plan and reaffirms its intention of opposing any plan which proposes to endanger the property rights of its citizens without just compensation. SEC. 8. Be it further resolved, etc., That a copy of these resolutions be handed the Morehouse Enterprise, Shreveport Times, Monroe News-Star, Times Picayune, and Commercial Appeal, and that a copy be forwarded to the President of the United States, the United States Army Engineering Corps, Mississippi River Commission, the Senators and Representatives of the State of Louisiana in the United States Congress, and to the heads of all interested departments of the United States Government. Adopted this 2d day of April 1935, at Bastrop, La. C. E. VAUGHAN, President. E. D. SHAW, Secretary-Treasurer. The CHAIRMAN. Is there anyone else, now, who has not been heard, who desires to make a statement in order that he may return home! (No response.) The CHAIRMAN. We will adjourn until 10:30 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 9:35 p. m., a recess was taken until 10:30 tomorrow morning, Tuesday, Apr. 9, 1935.) FLOOD CONTROL IN THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 1935 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. The committee met at 10.30 a. m., Hon. Riley J. Wilson (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. When we closed the hearing yesterday I believe Mr. Bullis had completed his statement. The next witness will be the president of the Fifth Louisiana Levee District, Mr. Kell. Will you give to the reporter your full name, and state whom you represent and the position you occupy? STATEMENT OF A. E. KELL, TALLULAH, LA., PRESIDENT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, FIFTH LOUISIANA LEVEE DISTRICT Mr. KELL. Mr. Chairman, my name is A. E. Kell; I am president of the board of commissioners of the Fifth Louisiana Levee District, at Tallulah, La. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, in order to inform the committee of the attitude that the levee board has taken it will be necessary to go into a little detail, which I am sorry to inflict on the committee. But I think I will have to do it in order to make you understand it. This question in reference to the Eudora floodway was broached first when we contacted General Ferguson and asked him to appear before the levee board and explain the proposition, which he did. We felt that the duty of the board was to get all the information we could. The board felt that the next step would be to try to ascertain the wishes of the people, so we called a hearing and invited the people all over the parish to attend. There was quite a large delegation at that meeting. Mr. Jacobs explained the engineering features of the plan, but we did not get anywhere. At that time we did not have the Markham report, so the citizens requested the board that when we got the Markham report we call another hearing, which we did. At that hearing the Markham report was discussed from a good many angles, and the result of that meeting was that the board was requested to appoint a committee consisting of three citizens from each parish to make further studies of it and go into the matter and report to the levee board in writing. That committee was appointed, and the reports came in. There were two reports. Some of the people wanted a modified spillway, and some of them opposed it, and the levee board was, you might say, sitting in between two fires. If we did not do what one fellow wanted he would shoot; I do not mean, of course, that literally he would shoot at us; and if we did not do what the other fellow wanted, he would shoot at us. So we thought that the proper thing to do was to see if we could not get a compromise. So we adopted this resolution at a special meeting on March 15, 1935, and I will read it to the committee. It says: On motion of Commissioner Hill, seconded by Commissioner Young, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 'Whereas the commissioners of this the Fifth Louisiana Levee District have received copies of the Chief Engineer's recommendations made to the Honorable Riley Wilson, chairman of the Flood Control Committee, under date of Febru ary 12, 1935, and have conducted hearings as to the wishes of the people in connection therewith, and have made exhaustive investigation themselves as to the advisability of such a floodway: Therefore be it Resolved, That the recommendations made by the Chief of Engineers in his letter transmitting the report on flood-control works in the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River, dated February 12, 1935, to the Chairman of the Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C., for proposed work and modification in the adopted plan for flood control, will be approved, provided that there are certain modifications and additions incorporated in the bill, the principal modifications of which are as follows: "1. It is the view of this board that one and one-half times the assessed value of the properties within the floodway is not an adequate compensation. in view of the fact that their assessments have been reduced in recent years by reason of the depression and difficulty of the taxpayers to pay their taxes. and we feel that their compensation should be twice the assessment of the year 1934." There is another reason there which was embodied there. We felt that at that time there were a good many small farmers in that territory who had bought cut-over lands at a low price, and under the law the assessment could not be raised. They are still assessed at a low price, and we figured that one and one-half times would not be sufficient assessment. The resolution of the levee board goes on to say: "2. This board also feels that there would be some provision for taking care, in whole or in part, of that portion of the bonded indebtedness throughout the parishes affected by the floodway, which would rest upon the lands actually in the floodway. "3. This board feels further, that the owners of the lands in the floodway should be compensated as aforesaid, not only for the lands, but for the improvements thereon, and that such compensation should include all the lands and improvements within the floodway from its upper end to its lower end. "4. We feel further that some compensation should be paid the landowners of the parishes in the backwater area because of flood waters which would be placed upon them. "5. We feel further that the floodway construction should not end at the Louisiana & Arkansas railroad near Wildsville, Concordia Parish, La., but should be continued down to the Black River and thence along the east bank of Black River to Red River, thence south on the east bank of Red River to a point approximately opposite Shaw, where it should then extend east to a connection with the Mississippi River levee. "6. It is requested that in order to properly take care of intercepted drainage, there be placed in the guide line levee at Bayou Cocodria and other places where necessary, flood gates of adequate dimensions to properly take care of drainage. "7. This board feels that the floodway as designed, having an approximate width of 50,000 feet, is wider than necessary to provide for the maximum amount required to be passed through it during a superflood and should be materially reduced; as in the present plant there is too large an area of land taken from the various parishes affected, there being 418,570 acres taken into the floodway in the Fifth Louisiana Levee District out of a total acreage of 1,400,000. "8. It is further believed by this board that because of large benefits derived by the States of Mississippi and Arkansas, through the recommendations of General Markham in locating a floodway in the State of Louisiana, that a fair payment of property, improvements and other equitable adjustments should be made so as to make the construction of the floodway less onerous upon the people affected. "9. This board feels that there are other minor modifications that it will present to General Markham and the Flood Control Committee at a later date." RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY FIFTH DISTRICT LEVEE BOARD, TALLULAH, LA., AT A SPECIAL MEETING, MARCH 15, 1935 On motion of Commissioner Hill, seconded by Commissioner Young, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: Whereas, the commissioners of this, the Fifth Louisiana Levee District, have received copies of the Chief Engineer's recommendations made to Hon. Riley J. Wilson, Chairman of the Flood Control Committee, under date of February 12, 1935, and have conducted hearings as to the wishes of the people in connection therewith, and have made exhaustive investigation themselves as to the advisability of such a floodway: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the recommendations made by the Chief of Engineers in his letter transmitting the report on flood-control works in the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River, dated Febuary 12, 1935, to the Chairman of the Flood Control Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C., for proposed work and modifications in the adpoted plan for flood control, will be approved, provided that there are certain modifications and additions incorporated in the bill, the principal modifications of which are as follows: 1. It is the views of this board that one and one-half times the assessed value of the properties within the floodway is not an adequate compensation, in view of the fact that their assessments have been reduced in recent years by reason of the depression and difficulty of the taxpayers to pay their taxes, and we feel that their compensation should be twice the assessment of the year 1934. 2. This board also feels that there should be some provision for taking care, in whole or in part, of that portion of the bonded indebtedness throughout the parishes affected by the floodway, which would rest upon the lands actually in the floodway. 3. This board feels further, that the owners of the lands in the floodway should be compensated as foresaid, not only for the lands, but for the improvements thereon, and that such compensation should include all the lands and improvements within the floodway from its upper end to its lower end. 4. We feel further that some compensation should be paid the landowners of the parishes in the backwater area because of flood waters which would be placed upon them. 5. We feel further that the floodway construction should not end at the Louisiana & Arkansas Railroad near Wildsville, Concordia Parish, La., but should be continued down to the Black River and thence along the east bank of Black River to Red River, thence south on the east bank of Red River to a point approximately opposite Shaw, where it should then extend east to a connection with the Mississippi River Levee. 6. It is requested that in order to properly take care of intercepted drainage, there be placed in the guide-line levee at Bayou Cocodria, and other places where necessary, flood gates of adequate dimensions to properly take care of drainage. 7. This board feels that the floodway as designed, having an approximate width of 50,000 feet, is wider than necessary to provide for the maximum amount re quired to be passed through it during a superflood and should be materially reduced; as in the present plan there is too large an area of land taken from the various parishes affected, there being 418,570 acres taken into the floodway in the Fifth Louisiana Levee District out of a total acreage of 1,400,000. 8. It is further believed by this board that because of large benefits derived by the States of Mississippi and Arkansas, through the recommendations of General Markham in locating a floodway in the State of Louisiana, that a fair payment of property, improvements, and other equitable adjustments should be made so as to make the construction of the floodway less onerous upon the people affected. 9. This board feels that there are other minor modifications that it will present to General Markham and the Flood Control Committee at a later date. I, Eileen Moncrief, secretary of the board of commissioners of the Fifth Louisiana Levee District, do hereby certify that the above is a true, correct, and complete copy of a resolution adopted by the board of commissioners at a special meeting held at its office in Tallulah, La., on March 15, 1935; a quorum being present and voting. Witness my official signature and seal of said board hereto attached this 16th day of March 1935. EILEEN MONCRIEF, Secretary. That is the position which the levee board took on the matter. This resolution says that we will approve the floodway in the event those changes are made. Since that time we have passed another resolution reading as follows: Whereas, this board adopted a resolution on March 15, 1935, asking for certain changes and modifications in the proposed Eudora spillway: Therefore, be it Resolved, That unless we can secure such changes and modifications as specified in said resolution, the board will oppose the said spillway as recommended by the Chief of Engineers. That is the attitude the levee board has taken, which I wanted to explain to the committee. I will be glad to answer any questions you may desire to ask me. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Kell, as I understand the opposition of your levee board is relative to compensation. Is that the recommendation suggested by the resolution, that you feel that it should be based, in toto, on one and one-half times the assessed value of the property for the year 1934? Is that the position that your board takes, that that is not adequate? Mr. KELL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. As I understand General Markham's explanation, I believe it was that within a parish it would not apply to each particular piece of property, but in toto it would be one and onehalf times the assessed value, and then that would be distributed according to what would be fair, to each property owner. If that were made on that basis, do you not think you could fix the basis which would be fair in handling it in that way? Mr. KELL. When we passed that resolution we did not understand that they included improvements, and General Markham, as you know, stated that the one and one-half times assessed value included the land and the improvements. If you include the improvements and two times the assessed value I believe it would be fair to them. The CHAIRMAN. According to his testimony, he included the improvements. For instance, here is a man with cut-over land assessed at a certain amount, and he puts his home and improvements on that cut-over land, and that home and the improvements are taken into consideration as to what shall be paid in. Do you think |