The San Francisco call., 1896-05-15
LAMBDA IN
THE VANGUARD,
That Model City Addressed
On Modern Municipal
Ownership.
FACING THE PROBLEM.
Shall the Lighting Plant be
Turned Over to a Private
Corporation ?
ARGUMENT FOR SELF.sUPPORT
The Executive Committee of the League
Presents an Overwhelming
Plea.
ARGUMENT FOR sELF-sUPP0RT
The following communication is self

ihC iOiloN1HS SOllliu unlCdtlOH Is Sell
explanatory:
ALAMEDA Cal, May Q, 1896.
To the Citi=ens Of Alameda: The Municipal
ownership League OF Alameda, through its
executive committee, desire TO place before
you statement OF the situation as regards the
maintenance OF municipal ownership of our
electric light plant In so doing 1t is needless
TO say that they have only the best interests of
the city at heart. They are not biased by self
interest. They have no private ends to serve.
But they feel that the time is at hand when
if citizens cannot be found who are willing to
perform some labor in the interest of broad
minded and progressive civic policy, and TO
unite in opposition to certain schemes for the
promotion of personal ends, Alameda will lose
the reputation which she has justly earned, OF
being one OF the best-governed, the most pro-
gressive and the most advanced cities in the
State.
The committee freely concede that many
citizens differ from them on this question
citizens who are as conscientious and as free
from motives of self-interest as are the men,
bers themselves. Itis 10 such citizens and TO
others who are unfamiliar with the question,
that this appeal is made, and not to thbse who.
from selfish motives. adverse to the interests
OF the public at large, are actively engaged in
placing before the people statements which
are distortion OF the truth, and basing there
on fallaciOuS arguments.
When the league was organized the commit
tee found them selves confronted by the asser-
ton, reiterated with strenuous emphasis, that
the electric plant owned by the city had cost
tine city very many thousands of dollars more
than had ever been received in benefits from
the same. While we felt, in common with all
our feIlow-citizens, that the purchase of the
Jenney plant eight years ago was an ill-ad-
vised one, and that the board which made the
purchase was deceived by false representa-
tions, yet we were not at all sure that the case
was as bad as was being made out by the adj
yocates of private corporate ownership. To
satisfy ourselves and the public on this point
we employed, at the expense of the league, one
OF Alameda's best-knoWn citizens and expert
bookkeepers to make thorough examination
OF the city records and report 10 the committee
q anfi hof rbA rN1or,+ had
that this aggregate could be placed side by
side with q statement of the benefits received
The result OF this examination is sufficiently
favorable 10 nullify the assertion that munich
pal ownership had up to that time proven a
losing experiment
This report has already been given to the
pubhe through the San Francisco Daily CALL
OF April 10. On another page of this leafiet
We publish it nearly in full. eliminating only
some dry details OF figures which have already
been published. There will also be found in
| this issue digest of the same report prepared
| by the secretary of the league, and published
| i'll the San Francisco Examiner of April l6
From this 1t Will be seen that instead OF this
! city being loser by reason of its ownership OF
an electric light plant, it is a gamer by some
the supposition that the Oakland Gas Light
Company would not have charged us more
| than il has charged the city of Oakland during
| the same time for the same service. That this
| suppositlon Is liberal one cannot be denied
! 1t is almost certain that Alameda, being
smaller city, and requiring less service than
| been taxed higher rate than Oakland has had
| to pay; because it is well established prin-
clple OF economies that the larger the plant
and the patronage the lower will be the rate
at which the service can profitably be supplied
The question which the taxpayers Of Ala
meda are called upon TO meet at the present
ship OF It's plant, or shall it turn it over to a
| private corporation, to whom shall be given
the monopoly OF lighting its streets and its
public and private buildings
In considering this question neither the fact
that the city was mulcted by the purchase of
the Jenney plant nor the fact that tor years
/ TINS com paratively worthless plant WAS
| operated under poor management cuts any
| figure. The only bearing these facts have on
the situation is to form basis of Judgment as
| to what can be done in the future with an up
to-date plant properly handled.
The present Board of City Trustees are not
responsible for the mistakes of their predeces-
| sors. They have to take the situation as they
ma It. The question confronting them is ::
! Shall we yield to the opportunities of in
terested parties and take steps looking to the
! turning over of the plant to a private corpora
tion or shall we improve 1t SO as to make it an
economical property, the benefits of which
shall lnure to the citizens at large rather than
| to few private individuals:
The public must understand that there is no
halfway ground. Alameda is not large enough
/ Tor two plants. Even if it were, just so sure as
the city gives TO a private Corporation the right
! to supply consumers with incandescent lights,
! Just so sure is the fist step taken which will
/ lead to the REIMBURSEMENT of the entire city
ownership, through corrupt public officials.
Believing this to be true, we are called upon
to decide between municipal ownership on
| one side and that of private corporation on
the other. We unhesitatingly declare in favor
OF the former. By the judlcious enlargement
| OF the plant which the city now has it can be
made TO pay to the taxpayers big returns for
| the money invested; that under private cor
porate ownership it would pay such returns to
the stockholders is confidently expected by
| tnose who are endeayoring, sin the interests
| OF the suffering Taxpayers" to gain control of
valuable property OF the city.
II IL is worth securing by private corpora
ton 1t is worth retaining by the city. The
city can make more out of it than can a pri-
vate corporation. There are many expenses of
an 1llegltimate nature which private corpor.
atlon is compelled 10 meet that municipality
is not confronted with. For the preservation
| OF the purify OF our city government we should
retain city ownership OF the plant. There is
! no greater source of corruption in municipal
governments than that which results from the
necessity of investing legislative board with
power to decide between the interests of the
| PUBIC and those of q private corporation
In addition TO the benefit to be derived by
the citizens as taxpayers, should also be con-
sidered the still greater benefits which will be
gained by the same persons as individual rate
payers With the fighting plant in corporate
control no such rates as are now given to the
city can be expected. The rates given to con-
sumers OF incandescent lighting are about
nan the price OF gas as now charged. With
the enlargement OF the plant, and the in
creased demand that will accrue soon as the
city IS able TO supply all who wish it VIII come
an ail-nfght service, and perhaps still fur
ther reduction in rates. So that the summing
up OF the whole situation will be, that with
proper management OF an up-to-date plant the
| city Will be able to run its arc-ight system
free OF cost TO the taxpayers and at the same
time give better service OF incandescents al
less than half the price charged to consumers
| for the gas they are now using.
What we have said herein is based on the
| supposition that the citizens of Alameda have
the legal right to manufacture electricity and
| sell 1t TO themselves 1t is contended by the
| opponents OF municipal ownership that they
have not that right-that while cities of the
sixth class are in terms given that privilege
| those OF higher class, to which Alameda be-
longs, are denied it. II that be the case prog
ress in population and wealth is to be punished
| by contracting municipal rights and liberties
an anomaly which, If in existence, should
not be permitted to continue. Whatever NAV
| be the law on this point there can be no doubt
as to the moral right of the city to protect and
| advance the interests of its citizens III il
should be decided by the courts tn at under the
| law Alameda must be at the mercy of 8 private
corporation for the supplying OF great utilitv
such as electric lighting. IL would then he
| hoove our citizens TO bestir themselves with
| yigor 10 obtain from the next Legislators such
| right of self-government which has, through