The council met again that Wednesday, with many people expecting a fight to be at hand. A large and noisy crowd came to view the fireworks. After the meeting opened with a controversial decision on the location of electric street lights in the city in which the council approved a minority opinion, the city clerk picked up a stack of papers, and addressed the mayor on the new waterworks ordinance.

After reading the ordinance, with no one paying close attention, according to the Eagle's account on July 1, the motion that it be placed for passage was moved and seconded.

At this point, Hiram Lewis, a prominent businessman as well as a member of the Wichita Water Company, had a proposition to make. He felt the only real objection to the original company was that it did not furnish sufficient fire service facilities and, therefore, wished to offer a solution. To make amends for the defects in the current system and to avoid the need for a new company, he said the company would lay four more miles of main in any direction the council desired, making 15 total miles (the same proposed by the new company), would use 6-inch mains, instead of the 4-inch proposed, and would add 200 fire hydrants for a total of 220. Five thousand dollars would be charged for the hydrants, $4,000 less than the competitor's rate. The contract would be binding 18 years, three years less than the competitor's original contract, and the mains would be wood or iron as the council wished. Lewis hoped to influence the council against granting the new competition.

Upon questioning, Lewis and Superintendent B. B. Eggleston assured the council that the wooden pipes were warranted to bear 125 pounds pressure and only once had ruptured. But the majority was not convinced. After a lengthy discussion by the body and with spectator input, the council voted down the proposition by a 7 to 2 margin and by the same tally passed the ordinance for a new waterworks.

Councilman Allen expressed his reasons for opposing the ordinance. He claimed he did not vote as he did because he was satisfied with the present company or because he believed it had fulfilled its contract successfully. Nor was he opposed to competition in the industry. Instead, he said, the council had not spent enough time. As a member of the council in 1882, Allen remembered spending weeks considering the old company's franchise and still many mistakes were made. Too much money was involved to decide so quickly. A vote on each section revealed the decision had not been changed, and soon the ordinance was passed as a whole and the manuscript conveyed according to normal custom by the clerk to the mayor. But a surprise was in store as Mayor B.W. Aldrich refused to sign it. Those filling the room were astounded. The Eagle reported, "The expression of surprise readable on the countenance of some could only be comprehended by me seeing and not being told." The mayor agreed with Allen and did not feel enough time had elapsed for a good decision. The shock was felt in the silence of the room until the clerk brought up the next item of business. So on after, the meeting adjourned." (Eagle, 7/1/1886).

When the council met on July 12, 1886, the uppermost question was whether the mayor would sign the ordinance. Prior to the meeting, the issue was discussed with increasing interest throughout the city, and citizens again crowded the chamber.

As the meeting was called to order, the crowd waited in anticipation. Their questions were soon answered as the mayor vetoed the ordinance and refused to sign it. A manuscript explaining his veto was read by the clerk to a silent audience with only the varying expressions revealing the response. The mayor wrote that he returned the ordinance out of a sense of duty for the taxpayers, and in their best interests. Although agreeing that the city needed better water facilities, the mayor believed that the growth of Wichita from a vigorous inland town to a city of metropolitan proportion demanded extreme care in increasing the bonded indebtedness of the city. Already, Aldrich reported, revenues were being exhausted by current expenses and vital public improvements were being delayed. Making such an additional commitment would be a mistake, he believed, since the city tax would have to be raised by two and one half mills.

The mayor then addressed a new concern, arguing that, before further rentals from a private water company such as for inevitable flushing of a sewer, the city should consider owning and operating its own waterworks. He continued by outlining the benefits of a city-owned works and then explained the drawbacks of the new ordinance. He concluded by saying that, if the others had spent the time he had spent considering the matter, they would agree.

Silence followed the reading. It finally was broken as Councilman Richey moved to refer the veto message to the Judiciary Committee, with Brown seconding. Carey then stated that the new company had a better offer to make and moved to amend the first motion and send the second offer along with the veto message to the committee.

Allen followed his remarks by moving to approve the veto, but failed to receive a second. This prompted a period of chaotic questioning as everyone tried to decipher the question before the council. Finally, a motion passed to send the veto and the second offer, along with various supporting documents, to the committee. With the question temporarily disposed, the council quieted down to its normal business.

Two days later the council met again. Once more the meeting was preceded by animated discussion throughout the city on the subject of the new waterworks and what the council would do. Once the waterworks came up for discussion, it did not take long for things to start happening. Councilman Carey, a member of the Waterworks Committee, announced that Mr. Tiernan had instructed him to withdraw the old ordinance and introduce a revised one. He deposited the new version on the table, to the surprise of many, and the mayor quickly retorted that the committee was appointed to report on the veto, not to examine a new bid