Laserfiche WebLink
<br />RESOLUTION -- Page Two <br /> <br />4) The interest rate cannot be economically justified <br />either on the basis of the average long-term interest cost <br />on money borrowed by the federal government or of the average <br />private business. <br /> <br />5) There is a substantial division among federal offi- <br />cials on the feasibility of the 7 per cent interest rate as <br />evidenced by the recommendation of a Task Force of the National <br />Water Resources Council that a flat 5.5 per cent rate be used, <br />as well as the opposition of many federal officials and mem- <br />bers of Congress. <br /> <br />6) The interest rate discriminates against water pro- <br />jects, since no other form of federal construction activity <br />is saddled with such restrictive criteria. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Water <br />Resources Association Board of Directors, at its regular <br />meeting February 11, 1972, opposes the proposed 7 per cent <br />interest rate and urges the Water Resources Council to delay <br />implementation of the proposed Principles and Standards until <br />Congress has had the opportunity to hold hearings on the full <br />effects of such Principles and Standards. <br /> <br />BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the serious consequences of <br />establishing such an interest rate be forcefully called to <br />the attention of the President of the United States; Governor <br />Ronald Reagan; the Director of the Office of Management and <br />Budget; Senators Cranston and Tunney; the California and <br />Western States Congressional Delegation; Secretary of Interior <br />Rogers C. B. Morton; U. S. Reclamation Commissioner Ellis L. <br />Armstrong and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. <br /> <br />Adopted by the Board of Directors <br />California Water Resources Association <br />February 11, 1972 <br /> <br />tnm <br />