« PředchozíPokračovat »
This district was created on April 15 by a vote of 4 to 1 and includes the whole of Sacramento County and one district in the county across the river from Sacramento. The port district commission took office on May 19 and immediately drew up preliminary plans and specifications and submitted a bond issue to the voters in the dictrict for $3,750,000 to provide necessary funds for terminal facilities, railroad connections, et cetera. This includes, by the way, $600,000 for railroad facilities, so that all the terminal facilities will be provided with adequate railroad facilities as well as highway. This bond issue was approved by a vote of the board 6 to 1. The district was created by a vote of 4 to 1 and they came back 7 months later and approved the bond issue by a vote of better than 6 to 1. It was almost unanimous throughout the entire district. A detailed listing of the vote is included in the brochure.
The port layout you will find in the brochure and you have a map on the wall before you which illustrates it. The city of Sacramento is shown in the background with the Sacramento River below.
The turning basin of the deep-water-channel project is in Lake Washington, a natural lake, 31,2 miles long and about 10 feet deep. The turning basin is on the lower right-hand side, Mr. Chairman, and will be large enough in size to permit the easy turning of any vessel in the American merchant marine. The channel will be 30 feet in depth, and will shorten the route to San Francisco by approximately 15 miles. There will be very few bends or curves in the river, making the channel easy of navigation and one which the steamship companies will find economical and will want to use.
The connecting canal between the river and the turning basin is proposed to be of 11-foot depth. That is the very first phase of our construction. It is the connecting channel that calls for urgency in an appropriation at this time. The first phase of the terminal construction will be the grain elevator for the public storage of grain, which is shown at that point. There has never been a provision for public storage of grain in bulk, or a grain elevator, in all of northern California. We are proposing to provide that facility. We will use that for the storage of grain produced in the Sacramento Valley for 100 miles north of Sacramento. The river flows right through the center of that producing area.
This connecting canal is the first item on the agenda for construction and will permit barges to handle grain in bulk right from the grain farms to the terminal elevator on this deep-water-channel project. By constructing that elevator at the outset, it means that it will be in use even before the deep-water-channel project is completed. We will both rail and highway to make the elevator a financial success, but it requires water transportation. The grain people insist upon having deep water for economic handling of grain.
That elevator will be used not only for California grain, but for Montana wheat which will be shipped in by rail for storage at that point; Dakota wheat; corn, and oats from the Middle West, from such areas as Kansas City and Omaha, for use by milling companies, which will be located immediately adjacent to the grain elevator.
The railroad companies have not opposed this project. At no hearing has any testimony been offered in opposition to the deep-waterchannel project. The project will be a producer of new and additional
traffic and therefore they are not opposing it. There is new tonnage being produced, new industries coming to Sacramento.
The Campbell Soup Co. has just located a plant there costing many millions of dollars to serve 11 Western States, Honolulu, and the Philippines. They are within the switching area, in easy access to these terminal facilities, so that they may use the terminal facilities for their shipments.
Another industry, the Continental Can Co., more recently has invested $14,000,000 in a plant located about 6 miles above the Sacramento River, which will use water transportation, and they will have over 100,000 tons of traffic to go by water through the deep-water channel when it is completed.
I do not want to take up a lot of your time. Our city manager is here, and he will tell you about the inadequacy of their present facilities from the city's point of view; our county manager will tell you about the county interests; and the chamber of commerce will tell you about the general over-all interest. Let me say it is most urgent that this appropriation as now in the budget before you, $2,500,000, be authorized. I understand the engineeers will use the funds for the purpose of constructing the connecting canal to the turning basin, so that this project within 15 or 20 months can be placed in operation.
In other words, you are getting a return on your investment immediately.
We urge with all the sincerity we can that you give favorable consideration to this deep-water channel and the $2,500,000 budget now
The local interests are putting up $1,500,000. It is tied in with the appropriation from the Federal Government, and therefore they must be made simultaneously.
I will now ask to be heard Mr. Peter Mitchell, a member of the city council, who will point out to you the local situation.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 24, 1948.
SACRAMENTO SHIP CHANNEL
STATEMENT OF PETER MITCHELL, MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL,
SACRAMENTO, CALIF. Mr. MITCHELL. My name is Peter Mitchell; I am a city councilman in the city of Sacramento. That group has authorized me to come here and solicit your support for the deep-water canal for Sacramento. I have filed with your committee a brief on what I would like to have said, and I would like to emphasize just one or two points, the main one of which is the inadequacy of the present facilities we have to offer.
We have only the Sacramento River now right in front of the city of Sacramento with four old wharves. There are two presently in operation, one being used exclusively for the shipment of wool, and the other for the shipment of general merchandise, and that one used for the shipment of general merchandise now handles between 400,000 and 500,000 tons of freight annually, and it is right in the city.
We feel the facilities for truck transportation and rail transportation are totally inadequate with a growing community such as we are. With the new people coming in, the needs for the new traffic, and so forth, the needs for the importation of additional goods into our city are going to be great, and the city of Sacramento feels that a further expenditure of funds in the enlarging of the facilities along the Sacramento River would be a rather foolish expenditure of public funds. We also feel, because of its location, being located on a 10foot deep channel, that deep-water shipping is the answer to our section of the State, and we respectfully solicit your support for this project.
Mr. STONE. With your indulgence, there are two points I failed to make. One is that our port district commission has complied in every respect with the requirements of the Federal Government for local participation, and in our brochure you will find a certified copy of the agreement and the assurance of local participation filed with the United States Army engineers. In doing so, we believe we have complied with every request of the Federal Government for local participation.
One further point, that is, that the channel for 25 miles downstream from Sacramento passes througli an area which would lend itself to military installations in case of necessity for national defense. In fact, some of the spoil areas after we are through with the dredging would lend themselves-hundreds of acres in various sites--to mili
tary installations of both the Navy and Army, as the Federal GovernKement might see fit, in case of necessity for national defense.
Mr. MITCHELL. I would like to offer these pictures as part of the record, showing the crowded conditions of our present port.
Mr. STONE. Our next witness is Mr. Charles W. Detterding, our county manager.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 24, 1948.
SACRAMENTO SHIP CHANNEL
STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. DETTERDING, COUNTY MANAGER,
Mr. DETTERDING. I am county manager of Sacramento, and prior to that time I was county engineer. I am very familiar with the Sacramento River and the difficult problems connected with the maintenance of a 10-foot channel in that river. Certainly, it is inadequate for the needs at this time. Because of our tremendous growth, people moving into the Sacramento area, the whole trade area, there is a tremendous increase in the volume of business.
The whole area affected by this channel are deeply interested in it. I have talked with representatives from many of the surrounding cities and communities and also from Oregon and Nevada, and there is a general interest, and we are anxious that you will authorize the appropriation to start this project.
Mr. Stone. Mr. A. S. Dudley, our secretary-manager, will conclude our presentation, and afterward I believe Congressman Johnson wishes to say a few words.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 24, 1948.
SACRAMENTO SHIP CHANNEL
STATEMENT OF A. S. DUDLEY, SECRETARY-MANAGER, SACRA
MENTO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Mr. Dudley. For 25 years I have been secretary-manager of the Sacramento Chamber of Commerce, an organization which has, over that period of 25 years, been keenly interested in the development of water development on the Sacramento River,
In addition to representing the Sacramento Chamber of Commerce, I have and would like to file letters addressed to the Sacramento chamber from 16 chambers-of-commerce organizations in northern California and this trade area, urging your serious consideration of the earliest possible start of construction of this ship-channel project. Those letters have come from the cities of Auburn, Chico, Dixon. Folsom, Galt, Grass Valley, Gridley, North Sacramento, Oroville, Red Bluff, Redding, Roseville, Susanville, Truckee, Williams, and Willows.
Also, we have filed with the clerk of your committee a statement from the Sacramento Chamber of Commerce, and I would like to file a resolution at this time from the board of directors of the Sacramento chamber.
(The resolution and letters above referred to were filed with the committee.)
Mr. Dudley. Also, with your permission, there are two points which I would like to emphasize. One is that there are over 3.000 shippers in this area, each one of whom has been contacted personally and has made a statement which is on file with the United States Corps of Engineers district office, as to the amount of savings that would be effected if and when the deep-water shipping is established for Sacramento.
Three-quarters of the water supply of the State of California are in this particular area to the north and east of Sacramento. This deep-water shipping will come 100 miles inland from the Pacific: it will directly connect with two transcontinental rail lines, the Southern Pacific and the Western Pacific, largely eliminating many of the problems which usually occur in transferring from deep-water shipping to rail, and with direct connections serving the entire Pacific and Orient, and bringing the raw materials into the eastern industrial sections and bringing the finished products back and out to the Pacific.
Two large military installations are at Sacramento. They are the Air Corps supply depot and the air depot at McClellan Field, with a better than $2,000,000 monthly pay roll there, which serves the entire Air Corps, and the second one is the Signal Corps depot in a similar way serving the entire Pacific in Sacramento with nearly threequarters of a million dollars monthly pay roll.
Those two military installations at Sacramento, inland about seventy-odd miles, are in operation already and should have deep, water shipping established to provide increased facilities for national defense.
I thank you kindly.
STUT. Mr. KERR. Mr. Chairman, let me make one observation. I have
been very much struck with the fine appearance of these fine gentlemen from California. They always make a good appearance when
they come before our committee. But I want to tell you if things do TAGES not suit you in the State of California, move down in North Carolina,
the next best State in the Union.
AUBURN CHAJ!ER OF COMMERCE,
Auburn, Calif., January 17, 1948.
DEAR MR. DUDLEY: We understand that you and other representatives from the Sacramento region are going to Washington to appear before congressional committees to request the initial funds to start construction of the SacramentoYolo ship-channel project. As it will not be possible for us to send a representative from Auburn to appear at these bearings, we are urging that you speak for the Auburn Chamber of Commerce in requesting that funds be granted to start work on this project immediately.
As you know, Placer County ranks among the highest in the United States in the production of deciduous fruits. The continued shortage of refrigerator cars and the recent sharp increases in freight rates have worked a serious hardship
on this industry which would be greatly relieved by the Sacramento-Yolo ship 1
channel. In addition, this is the hub of a large luniber-producing area ; and
It is the feeling of the directors of the Auburn Chamber of Commerce that
G. E. KREATZ,
Chico CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Chico, Calif., January 17, 1948.
This deep-water channel in Sacramento will open a new mode of freight transportation for the agriculturally rich Sacramento Valley and northern California, and will be of a definite advantage to the city of Chico.
Our board of directors urged the necessary congressional actions to complete
Our transportation committee is most interested in this project and if we can
DONALD J. QUINN, Manager.
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Diron, Calif., January 19, 1918.