The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-30


cisco Figonis we'll Both of them pay
about half the rate they formerly paid to
Spring Valley, and they have what they
consider, and what really is, most supe-
rior drinking water. Housewives who do
their own washing appreciate Figoni's
well water. because it is soft and makes the
laundry work easier.
Figoni has two tanks above his well.
One of them has capacity of 2025 gallons
and the other HOO gallons, giving total Of
1925 gallons. He has large windmill at
tachment, but does not depend upon it
entirely.
There is a stationary engine of consider
able capacity located only few feet from
the well, and when the trade winds fail
and the north winds do not blow-which
is seldom enough in this City-the steam
engine does the work just as well, and at
moderate cost.
Figoni keeps his well in good condition
and his pump in thorough repair. He is
his own engineer and superintendent of
water works, and therefore gets the most
for his outlay. He is not a rich man, and
it is only this fact which prevents him
from developing his water rights to an
extent that would enable him to supply
all of North Beach with better and cheaper
drinking water than that supplied by
Spring Valley.
The Committee on Municipal Ownership
OF Water Works has addressed an open let
ter to various organizations whose mem
bers have already, or are solicited, to in
dorse the petition asking for special cleo
ton, John M. Reynolds, chairman of the
committee, is the author of the letter. 1t
contains great deal of matter of public
interest in connection with the question.
Copies of it have been forwarded to over
200 or CARNATIONS in the City. 1t reads as
follows:
Gentlemen: Enclosed is a petition which we
ask your organization 10 indorse. Please bring
1T before your association and kindly mail us
the Endorsement ii it is approved.
Permit us to say that this is not political
experimentation all parties alike indorse
it. There are but FIVE cities in the United
States of over 100000 inhabitants which
allow themselves TO be taxed by private corpo-
ratlons Tor water, and even OF those five there
are indications that in Denver and Omaha and
here in San Francisco the water works will
soon be owned by the City government. More
over, IN every case where the City government
has taken control or bought or constructed its
own plant the taxes for water and light have
been greatly reduced.
! A startling example of the difference be-
tween municipal and private control is shown
in the difference between water rates at Sacra-
| mento and Stockton. At Sacramento house
OF seven rooms pays 81 per month and the city
| makes profit of 200 per cent on running ex-
| penses. AT Stockton the rate for "tenements
| occupied by single family is ST. so per
month, and the profit all goes to the water
! company.
| AT Tacoma, since the city has owned the
| water and light works, the rates have been re-
| duced 20 per cent to all consumers, and the
| expenses OF water and light used by the city
now are more than paid by the revenues from
consumers, even at this reduced rate. That
city is now relieved from taxatlon for water
and light for municipal purposes, besides get
ting these necessities to consumers at great
reduction Tacoma charges consumers for arc
lights Sill per month; this is under city con-
troll; while at Sacramento, under the private
monopoly OF works largely constructed by the
State prisoners the city itself has to pay $14 95
per month.
We call your attention to the following
proofs that city ownership reduces the cost:
The usual public rate in the East is rs cents
per month for sixteen candle-power lights.
The usual private monopoly rate is 81 80 to
w per month for sixteen candle-power lights.
The average cost there for lights OF 1000
candle-power under private monopolies is
about 500 per light in cities of $4,000 in
habitants. The same light in similar cities
under city ownership costs but $50 on an
average.
We can show that even in Chicago (which is
reputed TO be corrupD the reduction in cost in
favor of city ownership is nearly twothirds
THESE are arguments which should stir the
citizens OF San Francisco to action. We do not
desire the City TO buy the present works, but
10 10 nave new and better works constructed.
We should oppose buying the Spring Valley
works at the cost which the company puts
upon them. II they are purchased at all 1t
should be at their actual value without refer
ence 10 the past excessive and perhaps fraudu-
lent expenditures and without reference TO the
enormous profits which are wrung from us.
we shall favor new works and thus get rid of
delays and litigation which might, and
probably would, result from the condemnation
OF the existing plants.
With this explanation OF our aims and with
the unanswerable arguments in favor of pub
lie ownership that can be made, we sim
cerely hope your society will take an interest
IN the matter, indorse the petition. and that
your members will sign 1t and circulate blanks
Tor the general public to sign. Blanks can be
had at the office of our chairman, 602 Market
street.