Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
Statement by Hans Doe Director, Metropolitan Water District. 1 Page. [Memo], 8/15/1962
To: Ralph B. Bunje From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Kenneth Haussler. 1 Page. [Letter], 5/7/1962
California Water Development. 15 Pages. [Report], n/a
To: Research From: Bob Haldeman Re: Letter from Morton C. Hull. 2 Pages. [Memo], 2/21/1962
To: George H. Ide From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Advice on water problems. 2 Pages. [Letter], 2/9/1962
To: Melba Bennett From: Bob Haldeman Re: Task Forces for issue study - - especially water. 2 Pages. [Letter], 1/10/1962
To: James H. Krieger From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Water phase of Nixon's Campaign plans. 2 Pages. [Letter], 1/10/1962
To: Water Task Force From: Bob Haldeman Re: Hans Doe. 1 Page. [Memo], 11/19/1961
To: Frank Bennett From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Letter regarding Jim Kreiger. 2 Pages. [Letter], 12/22/1961
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26128109
label
WHSF: Returned, 63-22
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26128109
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Returned, 63-22
description
This file contains:
Statement by Hans Doe Director, Metropolitan Water District. 1 Page. [Memo], 8/15/1962
To: Ralph B. Bunje From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Kenneth Haussler. 1 Page. [Letter], 5/7/1962
California Water Development. 15 Pages. [Report], n/a
To: Research From: Bob Haldeman Re: Letter from Morton C. Hull. 2 Pages. [Memo], 2/21/1962
To: George H. Ide From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Advice on water problems. 2 Pages. [Letter], 2/9/1962
To: Melba Bennett From: Bob Haldeman Re: Task Forces for issue study - - especially water. 2 Pages. [Letter], 1/10/1962
To: James H. Krieger From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Water phase of Nixon's Campaign plans. 2 Pages. [Letter], 1/10/1962
To: Water Task Force From: Bob Haldeman Re: Hans Doe. 1 Page. [Memo], 11/19/1961
To: Frank Bennett From: H. R. Haldeman Re: Letter regarding Jim Kreiger. 2 Pages. [Letter], 12/22/1961
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Returned White House Special Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26128109
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9fd961a0533456c5
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
White House Special Files Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
63
22
08/15/1962
Memo
Statement by Hans Doe Director,
Metropolitan Water District. 1 Page.
63
22
05/07/1962
Letter
To: Ralph B. Bunje From: H. R. Haldeman
Re: Kenneth Haussler. 1 Page.
63
22
n/a
Report
California Water Development. 15 Pages.
63
22
02/21/1962
Memo
To: Research From: Bob Haldeman Re:
Letter from Morton C. Hull. 2 Pages.
63
22
02/09/1962
Letter
To: George H. Ide From: H. R. Haldeman
Re: Advice on water problems. 2 Pages.
63
22
01/10/1962
Letter
To: Melba Bennett From: Bob Haldeman
Re: Task Forces for issue study - - especially
water. 2 Pages.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Page 1 of 2
Box Number Folder Number Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
63
22
01/10/1962
Letter
To: James H. Krieger From: H.R.
Haldeman Re: Water phase of Nixon's
Campaign plans. 2 Pages.
63
22
11/19/1961
Memo
To: Water Task Force From: Bob
Haldeman Re: Hans Doe. 1 Page.
63
22
12/22/1961
Letter
To: Frank Bennett From: H. R. Haldeman
Re: Letter regarding Jim Kreiger. 2 Pages.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Page 2 of 2
STATEMENT BY HANS DOE
DIRECTOR, METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUGUST 15, 1962
Hans Doe, a director of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Cali-
fornia, today said "I just can't say enough to express the full gratitude of the
people of Southern California for the bi-partisan effort expended to make the
San Luis Reservoir a reality."
The ground breaking ceremony to mark the official start of construction of
San Luis dam and reservoir will be held Saturday at the reservoir site near Los
Banos in western Merced County.
Doe said, in a statement released in San Diego, that "the California Water
Plan, in which the San Luis reservoir will play a major part, will help prepare
California for its destiny as the nation's most populous and richest state.
"And I'm sure the people of this state will remember that this important
link in the chain to bring surplus water from the North was, as many of our major
accomplishments are, a joint effort by leaders of both political parties, includ-
ing former Vice President Richard Nixon, Gov. Edmund G. Brown and Sens. Thomas
Kuchel and Clair Engle," he said.
Doe recalled that when the legislation authorizing joint federal-state con-
struction of San Luis reservoir was bottled up in a Congressional committee in
1960, Vice President Nixon provided the strong urging to cause the entire Repub-
lican membership of the committee to swing in favor of the bill and approve it.
Doe said "this effort resulted from a conference between Brown and Nixon at,
of all places, the opening baseball game of the season in San Francisco."
Doe said Brown subsequently expressed his thanks in a telegram to Nixon
dated May 20, 1960. Doe said the telegram, never before released, read as follows:
Honorable Richard M. Nixon
Vice President of the United States
Washington, D. C.
I think the opening baseball game in San Francisco will prove extremely valuable
to all the citizens of this state. When a Democratic Governor and a Republican
Vice President, both native sons, join together in any project it looks like
things get done. May we, despite our political differences, find many future
opportunities to be of service to the people of our native state and wonderful
country. Thank you for your help on San Luis.
Signed
Edmund G. Brown, Governor
-30-
8/15/62
May 7, 1962
Dear Ralph:
Dick Mixon has just advised that Kenneth Haussler,
President of the California School Board Association,
is a Republican - and for us - but cannot take an
active part in polities. However, Haussler gave
Dick the name of Bernell Harlan of Woodland and said
he could be very helpful on water problems of
Northern California, especially agriculture.
X X X
He can be contacted through Ken Maussler, or direct.
...
We should try to get him active in our agriculture
group. Would you make the contact and let me know
what you are able to work out with him?
H S date
I understand Marlan is listed in the Woodland phone
book. Ken Haussler's address is Route 1, Box 1540,
Davis, California - Telephone: SKyline 3-3814.
& I - Water
Many thanks, and best regards. I look forward to
File: "Farmers for Nixon!
seeing you and Ross on Friday.
Sincerely,
H. R. Haldeman
Mr. Ralph B. Bunje
World Trade Center
Ferry Building
San Francisco 11, California
One of the greatest challenges to the dynamic growth of California is that of water
development. Potentially, there is enough water in all our available resources to
meet all our needs. It is our job to distribute nature's bounty -- to transport water
from areas of high rainfall and surplus to areas of low rainfall and deficiency. This
has been going on for a long time. You know the story better than anyone, but
let's briefly review the big picture -- what has been done.
As early as 1904 the City of Los Angeles planned and then built the 238-mile Owens
2
Aqueduct to import water from the eastern slope of the Sierras.
In the 1920's Los Angeles turned its eyes toward the Colorado River, for still more
3
water -- this time to a part of the water that originates high in the Rocky Mountains.
San Diego also sought a portion of the Colorado River supply, and then pooled its
share with the other member agencies of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California, which built a 240-mile aqueduct over the desert and through the mountains,
pumping water 1,600 feet from the Colorado River to let it flow by gravity into ever-
thirsty Southern California.
Early in the century the East Bay Minicipal Water District was formed and the area
around the San Francisco bay constructed a long aqueduct east to tap the waters of the
Mokelumne and Tuolumne Rivers.
1.
San Francisco, in 1900, looking to its future, built the remarkable Hetch-Hetchy system to
bring water from the Sierras across the valley floor to meet its growing needs.
The great Central Valley Project was conceived by California in 1929 and undertaken by
the Federal Government in the 1930's. The waters of the Sacramento are contained by
Shasta Dam and the regulated flow fed into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. From
Delta
there it is pumped into the 117-mile long Mendota Canal on the west side of the San Joaquin
Valley. On the east side of the San Joaquin Valley Friant Dam regulates the flow of the
San Joaquin Jacinto River, and canals from that reservoir supply water to lands on the east side of
that valley. This exchange of water has produced a flourishing economy in the great
San Joaquin Valley.
The Imperial Irrigation District and Coachella Valley County Water District have diverted
8
great quantities of Colorado River water through the All-American Canal into the interior
valleys of Southern California. Some of the richest farm land in the world is the result of
this program.
The significant thing about all these developments and there are many others I have not
9
mentioned is that most of these mighty projects were conceived and built and paid for
by the people who use them. No State moneys were used. Where Federal funds were used,
they have been repaid, at least in part.
2.
The Feather River Project is the first step of our master plan to bring more water from
the North and use it in areas all the way to the Mexican border. It differs from the
many great projects that have gone before in that the State is building it. Bonds will
be issued by the State and the moneys used to build a great aqueduct, the users of which
will repay all the costs other than those allocated to fish, wildlife, recreation and other
benefits of statewide significance. This project was neither conceived nor planned by the
present administration. It is the direct result of a study initiated under the Warren admin-
istration. The plan to finance it was brought to fruition with the help of the water leaders
of both parties under the present administration. But it is misleading for the present
administration to take credit for the State Water Plan. Until recently water has been
non-political, much too vital for party credits and bylines. It is time to put it back in
focus.
In brief outline, the story of the Feather River Project is this. In 1947 the State Legislature authorize
a comprehensive study of all the water resources of the State. For 10 years the Department
of Water Resources pursued this assignment, and in 1957 published the State Water Plan.
The first unit of that comprehensive blueprint for State wide water development was the
Feather River Project. For several years the water leaders of the entire State, as well as
our legislators, tried to find the financial combination that would make possible the execution
of the Feather River Project.
12
It is only fair that we tell the people of California that the one and three quarter billion
3.
?
dollar price tag placed on the Feather River Plan was pulled out of thin air. Nobody
wanted the responsibility of putting a two billion dollar bond issue on the ballot SO
13
the situation was conveniently compromised. The truth of the matter is that no one
can honestly say what the Feather River Project will cost and we might as well face
that fact.
At any rate many bills were drafted and rejected. In 1959 Senate Bill 1106 -- the financing bill-
was introduced in the legislature. Its initial form was not acceptable. But the body of
dedicated water leaders up and down the State fashioned the amendments that finally made
14
the bill workable. Here again it was the work of leaders of both parties finding a way.
And the years of trial and error that went before were not wasted. On the contrary, it was
that experience that made possible the final solution.
SB 1106 passed the Senate with the urging of the Governor. It was adopted by the Assembly
is
without change because the Senate threatened to kill the bill if it ever got back to them
for amendment.
Throughout all this legislative history the Director of Water Resources was the man who
had served in the Department through three administrations.. Although a Republican he
handled the assignment as a non-political one. And it was Harvey Banks, the director,
who was held on to carry the new plan to the people in the election of 1960. It was Mr. Banks
4.
Who, along with water leaders everywhere, told the big story of water development
in every corner of the State. Under his leadership the plan was approved by the voters.
17
Until he resigned in early 1961 water was above politics. I am determined to return it
to that high state.
If there is any doubt about who the real leader of the California Water Plan was, here
14
is the statement of the present governor made in April, 1961:
"When I walked in as Governor of this State there were great pressures back and forth as
to whether I should retain Harvey Banks as the head of the Department of Water Resources.
But I had worked with him as Attorney General and I knew there wasn't a better water
19
engineer in this State, and the water program of California as it moves ahead will be a
monument to Harvey Banks that will be there in his old age, when he is sitting in a
rocking chair looking at these great big aqueducts and these dams. He will say, 'By
golly, that's my baby! I did it!" (By the way Harvey Banks is recovering rapidly from
minor surgery. We certainly wish him well.)
May I pay tribute to another great engineers, my good friend, the late Samuel B. Morris.
He served on the State Water Commission and occupied places of top responsibility in local,
20
State and national water circles. One of his great achievements was the role he played
in the Feather River Project. It has been said that a key to the financial solution which
5.
the California voters approved in 1960 was the Delta concept. This means that all the
people who contract with the State for water will pay a uniform charge for all the water
which under this plan or future plans is delivered into the Sacramento-San Jeaquin Delta,
2
and most of the waters which we will develop in the future will come into this delta pool
before being transported into other parts of the State. Though the credit for this concept
must by shared by many men, I think all would agree that Sam Morris was a chief
architect and a most ardent supporter.
The water developments of this State prove that self-government at the local level is the best
government. This is basic to my philosophy. The water projects we have already built are
the best possible evidence of the effectiveness of local self-government. The vast irrigation
22
works built by the irrigation districts, the municipal systems constructed by public agencies
of one kind or another, and the works of private utilities all testify to the resourcefulness and
achievement of local units. The job of the State should be to encourage this spirit, not
displace it with larger government. The people in the local areas are the ones most able
to plan and built their own works and I would apply this philosophy to the State as well as
to the Federal government.
The function of the State is to guide and encourage local communities to help themselves.
23
This does not require more layers of government. I would say that it requires less. Getting
rid of the present Governor's super cabinet will be one of my first acts.
6.
What is needed is more help from basic government. There is considerable criticism that
local units are not getting the help they need. This can be cured only by a direct and
24
able leader who has the confidence of his staff and the people in the communities which
his department serves.
At all costs the counties of origin of the water must be protected. Present population
distribution does not necessarily reflect the population of the future. There is enough
water available if properly harnessed, to serve all the people of the State. In the
25
meantime we must not make the same mistake in philosophy that the federal government
makes when it tries to lay claim to all California water. We believe in the water rights
of the counties of origin and of the original users.
It may be an unlikely thing for a candidate for Governor to say, but it is my opinion
that too much power has been vested in the Administrative branch of state government in the
26
Feather River Project. The plan would be sounder if it contained more visible checks than
the Governor's vague intention to deal fairly with all sections of the state. Again, I find
myself critical of the super agency program of the present Administration. As it stands,
the Governor has virtual life and death power over the projects of the Feather River Project
and at the same time he has delegated that authority to an appointee who has no responsibility.
I would like to see the authority spread out -- regardless of who is Governor and Director
of the Bureau of Water Resources.
7.
Where there is a legitimate reason for Federal participation in local projects let the
government participate, but only to the extent necessary. Believing that marriage to the Federal
Treasury makes Congress my mother-in-law I would court Federal loans warily. In flood
27
control, for example, there is good reason for Federal participation. California must seek and
obtain its share of Federal money on that score. The same is true where Federal projects make water
available to those users who agree to abide by Federal restrictions. But I do not believe
little 168A
California should enter into agreements with the Federal government which compel our people
to adopt wholly artificial rules limiting their right to use State water. The 160-acre
limitation does not satisfy the present farm economy. It is not suited to California. We should
not accept it as a part of any agreement with the Federal government. The fact that the
present administration recognized it in State contracts with water users reflects a gratuitous
compromise of principles which won no friends among the farmers. As a matter of fact the use of
160 acre or any acreage limitation is a step toward socialized agriculture.
Speaking of Federal - State cooperative projects it was my honor to take a hand in the adoption
25
of the San Luis Dam by the Federal government. It is only honest to add that I do not agree
with the double standard of philosophy which the present State Administration adopted in
connection with the San Luis Project. I am against the 160 limitation at all times and in
all places where state water development is concerned.
29
Furthermore, along this same line, we must not use a water project as a means of getting
the State into the power business through the back door. On the Feather River Project California
8.
will need more power than it can produce, and the private and local utility systems
are ready, able and more than willing to provide the necessary additional power to pump
the water over the mountains. In return these same systems have agreed to purchase all
the power which the State can produce along the power drops of the aqueduct and from Oroville Dam.
Laidfor.
Incidentally, I do not believe that dam can be built without the sale of the power at a fair
30
market price. These systems have agreed to put all the power purchased in the bank -- so
to speak -- so that later the State can take it back from the local utility systems when the
big pumps on the aqueduct are ready to go to work. Also, these same systems have agreed to
provide cheap off-peak power for more valuable on-peak power generated by the State. This
power swap is extremely valuable and the State should take full advantage of it. Remember
that the power companies have organized a vast power pool. Electricity can be generated
by one utility in one part of the state and used at the opposite end of the State in the service
territory of another system. The back bone of these facilities, including about 90% of the
total steam generating capacity of the entire State, is already in existence. The rest of
the intertie will be constructed as needed. This power pool is operated by men and women
who bargain collectively and freely for their wages and working conditions. These same
companies contribute a large share of the taxes which are nedded to run the State. There
is no reason for either the Federal or State government free of all regulation and control
to duplicate these facilities and take away the invaluable human freddoms and tax moneys
which free enterprise makes possible.
9.
Originally the present Administration announced its policy to deal with the existing
utility systems for the extra power needed to operate the aqueducts. Since the new
Director of Water Resources has taken over there has been an ominous change entirely
31
in keeping with his past experience and performance which I have discussed at some
length during this campaign. The Power Committee which was used by the former director
to consult on all matters pertaining to power requirements, distribution, sale and exchange,
has been strangely inactive. There is heard talk of the possibility of construction of a
nuclear plant to generate power needed for pumping. The amount of money available
build
to built the water project will not be sufficient to do that job, too. There is no money
available to build an atomic plant and it is not needed.
California should spare no effort in defending its water against claims of the Federal
government. The tempo of these claims has been growing steadily, and so far Congress
1
has failed to enact the necessary laws to protect the States against these encroachments.
32
In the Santa Margarita watershed some 6,000 people have been hailed into court by the
United States to hear the Government claim that it had a "superior" right to the water
supply of that river. This litigation has gone on for more than 10 years. It has been
expensive and annoying and disheartening to the people. We should use every means to
settle or end this case, and in the process make it clear that the United States must drink
our water like any other Californian. If the government wishes to exert special claims
to our water supply it must pay for them, not attempt to take that supply under the guise
of sovereign rights.
10.
More recently the United States told the City of Fresno that it did not intend to follow
the laws of California and that by reason of putting a dam across the San Joaquin River
there simply was no more water available for people downstream. In making this claim
33
the Attorney General disclaimed any responsibility for what the Secretary of the Interior
had done before, and concluded that when the United States acquired the territory of
California from Mexico in 1848 the United States became the owner of all lands and
all rights to use water within the territory.
Fed. you. It
These are only two instances of the broad claims being made by the United States. We
34
must take the battle of preserving California's waters into the Congress and courts of
the United States. I think we need people with conviction to do this job.
Some areas of this State are experiencing difficulty in contracting with the State for
Feather River water. The problem arises because each area contracting with the State
35
must repay that portion of the capital cost of the entire project which is charged to the
area on the basis of proportionate use of the facilities. Some of the thirstiest areas are
agricultural. They have modest valuations and some of them feel they cannot raise
the necessary payments through either taxes or water charges to fulfill their obligations.
36
There are several possible approaches to the problem:
37
The first is to charge as much of the entire project to the general taxpayer of the State
as is justified. For example, fish and wildlife, recreation, flood control, are some of
11.
the benefits which will come to the State as a whole. They must not be charged
against the water user. The Legislature should be encouraged to find as many of these
38
statewide benefits as possible, and to that extent the cost of the facilities should be
reduced insofar as the water user is concerned.
In addition to bond proceeds, the State will be using money from the California
Water Fund to pay for the Feather River Project. That fund is made up of moneys that
come to the State of California through its oil, gas, and mineral reserves. As the
matter now stands the water users must repay all capital costs with interest. This includes
39
interest on the California Water Fund, even though there is no requirement that the State
itself pay interest on that money. Careful study should be given to the possibility of
waiving that interest. It would help the rural areas, but it would also benefit the
metropolitan areas because the reduced interest charge would apply to all contracting
agencies.
The contract with the State is flexible insofar as postponing payments is concerned.
40
Inasmuch as the land to which this water is delivered will increase in value the principal
payments of each contracting agency should be delayed long enough to permit the increased
value to be reflected. This will delay the day of payment, not excuse it.
Each area must be encouraged to search broadly and deeply its own financial resources.
41
Sometimes there is a tendency to throw the expense of a project to somebody else,
12.
particularly the State. And oftentimes the agency itself may have greater resources
42
than appear at first blush. The local area must act boldly and imaginatively in it S
own behalf, and extend itself fully in order to contract for water from the State project.
If the State's estimates hold up, and in California we have every reason to think they
will be exceeded, the demands on our water supply will require increasingly imaginative
planning. Just as the Feather River Project and other units in the California Water Plan
43
were planned by past administrations almost 20 years ago, so it is up to US to lay out a
resourceful plan for the generations to come. Here are some of the things we should
be doing now for the sake of our people, and farms and industries of tomorrow:
We should be working now at full throttle to develop the financial means for implementing
the next stage of the California Water Plan. That means that the great surplus seasonal
44
waters of the Northwest, the Mad, Eel, Trinity and others must be diverted into the
Sacramento River and through the Delta for distribution into other parts of the State.
Our experience with the Feather River Project indicates that finance is the key to water
development. We must give our immediate attention to that task.
All water resources developments must be envisioned with a view to their incidental use
45
for flood control, fish, wildlife and recreation. There is an ever growing demand on our
recreational facilities with the growing numbers of people coming to our State. Imaginative
13.
planning can accommodate, at least to some extent, the wholesome outdoor recreation
of our people. Again, let me say that the costs of these programs must be borne by
46
the people generally, not by water users specifically.
Waste disposal is equally as important as water supply. In some ways it is even more
important because one community's disposal may be another community's supply. As
our communities build up, problems of water quality become ever more important.
47
Many of our ground water basins are the basic sources of supply for millions of people.
These basins must be kept pure so that their function may be continued. Salt water
intrusion must be stopped. This program requires intimate cooperation and coordination
between the innumerable local agencies charged with this responsibility, as well as
the State agencies that are designated to oversee the areawide problem.
The imminent threat of water pollution is not only local. It is statewide, and even
national. The Federal government is moving into the picture in a big way. California,
48
if it is to manage its own water supply and disposal system, must give priority attention
to this business of water quality and disposal. It is a problem readily overlooked or shoved
into the background because the far reaching consequences of pollution and contamination
cannot always be seen immediately. I would propose legislation that will bring water
quality control into the forefront as one of our most pressing problems.
49
We should not dismiss the possibilities for the future in the conversion of sea water. The
14.
blunt truth of the matter is that we may well need both the water from the Feather
Joes
River Project and converted saline water. Desalting research should be encouraged
in every way possible. This must go on at the same time as we are developing our fresh
water supplies. In the case of sea water, we know that the supplies are inexhaustible.
In the five oceans of the world there are 300 million cubin miles of water. Another
thought to keep in mind is the amount of brackish water that has invaded our underground
water tables. That, too,will eventually havetb be converted. Saline water conversion
research must be pressed forward with honest diligence not as a substitute for the
California Water plan but as a very necessary adjunct. Here, too, I find myself in
substantial disagreement with the philosophy of the present Director of Water Resources.
He was perfectly willing to see the small research appropriation for desalination of
water go down the drain in this year's budget.
As community growth multiplies not only the problems with which we are faced, but the
number of agencies which are organized to meet them, it is the job of the State to
51
coordinate the activities of all these local agencies without replacing them. The
Department of Water Resources should be responsible for coordinating the activities
of water supply, disposal, flood control, and the many other problems which arise in
connection with them. No new agencies are needed. Some that already exist are, in
fact, surplus and compound our problems.
15.
RESEARCH (with file)
2-21-62
Bob Haldeman
File: - Research Memos
cc: H. Flournoy
X - S & I - Water
X - Chron.
Attached from Morton C. Hull appears to be extremely
interesting and might be of great value in developing
attack on Warne.
His file drawer of water reports etc. should be checked
into.
File: - to research
X - S & I - Water
x - H
X - Chron.
February 21, 1962
Mr. Morton C. Hull
515 East "J" Street
Ontario, California
Dear Mr. Hull:
Your letter addressed to
Mr. Nixon c/o of my office has just been received
and I am taking the liberty of acknowledging it
immediately.
The file of material which you
included on the water issue will be read with
interest and will, I feel sure, be of great value to
us. It is being directed to those working on this
important subject with the request that they contact
you for further data which you have and which you
feel would be helpful.
We are very grateful for your
interest and for your offer to be of assistance.
Best regards.
Sincerely,
H. R. Haldeman
February 9, 1962
Mr. George H. Ide
Idebe
835 West Sunset Drive
Redlands, California
Dear Mr. Ide:
Dick Nixon has just passed along to me copies of
his recent correspondence with you and
Mr. Phillips. As he has indicated, and as we
well know, the water problem is going to be one
of the major issues and we certainly need and
would appreciate having the advice and counsel
of a good friend like you.
Hugh Flourney is working on development of Task
Forces for issue study, and I am asking him to
contact you direct in the hope a mutually convenient
time can be arranged for him to meet with you and
others on this important subject.
With kind regards.
Sincerely,
H. R. Haldeman
Hon.
cc: Mr. H. 1. Flournoy
File: S & I- Water
X I
x-P
X - Chron.
H. I. Flournoy
2-9-62
Bob Haldeman
Dear Hugh -
Attached is file of correspondence between RN and George Ide.
Mr. Ide should definitely be contaced. Will you please follow through ?
January 10, 1962
Dear Melba:
I have heard from Jim Krieger and
have put him directly in touch with Hugh Flournoy
who is working on the development of Task Forces
for issue study - - especially water.
My function in the campaign is going
to be concentrated on the organizational side, and I
felt it would be better for Krieger to work directly
with those responsible for development of issue material.
I am sorry we didn't get a chance to
chat at the "Woman of the Year" affair, but hope we
will be seeing you up here again before long.
I appreciate your suggestion on
Mac Faries and will get in touch with him.
Love,
Mrs. Melba Bennett
1184 Camino del Mirasol
Palm Springs, California
1184 CAMINO DEL MIRASOL
PALM SPRINGS. CALIFORNIA
December 28,61
Dear Bab-
Thank you for your leter
which & have forwarded to
Jun Kreiger and have sug- -
gested he contact you. &
cell sure that you can
place every confidence in
his suggestions.
It was so good to see
your at the Times "do" and
also to have a visit after -
wards with Dick and Pat.
Don't forget to let us Draw
When you and go want to
Come down - and the
children,
Love, Meeleo
over
P.S -
Mac Fairies, even though he is
now a Judge, would be most
helpful to you in an advisory
capacity. He was a wonderful
Commitreemu and cauld give
you a good list of the Ethnic
groups. Cem sure he waved do
cougthing to help Diek, also, he
knows all the Tricks of successful
Campaigning m.
January 10, 1962
Mr. James H. Krieger
Best, Best & Krieger
4200 Orange Street
Riverside, California
Dear Mr. Krieger:
Thank you very much for your letter of January 8th.
Needless to say, we will gratefully welcome your
help on the water phase of Nixon's campaign plans.
I am taking the liberty of sending your letter to
Hugh Fleurney who is working on development of Task
Forces for issue study, and by a carbon copy of this
letter, am asking Hugh to get in touch with you
directly to set up a meeting with you and Harvey
Banks, as you suggest.
Thanks very much for your interest and assistance.
Sincerely,
H. R. Haldeman
ec: Hon. H. 1. Flourney
Mr. Robert H. Finch
P. S. -- Hugh -
Please be sure you or someone gets in touch with
Krieger as quickly as possible.
HRH
blind copy - Mr. Donald Frey
(Confidential)
Don -
Please check up on this in a week or so to be
sure Krieger has been contacted.
January 8, 1962
Mr. N. R. Haldoman, Campaign Manager
Ninon For Governor Committee
3908 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles 5, California
Dear Mr. Haldeman:
It was very nice of Melba Bennett to put us in touch with
one another. Rest assured I - ready and willing to discuss the water
phase of Mixon's campaign at your convenience.
It is my understanding that Hans Doe, the President of the
Irrigation District Association has already been contacted by Mr. Nixon.
In addition to him the names of Harvey o Banks, former Director of Water
Resources, Bill Jennings, of San Diago, and Neward Miller, former Vice
President in charge of Water Problems for the Les Angeles Chamber of
Commerce, appear likely members of such an advisory committee.
If you wish to arrange a date I would like to discuss the matter with
you, preferebly with Harvey Banks present.
Sincerely,
James H. Krieger
ac - Mrs. Frank Bennett
Sunday, November 19, 1961
MEMO TO:
Water Task Force
FROM:
Bob Haldeman
Mr. Hans Doe is an old friend and campaign worker for RN
and is most anxious to be of assistance on issue material on water.
He is a Director of several metropolitan water districts and
is president of the Association of California Irrigation Districts.
He lives in Vista, California and his phone is PA 4-4996.
He has offered the services of Mr. Robert Durbrow, executive
director of the Irrigation Districts, who is located at 932 Pacific Building,
821 Market Street, San Francisco.
December 22, 1951
Mrs. Frank Bennett
1184 Camino del Mirasol
Palm Springs, California
Dear Melba:
Thank you very much for your letter regarding Jim Kreiger
and the water situation.
I certainly agree with you that water will be the major
issue in the campaign and it will be very helpful to get
Mr. Kreiger's views and especially his analysis of what
Brown's pitch will be.
Dick is going to set up a Task Force on the water issue
and I think the first step would be to ask for
Mr. Kreiger's suggestions as to who, in addition to
himself, he feels might be valuable to have on this Year
Force. Would you like to ask his for this information,
or would you like me to get in touch with his directiv?
I will be glad to handle it however you think best.
I very much appreciate the offer of a place to get away
from it all, and especially the removal of the telephones.
You may find us taking you up on it before too long.
Thanks very much for writing.
Love,
H. R. Haldeman
1184 Camino del
Dec 1961
mirasol
Dear Bab- Palm springs
Beety Aaid you wanted any
suggestions + neight love, so here
is crie. leudoubtidly you are
aware that
waler will be
the number one since we the
compaign. Jun Kreiger, an
actorney in Rivervide cauld give
you the pitch from this end
of the State - has been serving
an the water District for some
time, is intelligent and has a
good idea of what Brown's
pitcle will be. 2 asked him
if lee would Take the time to
cause in and Tale with you
and be said be d do anything
be cauld to lee Gelpful and
Cauld Tell your the were you
should Taeld to (or Dick). So
let me know if you want to see
lim.
If and when you and to need
to get away dan T forget you fill are
tear aut all the tele pleases !
always welcome here, and
Love
%
Muba
the
MBB
IF
or
OF