Page images
PDF
EPUB

Anything that I would have to say seems to have been pretty well said by these attorneys general who have appeared here; what we are mostly concerned with, however, is not the future development of reclaimable lands, but that which has been already reclaimed. The whole industrial district of Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, Bellingham, and all these other cities are on reclaimed land. In fact, that reclaimed land has played a rather conspicuous part in winning this war. There are four transcontinental railroads running to these cities, some of which are over reclaimed land; we have built on this land a great number of Victory ships, Liberty ships, minesweepers, destroyers, tankers, LST's, and all sorts of vessels that have been used in the war, and I think it is quite possible you gentlemen have heard of a plane we manufacture there, known as the Flying Fortress. Mr. JENNINGS. Who defrayed the cost, who put up the money? Mr. UNDERWOOD. I am talking now for Seattle, and Seattle put up every dollar of it. It never asked a dollar from the Federal Government. When we reclaimed the Duwamish River there 15 years ago, we had already spent $6,000,000 before we even asked the Government to maintain it. We put that money up ourselves, and got it back by selling this tideland to these people that put in these various plants I am speaking of.

The CHAIRMAN. Your statement is that a big part of the industrial section of these various cities you have mentioned is on reclaimed lands?.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. And if the contention of the Federal Government is sustained the title to that land will be tremendously confused, to say the least of it and therefore you are not keen for that situation. Mr. UNDERWOOD. That is exactly right, Mr. Chairman.

I have here some resolutions

The CHAIRMAN. You may file them. /

Mr. UNDERWOOD. I will file them, if I may, and I would like to leave with you some maps showing this picture. The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

(The papers referred to are as follows:)

My name is J. J. Underwood. I am the Washington, D. C., manager of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce. I am appearing here in behalf of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce,' the Tacoma Chamber of Commerce, and the port of Seattle, to urge the passage of a measure that will quiet title to tidelands in various parts of the United States, and particularly of Puget Sound and the State of Washington. I wish to present a copy of the resolution passed by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce, and endorsed by the Tacoma Chamber of Commerce, and copy of a resolution passed by the Port of Seattle Commissioners.

Congressman Henry M. Jackson has copies of resolutions passed by the Bellingham Chamber of Commerce and the Bellingham Port Commission, which will be presented to the committee.

It is our contention that this legislation should be made to apply not only to all lands beneath tidewaters, but also to all lands reclaimed from beneath tidewaters, and all lands reclaimed from beneath navigable waters within the boundaries of each respective State.

I have here for the committee's inspection, but not necessarily for reproduction in the record, maps of some of the waters of the State of Washington which will show the amount of tidewater land and the amount that has been reclaimed.

Seattle and King County began to reclaim tidelands in 1895 and expended many millions of dollars in that work without asking any Government assistance. This was done by a series of dredging, sluicing, and filling operations. These tidelands were sold by the State to private individuals and corporations and the

whole industrial area of the city of Seattle is located on filled-in tidelands. In addition to that, many plants and warehouses now owned by the United States Government are located on these reclaimed lands.

The Boeing Aircraft plant, which has produced a great many airplanes of the type known as the Flying Fortress is located on reclaimed land. So, also, is the Boeing airfield from whence these planes are flown to various parts of the world, where they have played a not inconspicuous part in winning the war in Europe, and at least in making it uncomfortable for the residents of Japan and various islands in the South Pacific and in the Central and Far East.

I have no knowledge of the exact sum of money that it cost to reclaim this land, but an estimate made by the Seattle Port Commission shows that approximately $56,000,000 worth of land is involved in the city of Seattle alone. The revenues derived by the State, county, port commission, and the city of Seattle, from Seattle tidelands is as follows: From taxes, $980,096 per year; from rents, $84,055 per year.

Incidentally, for the information of this committee, the citizens of Seattle spent more than $6,000,000 in straightening the Duwamish River for a distance of about 5 or 6 miles before any help was asked from the United States Government. About 15 years ago the Congress passed legislation instructing the War Department to maintain this channel and to pay 50 percent of the cost of certain extensions of the channel. Peculiarly, as the channel of the Duwamish River was extended, it eliminated the recurrent floods in that area of about a mile and a half beyond the head of the improvement. This was not conceived as a floodcontrol project, but solely for the purpose of making land available for factory sites, and all of the ships and airplanes that have been built in Seattle for service in the present war were constructed in yards and plants erected on reclaimed tidewater lands.

I might say for the information of the committee that the lands under navigable waters were included in the resolutions because of the New River decision of the Supreme Court which determined that any water that is tributary to navigable water, or that could be made navigable, should be considered navigable water, and therefore would come under the jurisdiction of the War Department. Under this decision almost any kind of stream or lake or pond could be construed to be navigable water.

Therefore, for the reasons above stated, we earnestly urge the passage of this legislation, with the proviso that it shall apply also to all lands reclaimed from beneath tidewaters, and all lands reclaimed from beneath navigable waters.

RESOLUTION RE CLARIFYING TITLES OF TIDELANDS AND NAVIGABLE WATERS APPROVED BY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SEATTLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, MAY 15, 1945

The Seattle Chamber of Commerce urges the enactment by Congress of the following resolution, as amended by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce. This resolution is typical of those recently presented to the Seventy-ninth Congress, first session. Omitting the formal parts, it reads as follows:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the United States of America hereby releases, remises, and quitclaims all right, title, interest, claim, or demand of the United States of America in and to all lands beneath tidewaters, all lands reclaimed from beneath tidewaters, all lands beneath navigable waters, and all lands reclaimed from beneath navigable waters within the boundaries of each of the respective States, unto each of such States and unto the respective grantees or successors in interest thereof, and unto the respective present owners of such lands of which title has been confirmed by official action of the United States of America; excepting therefrom such lands beneath tidewaters and such lands beneath navigable waters as have been acquired by the United States of America from any State, its grantees or successors in interest, by cession, grant, quitclaim, or condemnation, or from any other owner or owners thereof by conveyance or by condemnation; retaining, however, to the United States of America its present powers of regulation for the purpose of commerce and navigation.

"As used in this joint resolution the phrase 'lands beneath tidewater' shall include all lands permanently or periodically covered by tidal waters up to but not above the line of mean high tide and oceanward to the boundary line of each respective State where in any case such boundary line extends oceanward; the

phrase lands beneath navigable waters' shall include all other lands covered by waters which are navigable under the laws of the United States."

It is further recommended that copies of this resolution be sent to the President of the United States, the members of the Judiciary Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, and to the Washington delegation in Congress. NOTE.-The italicized sections are amendments recommended by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce.

[Resolution No. 1155]

A resolution of the Port Commission of the Port of Seattle relative to proposed Federal legislation affecting tide and submerged lands

Whereas the port of Seattle, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington, is the legal title holder both in a proprietary and trustee capacity of tide and submerged lands; and

Whereas the port of Seattle, in aid and of assistance in the development of the waterways and harbors of Puget Sound and Lake Washington for the purposes of commerce and the general welfare of the peoples of the State of Washington, has expended vast sums of money improving the tide and submerged lands thereof by constructing thereon docks, piers, quays, etc., and

Whereas there have been recent claims made by Federal agencies questioning the title in and to the said tide and submerged lands, and

Whereas there is now pending in Congress certain resolutions to quiet title to said lands: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the port of Seattle, a municipal corporation, That the Congress enact an appropriate resolution, releasing, remising, and quitclaiming to the several States all right, title, interest, claim, or demand of the United States of America in and to all lands that are now or have heretofore been beneath tide and navigable waters within the boundaries of each of the several States; saving and excepting thereupon only those lands heretofore acquired by official action of the United States of America; and retaining, however, to the United States of America its powers of regulation, for the purposes of commerce and navigation.

Adopted by the port commission of the port of Seattle in open session this 15th day of June, 1945, and duly authenticated by signatures of the commissioners voting in its favor and the seal of the port commission.

J. A. EARLEY.

E. H. SAVAGE.
HORACE P. CHAPMAN.

"Mr. CLARY. There are only two or three more witnesses, Mr. Chairman; we will possibly finish in 10 or 15 more minutes. Mr. Irving Smith, city attorney of the city of Long Beach, is next.

STATEMENT OF IRVING SMITH, CITY ATTORNEY, LONG BEACH,

CALIF.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I believe that because of the fact that people commonly refer to the city of Long Beach as being only interested in this problem because of oil, I should make a brief statement.

I have no purpose of reiterating the many things applying to other cities that fully apply to my city of Long Beach.

Being the chief law officer of the city of Long Beach, and its harbor board, we want this committee to understand we are very much concerned in this present resolution. We are concerned that the resolution include the amendment, which I believe has been proposed by Mr. Shelley, of the American Association of Port Authorities, of which our city is a member, to include definitely reclaimed submerged lands.

We have built in Long Beach since 1911 a modern port; the attorney general of our State listed the city of Long Beach as one of the important ports. Our port improvements are built entirely, or, should I

say, 95 percent, upon reclaimed submerged land. We have an investment of approximately $15,000,000 at this time in our harbor improvements. Prior to my leaving the city to attend this meeting, we let a contract for $1,500,000 for three more bridges to be built on reclaimed submerged land.

If the Government is to continue with its continual sniping at our title we will not be able to go forward with our development and financing of improvements. We have today in the blueprint stage in our engineers' office a $52,000,000 program for postwar improvement in the development of our harbor.

In addition to our oil development we, this last year, in the 10 months of our last fiscal year, beginning July 1, 1944, and ending April 30, 1945, have received from rents and operations of our pier and harbor facilities alone, $642,000.

Mr. JENNINGS. For how long a time has these installations existed? Mr. SMITH. We received our grant from the State of California on May 1, 1911, granting us title to all the tide and submerged lands held by the State by reason of sovereignty within our city limits. Our city limits cover approximately 6 miles along the Pacific Ocean, and extend 3 miles from shore. The greatest portion of this improvement has been in the last 20 or 25 years.

Mr. JENNINGS. How did you get the money-sell bonds?

Mr. SMITH. The city sold some $11,000,000 bonds to start with. Our charter requires every bit of the money received from our port facility, including the oil developed upon these tide and submerged lands every dollar must be spent for harbor improvement. It is frozen for that purpose.

We are receiving today some half million dollars a month from those sources, and that money goes into the building of a great public port. The city of Long Beach, in addition to that, has some 6 miles of public beach, much of which is built on submerged land, reclaimed; the city having acquired some 70 percent of the land bordering the Pacific Ocean along our entire beach frontage, in order that we would have, without any question, title to all accretions, both artificial and natural.

Mr. JENNINGS. How many people are employed on these improvements?

Mr. SMITH. I can't give the exact figure, but approximately, I would say 40,000 are directly connected and employed through industry and other establishments in connection with the commerce of the city of Long Beach.

a

May I say also that we not only have the port facilities built on these reclaimed lands, but we have parks, public beaches, recreational facilities, on which we have in good faith expended public funds of the people of the city of Long Beach in entire reliance on the continued decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. Our own supreme court in 1937, in the case of City of Long Beach v. Marshall, test case, cited in 11 Cal. Rep. 2d, page 609, declared the city of Long Beach received the fee title to these tide and submerged lands from the State of California, and our own State supreme court in making that decision, settling the fee title within our city, did so in view of these many decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States cited in the Attorneys General's brief.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much; you have made a good statement.

Mr. CLARY. Mr. Brockel, port manager of Milwaukee.

STATEMENT OF HARRY C. BROCKEL, PORT MANAGER, CITY OF MILWAUKEE, WIS.

Mr. BROCKEL. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, my name is Harry Brockel; I am municipal port director for the board of harbor commissioners of the city of Milwaukee, Wis.,

The board of harbor commissioners was created by statute to plan, develop, and operate a modern system of municipal harbor facilities for the port of Milwaukee.

For several decades, the city of Milwaukee has been in the process of developing a modern municipal outer harbor on the shore of Lake Michigan. This municipal harbor development was projected by the city of Milwaukee, with the approval, endorsement, and assistance of the State and Federal Governments.

Milwaukee's general plan of harbor development was approved by the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, and by the Congress, which under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1922, authorized extensive breakwater construction at Milwaukee for the protection of the municipal outer harbor works. This breakwater project, now complete, represents a Federal expenditure of approximately $7,000,000.

The State of Wisconsin cooperated by granting to the city of Milwaukee for harbor and terminal purposes extensive areas of submerged land in Lake Michigan. The State grant of submerged lands for harbor development extend along the Lake Michigan shore for about 2 miles, to an average width of 1,500 feet from the original shore line.

Milwaukee's municipal harbor properties at present comprise 371 acres of land, of which 212 acres, or nearly 60 percent, were created partially by accretion, but principally by filling of submerged land granted by the State. The Milwaukee Harbor project contemplates a series of piers extending into Lake Michigan, and as additional piers are constructed extensive additional filling operations will be undertaken. By far the greatest part of the development, both actual and prospective, has been or will be constructed on lands reclaimed from Lake Michigan under the State grants. The city of Milwaukee has during the past 30 years invested more than $7,000,000 in the construction of harbor improvements and municipal harbor facilities. A series of modern terminal facilities has been provided to meet the needs of commerce and shipping, with substantial benefit to Great Lakes commerce, both foreign and domestic.

Mr. ROBSION. Is it material what improvements you have made or are going to make, if the land is yours? We have heard a great deal this morning about what has been invested. What has that to do with it? If it is yours, it is yours.

Mr. BROCKEL. It would simply indicate to this committee the importance of the issue to these various localities.

Mr. ROBSION. If it is not your land

Mr. BROCKEL. If it is not our land, certainly some very substantial investments are in jeopardy.

In addition to the large municipal investments, private industry has leased 35 acres of municipal harbor property for new industrial

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »