and other minor items. This levee, or Rossville section, would actually be a continuation of the right bank levee for the Chatanooga Creek section and would extend generally southward from the Tennessee-Georgia State line to high ground south of Rossville and west of McFarland Avenue.

During preparation of the engineering design for this work, a realinement of the Chattanooga Creek section of the project was found to be desirable in order to reduce the total cost of the project and to furnish protection for a larger area at Rossville. This realinement eliminates the greater portion of the levee originally proposed to be constructed in Georgia. The area to be protected in Georgia, however, has been increased and includes all of the area in Rossville originally recommended for protection in House Document 479. Some rights-ofway will still be required in Georgia, since the realignement levee will extend approximately 900 feet south of the Georgia-Tennessee State line in order to tie into high ground. The degree of protection proposed to be furnished the area in Georgia is equal to that proposed for Chattanooga.

The district engineer at Nashville, Tenn., discussed the plan of protection proposed for Rossville with Mr. Bowman on March 27, 1946, and confirmed his statements to the mayor in a letter dated March 28, 1946. A copy of the district engineer's letter to Mayor Bowman was sent to you in connection with your letter of March 23, 1946. You will note that the district engineer's letter to the mayor states that the present plan will give the Rossville area equal protection with the Chattanooga area and will not require the installation of levees in the vicinity of Rossville. The district engineer's report to this office states that upon clarification of the matter, Mr. Bowman expressed himself as being very well satisfied with the proposed plan. I may assure you that the flood-protection works

for the Rossville area will be undertaken in close cooperation with the Rossville authorities and that plans for those works are substantially in accordance with and provide for all the protection contemplated in the report on which authorization of the project by Congress is based. Sincerely yours,

R. C. CRAWFORD, Brigadier General, Acting Chief of Engineers.

CITY OF ROSSVILLE, GA.,

Rossville, Ga., April 25, 1946. Hon. M. C. TARVER,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR JUDGE TARVER: Receipt of your letter of April 22 is acknowledged with respect to the Chattanooga-Rossville flood-protection project, as well as letter from Hon. W. M. Whittington, chairman of the Committee on Flood Control.

We note from Mr. Whittington's letter that Mr. Kefauver has now advocated an amendment to the existing bill to provide that each State would supply the right-of-ways for the levees in the respective States.

We, of course, understand that Mr. Fuller is not interested in any way whatsoever in this section of north Georgia, and that likewise Mr. Kefauver has no interest in Rossville.

While Mr. Kefauver lives in Chattanooga, Tenn., and is a neighbor of we of Rossville, Ga., we know of no occasion on which Mr. Kefauver has ever demonstrated any interest in flood-control problems in Rossville, Ga.

In behalf of the city of Rossville, the undersigned will attempt at this time to state our position as clearly and distinctly as we know how.

The authorities of the city of Rossville feel that any plans (for flood-protection construction) related to flood control in Chattanooga, Tenn., which are financed in whole, or part, by Federal funds, should incorporate therein and provide protection for Rossville, Ga., because

1. The cities are contiguous to each other.

2. The ground configuration is such that any obstruction of natural drainage in Chattanooga, Tenn., will necessarily redound to the detriment and damage of Rossville, Ga., unless coordinated planning takes into consideration and makes provision for the changed configuration as a result of levee or canal construction.

3. The construction of levees as now proposed by the flood-protection district of Chattanooga, Tenn., will result in irreparable injury and damage to Rossville, Ga.

4. The construction of a "chopped up” levee system would possibly result in the destruction of the beneficial effects of two separate systems.

5. The flood-protection district of Chattanooga is dominated and controlled by M. Z. L. Fuller. The latter person is making a deliberate effort to eliminate Rossville, Ga., from the plans for Chattanooga, Tenn. He is uncooperative, dictatorial, arrogant, and incidentally the principal beneficiary (he having purchased the assets of the defunct Central Realty Co. of which he was president at the time it became defunct) of any improvements that might be made in a portion of south Chattanooga.

6. Since the Chattanooga Valley Basin plan was eliminated by Army engineers, Mr. Fuller's vindictiveness has been manifested by completely ignoring north Georgia public officials with whom he has previously pretended to collaborate in dealing with, what he always considered heretofore, “an inseparable problem of great magnitude.”

7. Unless Congress includes Rossville in the present plan, it will necessarily mean

(a) That approaches to Rossville, Ga., from Chattanooga, Tenn., will be impeded by unsightly levees.

(7) The Chattanooga Creek's course will be changed.

(C) Floodwaters will be backed up over a large area in west Rossville, resulting in serious damage.

(d) No plan will have been devised to eliminate the basic causes of floods.

8. We desire to point out that water is no respecter of State lines. Obviously if water from Georgia flows into Tennessee (in this case through one entire community) and causes flood damages in Chattanooga, why would not damage result to property in Georgia ?

We are opposed to spending Federal funds in Chattanooga, Tenn., for the purpose of flooding Rossville, Ga. The problem must be considered as a whole and flood protection plans made accordingly.

We request that this, our protest, be brought to Mr. Whittington's attention when the Flood Control Committee reconvenes.

We thank you very much for your interest in our behalf in this matter and return herewith for your files, Mr. Whittington's letter of April 19.

If there is any further or additional information that we might supply in connection with our position on this problem, please do no hesitate to call upon us. Very truly yours,

HERMAN O. Bowman, Mayor. Mr. TARVER. I will quote briefly excerpts from Mr. Bowman's letter:

The authorities of the city of Rossville feel that any plans (for flood-protection construction) related to flood control in Chattanooga, Tenn., which are financed in whole, or part, by Federal funds, should incorporate therein and provide protection for Rossville, Ga., because :

1. The cities are contiguous to each other.

2. The ground configuration is such that any obstruction of natural drainage in Chattanooga, Tenn., will necessarily redound to the detriment and damage of Rossville, Ga., unless coordinated planning takes into consideration and makes provision for the changed configuration as a result of levee or canal construction.

3. The construction of levees as now proposed by the flood-protection district of Chattanooga, Tenn., will result in irreparable injury and damage to Rossville,

Ga.

The entire letter will be in the record, and I hope it will receive the attention of the committee.

I wish to call attention to this statement in the letter of the Acting Chief of Engineers to me, dated April 4, 1945:

The district engineer at Nashville, Tenn., discussed the plan of protection proposed for Rossville with Mr. Bowman on March 27, 1946, and confirmed his statements to the mayor in a letter dated March 28, 1946. A copy of the district engineer's letter to Mayor Bowman was sent to you in connection with your letter of March 23, 1946. You will note that the district engineer's letter to the mayor states that the present plan will give the Rossville area aqual protection with the Chattanooga area and will not require the installation of levees in the vicinity of Rossville. The district engineer's report to this office states that upon clarification of the matter, Mr. Bowman expressed himself as being very well satisfied with the proposed plan.

That is the plan that the engineers have devised, not the plan advocated by Mr. Fuller.

I may assure you that the flood-protection works for the Rossville area will be undertaken in close cooperation with the Rossville authorities, and that plans for those works are substantially in accordance with and provide for all the protection contemplated in the report on which authorization of the project by Congress is based.

I quote that portion of General Crawford's letter because it shows that no legislative change in the plan as authorized by Congress is necessary in order to afford appropriate and adequate protection, both for the city of Chattanooga and for the city of Rossville, and that the only purpose of Mr. Fuller in attempting to have the committee amend the legislative authority for this project is to satisfy his own spirit of vindictiveness occasioned by the denial of his own personal plans for changes in the method of affording flood protection to these two urban areas. I don't imagine that any representative of the Corps of Engineers has testified before your committee in favor of the amendment submitted by Congressman Kefauver. I judge from the correspondence I have had with the Corps of Engineers that

any amendment to the statute already in existence is unnecessary. If any representative of the Corps of Engineers has testified that any amendment is necessary in order to afford complete flood protection, both to the urban areas of Chattanooga and of Rossville, Ga., I would like to be advised of that fact, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I think the record is to this effect: Thus far the testimony both by the proponents of this amendment and the opponents would indicate that they don't want to have the levee tied to a certain place before the Georgia line is reached, and the Corps of Engineers merely responded to questions by assuring them what would happen if the amendments were adopted, and in this connection—if that is not a fair statement, General Wheeler, I would be glad for you to correct the Chairman.

General WHEELER. Yes; that is correct, Mr. Chairman. The views of our Department are as contained in the letter that Congressman Tarver has placed in the record. We believe that the plan as authorized by Congress, and for which we submitted a definite project coordinating the protection of the area which includes those two cities, is the proper plan.

Mr. TARVER. Do you think that any amendment to the statutory authority is necessary?

General WHEELER. No, sir; not to carry out that definite project for the protection of those two areas. Mr. TARVER. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. In this connection, Mr. Beard, so the committee may see just what the proposal is, will you turn to the map of Chattanoga and Rossville and indicate the proposed levee line under the adopted project, and the proposal to amend the adopted project?

Mr. BEARD. The proposal pertains to Chattanooga Creek, which is a tributary entering the Tennessee River at this point [indicating] right at the foot of Lookout Mountain, which is on the extreme western edge of Chattanooga itself. The project plan is to straighten Chattanooga Creek upstream to just about the Tennessee-Georgia line, with levees on both sides of the channel to confine the backwater from floods in the Tennessee River.

The project plan as now devised by our district engineer is to tie the easterly one of these Chattanooga Creek levees into high ground in Georgia, about 900 feet south of the State line, as indicated here. Rossville lies east of that tie-in point and will be fully protected. The alternate proposal contemplated under Congressman Kefauver's amendment would require a tie-back a great deal farther east, entirely within the State of Tennessee to this point, which would exclude Rossville from the protected area.

The CHAIRMAN. Would it require more or less right-of-way?

Mr. BEARD. Our information is it would require a greater expenditure for rights-of-way, because of getting into a somewhat more highly developed area.

The CHAIRMAN. Would those rights-of-way be furnished by the local interests? Mr. BEARD. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And would that plan protect the city of Rossville? Mr. BEARD. The plan proposed under Congressman Kefauver's plan would not protect Rossville.

right butary on The prope proposte the pe

« PreviousContinue »