The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1900-06-05
LIGHT QUESTION
SETTLED TONIGHT
WI Come Before the Water
Commission for Decision.
Question Of Public Ownership Of Q
Public Lighting Plsnt TO Be De-
cIded For or Against the Tax
csyes-Fsc tssnd Figures.

There is hardly question but what
the water commission. at It's meeting
tonight. viii definitely settle. in one
way or another. the question Of public
lighting. Whether the people OF As
toria shall build and operate their own
electric light plant. or whether the
taxpayers shall again be made TO bear
the yoke Of a private monopoly In pub
lic lighting, Is the question the COM
mission must settle tonight.
II the members Of the water COM
mission have kept their promise to the
people made NJ their last meeting,
namely TO investigate for themselves
the cost Of building. operating. etc. a
public light plant. there can only be
one conclusion which they can reach
tonight In all honesty. Justice and
fairness % the taxpayers. and that
is. for the city to build and run It's
own lighting plant
The commission. II It has tried 10
get facts and figures regarding public
lighting plants. has had over a hun
dred cities. owning and operating their
own light plants. 10 correspond with.
From the replies received from these
cities II should be easy 10 figure all
average OF cost and income Of a pub
lie lighting system OF any dimensions
and the Astorian says now that II the
water commission does not give to
Astoria It's own public lighting plant.
II VIII not be because public plants
In other cities have not paid expenses
and surplus. in addition TO reducing
the cost OF lights TO consumers from
20 TO so per cent.
There are cities In the United States
paying monopolies as high as 81 per
month for street lights. the price AS
toria once paid, but there are other
cities that are burning their own lights
for $3.50 per month.
There can be no dispute as to what
the figures from the various cities
show. taken separately or as an aver
age. The question is, have the mem
bers OF the water commission taken the
trouble TO get these figures? II they
have. their decision tonight is fore
gone conclusion: II they have not in
formed themselves. then 1t is patent
to the dullest observer that they do
not intend TO do so.
In quoting figures Of cost and re-
celpts Of public lighting plants else
where. the Astorian has taken all the
cities operating public lighting plants
just as they come.
In no city has the cost OF lights, un-
der public ownership, been within 20
per cent Of the cost OF the same lights
under private contract. and in many
instances the cost has been less than
one fourth that charged by private
corporations. In no city where pub
lie ownership has been tried has the
city returned to private contract light
ing.
In no city where the public has
undertaken to furnish its own lights
has there ever been q deficit in the
treasury on that account.
These are arguments unanswerable,
so far as the wisdom Of establishing
public lighting plants in other cities
is concerned. It may be that Astoria
is SC radically different from every 9TH
er city OF its size in the United States,
that different course must be pur-
sued here regarding public lighting
but. unless that is the case, there
seems to be no valid reason for max
ing the people continue to pay IS per
month for street lights Of no guaran-
teed power end $l.25 per month for in
randescent lights for private use, when
the latest improved street lights are
being furnished elsewhere. under pub
lie ownership, for 50 per month and
incandescent lights for private use for
?5 cents per month.
For the friends of the West Shore
Mills company 20 assert that for months
before the council stopped the extor-
tion, the public service furnished by
that monopoly was anything like the
service in quality or quantity Of light
guaranteed the city under its contract
or anything like an adequate cervice
for the price paid, would be euuiva-
lent to calling every taxpayer who has
eyes to see and who was abroad at
night, and then complained of the poor
service, a fool. The street lights were
not only dim every night, but night
after night lights at the intersection
of various streets would go out entire
ly apd remain out during the entire
period Of service, paid for by the city.
The West Shore Mills Company excuses
itself for this failure to furnish the
taxpayers with what they were paying
for, on the ground that its lamps, wires,
machinery, etc. needed renewing, and
in order to renew hem they proceeded
to levy an assessment on the people
by Increasing the price Of lights, re-
fusing to guarantee that the lights
to be furnished in the future should
be as good. let alone any better. than
those furnished in the past.
Does the water commission think 1t
justice to make the taxpayers buy the
West Shore Mills Company new ma
chinery and then pay them for the use
NJ n instead NJ hiivinR n for Them
selves.
The question is sifted down to that
Astoria cannot be properly lighted by
the West Shore Mills Company with