Wood River In Quandary Over Sewer PWA Decision Cancelling $135,000 Grant I» Puzzle Puzzle to Officials Seek New Course Consider Return to Plan Abandoned in 1930 After Discord , Chicago, where they had gone Wed nesday for a "showdown" with state PWA staff members. ' Their trip followed a delay of almost two weeks In PWA action on a contract led by the board of local Improvements subject to the administration's approval. Little information was obtainable from Farley Ferguson, state director director of the PWA, Thursday other than that the grant had been rescinded, rescinded, Manning said today. j Ferguson informed the Wood, River officials he had merely the j bare announcement that the grant' had been rescinded, and had not been informed as to the reason. Reason for Action i Press dispatches from Washington Washington quoted PWA officials there as objecting to the fact that on each of the last two calls for bids only WOOD RIVER, May 15. — Rescinding Rescinding of the PWA's $133,000 grant for the $450,000 Wood River ;runk and relief sewer came as a complete surprise to the state office of the administration. I The disclosure was made today as Mayor Hamilton and Corporation mayor namuum ana i/orpurnuuu Counsellor Manning returned from Chlraeo. where thev had eone Wed- 1 one complete bid was made—that of the Madison Construction Co. At one of the two openings, bow- j ever, a second bid on only one altemate, that for electric power- tie ing of the sewer pumps, was sub- remitted by a Chicago firm. Both the Madison Construction Co. r.nd the Chicago firm at^thatjlme ap- o - _ tlcally Invalidate the proposals The sen Madison Construction Co. withdrew OounMlloTVannlngl 1 the time was too' to state whether the city . its action rescinding the grant. F'owever, he did say he cussed with Assistant State Dlrec- tor Ferguson the possibility of changing the financial setup of the' project from one based on local improvements bonds to a sewer revenue bond basis. • been the market lor the sewer.revenue bonds was far better* at present than that for the local improve- • ments variety. Bond Bale Factor Ferguson could give no answer as to the prospects under such condi-j f 1 A vi a Hjfi«r\**t*lM» aaf rl I ding In the past, Under the administration of For | imuoi wie uumuiu>i.iauuu wi *-w»-.-•- mer Mayor Henry schnaufer an or- dinance providing the sewer reven- 1 ue bond setup was passed by the council, and it was upon this Or- > dinance that the original appllca- tlon for a PWA grant was made, t Then objections arose to the ; revenue bond setup. They' •were > based on the claim that owners <.f vacant lots would not be required to pay as much for the sewer as, those of built-up property, or might escape assessment tor its entirely., The local improvements plan then was 'substituted, though 'When it had been proposed to finance the project under that plan in 1930, strong objections arose. , Objections to the local improve- ment plan of financing the sewer were based principally upon the promise that all property would be assessed almost equally regardless ot rhether it was built up or va- cant and unusqd.