After two years, the five oil producers and refineries involved agreed to donate the $40,000 worth of materials for an industrial sewer if the city would build, own, and maintain it, paying the $65,000 in construction costs. The sewer would carry the wastes along the west bank of the drainage canal from near 21st to the river, since they could not go through the disposal plant. The Chamber of Commerce unanimously endorsed the sewer line project, as did the Community Chest, another civic organization, and it came before the City Commission.

The main reason the project was proposed it that time was the continued high level of unemployment in the city, with 5,687 workers seeking jobs. On October 10, the commission was to consider the project. Five hundred members of the National Service Union marched to City Hall carrying banners proclaiming, "We Want Work, Not Dole," and "Give Us Work," as they paraded in support of the proposal. The commission voted later that day to place the issue on the November 8 ballot.

During the campaign for the sewer, bitter opposition developed to the bonds, with the disposal plant in the middle of the controversy. Opponents claimed it would be a waste of government money when the depression was causing everyone to economize. The disposal plant was used as an example of $690,000 wasted, since it was built but not being used. According to some, the city had already wasted a fortune on sewage.

As the disposal plant become the symbol of waste, the city defended it by explaining why it was not yet in use. To help the city's cause, the plant was opened for public inspection on November 12 and over 2,000 citizens toured the plant prior to the vote. The Eagle endorsed the industrial sewer, and on November 5 called on the citizens to "vote the bonds, put these men to work, so that it may not be said of the Peerless Princess of the Plains that hunger and want and woe stalk in our streets and our parks." A group, which actually included only five people, claiming to represent unemployed workers, advertised against the project, but was refuted by 5,000 unemployed men and their families who campaigned for the bonds.

In the November 8 election, the bonds passed in every ward in the city. After hearing of the victory, Wells reported that work would begin immediately, and he claimed that "every inch of the work will be done by hand labor." (Eagle, 11/10/30). A special meeting of the commission on November 12 authorized advertising for bids which began the project. The city, hiring only Wichita men, did not use machines when human labor was available, in order to maximize the employment potential.

Although the sewage disposal plant had been completed, the state order for both primary and secondary treatment facilities had still not been met. In addition, the demand placed upon the plant and the river continued to rise. During the "dust bowl" years of 1933 to 1940 and the drought of 1952 to 1955, the very low flow of the river prevented the normal dilution of the waste, which maximized the problem. In addition, from the 1930's until the mid-1950's, the population of Wichita grew from 110,000 to 240,000, and the city's area doubled to more than 50 square miles. The pollution of the river upstream was one of the main reasons for the failure of the soft water supply in the 1930's, and it was also a significant factor when the city finally changed its water supply from the river to the Equus Beds in 1940.

Complaints continued to reach Topeka concerning the city's pollution of the river. The Board of Health pressured the city in 1935 by taking special action to issue temporary permits to Wichita for sewage disposal. These permits, however, were relied upon for 20 years, since the inadequate treatment continued. In 1944, improvements were made to the primary plant with the addition of two digesters, two service tunnels, and a valve room. Then on November 5, 1946, $180,000 in improvements to the plant were passed in a city-wide election. The changes were completed in 1948, adding digester covers, a central building heat exchanger, and a sludge metering building.

The U.S. Public Health Service offered Wichita a grant of $280,000 to aid in plant improvements on October 27, 1952. The city subsequently approved a $1,506,230 bond issue on November 5, 1952 for additional work.

A number of additions were made to the plant by January, 1956, including an additional bar screen, grit removal equipment, aeration tanks, two new clarifiers, two digesters, heat exchangers, a control building, blower house, the repair of three digesters, alteration to the settling tanks, sludge building, and sludge drying beds. Even so, the improvements were made on the primary plant, which removed 35 percent of the pollution. A secondary plant had not been built.

By 1955, more action was initiated. The Mayor's Advisory Report, which had been submitted by Commissioner A.E. Howse on March 15, 1955, brought attention to the continuing pollution problem, calling for city officials to fully participate in an active pollution abatement program and to cooperate with the Board of Health. Soon after, on April 5, 1955, Black and Veatch was hired to report on sewers and secondary sewage treatment. In August of the same year, Dwight F. Metzler, director of sanitation for Kansas, addressed the City Commission on the river's pollution by the city and various industries in the area. Pollution upstream of the White River near Great Bend, salt companies at Hutchinson, and oil refinery companies at McPherson and Burrton all caused problems for the city, making the Arkansas River, which had been a source for 30 million gallons per day, unusable for a water supply. Due to the pollution of the Arkansas River, the city had been forced to look to the Equus Beds for water in the latter part of the 1930's, and now Wichita was forcing similar problems on cities downstream. Pollution in Kansas continued to be studied by the Board of Health. A public hearing was held on the matter in Hutchinson in November, 1955, and subsequently a firm policy to halt stream pollution was established. The board issued a statement which read in part, "Studies show pollution damage to the extent that in some areas the stream cannot be used for public water supplies, industrial and agricultural purposes, or normal fish and aquatic life." The board ordered cities to initiate construction of treatment facilities. Primary treatment was the minimum acceptable, with secondary treatment required in many cases, such as Wichita's, to maintain water quality. (Pollution Abatement Policy, Kansas State Board of Health).

Requirements were also specified for industries. Wastes were expected to be free of toxic substances, and those pre-treated could flow into the municipal sewage systems. In addition, oil companies had to treat their brine run-off before disposal.

The board gave cities and industries six weeks to complete studies for treatment facilities. Black and Veatch's study proposed that Wichita build a $5.7 million secondary treatment plant, construct a $3 million main sewer to serve the southwest part of the city, and build additional primary