Los Angeles herald., 1892-02-25
I think the parties are after this fran


Mr.. McGarry-I think the companies
now doing business here take unneces
sary alarm as to the injury which will
be done by the new company. They
propose to give good ample bond, and
propose to put in FIRST class conduit
system, and of course they are opposed
by selfish interests. The companies
now here will be able to use the con.
duits, and they will find it much cheap.
er to them in the end. On general
principles this company should be given
franchise. If they tear up the streets
they will put them in the same condi-
ton. Strangers who may visit our city
and see our streets all torn up, with
gangs of men laying conduits. will think
that there is plenty of business here.
Mr.. Carran-We cannot afford to pay
per cent of our gross earnings.
Mr.. Summerland-If that is the case
l am in favor of denying them the fran
chise.
Mr.. Rhodes-I am opposed to grant
ing this franchise until we know lust
what the people back of it propose to do.
/ don't think this question of gross or
net earnings will cut any figure.
| Major Bonsall-When these applica-
tions were made some time ago l con-
sidered that they were only feelers to
get the sense of the council on the SUBJ
| ject. / think they should present a
proposition to the board of public works
that could be tangibly acted on.
Mr.. Nickell--I think these people
should make an agreement with the
existing telephone and telegraph COM
panies; we would then know that some
/ wires would be placed underground.
Mr.. Carran-We contend THAT the
other propositions made here are not
made IN good faith. We cannot afford
to pay more than per cent of the net
earnings. Our system is in existence in
all of the eastern cities, and we would
like to have the councilmen examine
into the merits of our system.
Mr.. McGarry--The telephone COM
pany gives US the use of fifty telephones
free.
Mr.. Carran-They pay no percentage.
Mr.. McGarry-I am in favor of defer
ring action and giving all of the compa-
nies o chance to make their best propo-
sitions to us.
Mr.. Rhodes-We want to know what
will be put into these conduits before
we give permission to lay them. | am
opposed to referring the matter to the
DOaru OF PUBIC WOrK6. 9A
A vote was taken on the motion to
deny the franchise. and iS was lost by
the following vote: Noes-Alford, Innes,
McGarry. Bonsall. Ayes-Nickell, Rees,
Rhodes, Summerland.
The committee then rose and the
council decided to take up the franchise
for consideration at Q O'Clock next Mon
day.
WATER RATES.
Aspecal session of the council was
held yesterday afternoon for the purpose
of fixing the water rates for the ensuing
year. All members were present. MIR.
Rees asked whether the water compa-
MES had filed reports with the city
clerk. Colonel Teed replied that veri-
fed statements of the transactions of
the water companies boards of directors
had been filed, but no statements OF re-
ceipts and disbursements as asked for
by the city attorney.
The reading of last years water rates
ordinance was called for. Mr.. Innes
moved that the same rates be re-enacted.
Mr.. Rees seconded. Captain Afford
moved to amend SO as TO reduce the
rate on every room above three in houses
occupied by single families to 10 cents
added to the 75-cent rate fixed for
three room houses. The amendment
was rejected.
Mr.. Tufts offered an amendment to
fix the rate for lawns at 10 cents per
thousand square feet. Mr.. Caswell
jumped up, and stated that that rate
would be simply ridiculous. The last
year rate was l cent per front foot for
lots not exceeding $50 feet depth. This
amendment was also lost.
Mr.. Tufts offered third amendment,
reducing the rate on each 100 square
feet OF cement walk from 20 cents to 10
cents. Mr.. Rees submitted an amend
ment to the amendment, fixing the rate
at Is cents. Mr.. Caswell objected to
the change as before. Mr.. Nickel said
the companies did not get paid for more
than one barrel in five of water used for
cement work. Mr.. Rees's motion was
then lost, as was the one OF Mr.. Tufts.
The motion was then on the adoption
OF the rates fixed last year, and this
measure was adopted by vote of ayes
and 2 noes, Messrs. Tufts and Afford
voting in the negative. The ordinance
was then read again, the rules were sus-
pended with reference to the printing
and the ordinance was passed. "
The ordinance as passed is this:
That the monthly rates to be collected by
any person or corporation engaged in the busi-
ness of supplying water TO the Inhabitants of
the city of Los Angeles Tor domestic and pri-
vate purposes, for the year commencing July L,
1892, and ending June 80, 1898, are hereby
fixed as follows:
For every tenement or dwelling house of not
exceeding three living rooms, occupied by
single family, rs cents.
For every tenement or dwelling house of
four living rooms, occupied by single family,
80 cents
For every tenement or dwelling house of five
living rooms, occupied by single family,
$l.00.
For every tenement or dwelling house of six
living rooms, occupied by single family,
$l.15.
For every tenement or dwelling house OF
seven living rooms, occupied by a single fam
lily, S1.3O.
For every tenement or dwelling house of
eight living rooms, occupied by single fam
For every tenement or dwelling house of
nine living rooms, occupied by a single fam
For every tenement or dwelling house of
ten living rooms occupied by single family,
$1.75.
For every tenement or dwelling house of over
ten living rooms and occupied by single
family ior every additional room 10 cents.
For hotels or boarding houses, in addition to
family rates, for each boarder 20 cents.
For lodging houses, in addition to family
rates, for each lcodger, 10 cents.
For business blocks, for each Office in addi-
ton to q basis rate of SO. 90, 10 cents.
For private fire hydrants, each 81. 90.
For restaurants and eating houses according
to daily average of people fed, for each rs peO-