The plan which the city adopted was the least popular of the three options, with most people favoring the Valley Center proposal. Opposition to the plan arose over the vague increases in water rates which were called for, the fact that the Water Company would control the supply, and, probably most important, because the plan called for a surface supply which people feared would be polluted from other sources north of the city. Underground supplies were accepted more willingly. In addition, questions were asked concerning whether the river flow through the city would be reduced because the water was being taken north of the city. The Board of Realty led a general movement against the proposition, and as a result of the generally negative opinions the proposition failed miserably in the election. The April 10 results showed 1,980 in favor, with 13,511 against, a majority of 11,621.

Despite the overwhelming defeat, a Beacon article in 1926 showed that the topic was still prevalent in the city, "but Wichita people did not lose their interest in the matter (following the election). It is estimated that more than $1,000,000 a year is the cost to the city of the present type of water. Plumbing, engine boilers, heaters, every water-using agency, is subject to severe deterioration. The additional soap bill of the city alone is estimated at $228,000 a year. That is the reason why once more people are beginning to ask if they are to get any solution of this problem." (Beacon, 8/22/26).

No official action occurred over the next several years although the subject was constantly discussed. In June of 1926, Edward C. Mateer, a Wichita citizen who was seeking a quality water source, revealed a possible source of soft water located 70 miles west of the city, along the Ninnescah River. Mateer informed the city that private experiments demonstrated that the artesian flow of the underground supply could be sufficient to push the water to Wichita without pumping. He offered to show the land to the city, if it was interested, and would sell at a reasonable sum. Soon after, the report the Chamber of Commerce showed considerable interest in the supply, continuing its support of soft water while pushing for an analysis of the Equus Beds. Renewed investigations were begun, but no action was taken by the city for a few more years, especially with memory of the huge defeat still in the minds of city officials.

Fears of a water shortage surfaced later in 1926 to aggravate concern about the Wichita water supply. Back on June 1, 1922, the State Executive Council had ordered that sand could not be pumped from the Arkansas River below a certain point. The order came after a full hearing of complaints by the city of Wichita and the Wichita Water Company against businesses operating sandboats near the water plant. When sand was taken from the river bed, the underground sources were released to flow freely in the course of the river, leaving the water lower than the land by several feet. The state engineers testified at the 1922 hearings and recommended a limitation on the amount of sand which could be withdrawn.

Until 1926 the order was followed, but then the Consumers Sand Company, a Delaware corporation, began disregarding the order, ignoring the efforts of the Water Company. Their activity, when combined with a six-inch shortage of rainfall in the first half of 1926, created a fear of drought in the city. The city went to the state in July of 1926 and continued to fight the sand company until 1929 when the company stopped its pumping. It was clear that the supply in Wichita was not safe from circumstances which could cause a water shortage. By the end of 1927, water consumption in Wichita had increased to nearly six million gallons a day for the 100,000 people. With the increasing demand and the need for new supplies, the attention eventually turned back to a soft water project. On April 10, 1928, the Chamber of Commerce Soft Water Committee, headed by John Kirkwood, recommended "That action be taken immediately to secure a supply of soft water for Wichita." The report, accepted by the chamber, also recommended that "the next feasible plan for securing an adequate supply for Wichita is through the present water company," and that a citizen committee be appointed to take charge of the soft water project. (Chamber of Commerce Minutes).

It wasn't until 1929, however, that action to review soft water again was undertaken. The City Commission, accepting the chambers earlier recommendation, requested the Water Company to report on possible