The Minneapolis journal., 1903-11-11
No Hurry.

Some months ago the city council
requested the city attorney TO make
a report regarding the status or the
underground wire district of the city.
This request led, quite naturally, to
an examination of the relations of the
Minneapolis General Electric COM
pany to the city. This examination
led, in turn, to a suggestion that IN
view Of the uncertainties of the situ-
alton arising from lack of a single
definite contract between the city and
the company, a franchise ordinance
should be prepared which should be
substituted for all existing franchises,
licenses or permits of the company.
A council committee, consisting of
one alderman from each ward, was
appointed to take up the task. This
committee has had number Of meet
ings and a skeleton draft OF an ordi-
nance has been prepared for it by
City Attorney Healy and introduced
by Alderman Lane. The salient feat
ures of the draft are the provisions
for a uniform rate to all consumers
of electricity and a gross earnings tax.
There is nothing in the situation to
force the General Electric company to
accept a general franchise at this
time. None of its privileges are near
their termination. The company has
no franchise of its own, but operates
by virtue of privileges secured by it's
constituent companies. These are the
Minnesota Electric Light & Motor
Power company whose name was
subsequently changed to the Mime
sofa Brush Electric company, the Ed
ison, Light & Power company and the
National Subway company.
These companies secured indeter-
inmate franchises to use the streets
for their poles, lines, subways, etc.
Such franchises may be valid during
the life of the corporation, but, not
longer. The Brush company's lease
Of life will expire in 1911 and the
others later, SO that not for eight
years, If then, assuming that the
franchise lasts as long as the COM
pany, will the General Electric COM
pany be in need Of a new franchise. s
1t Is true that there Is good legal
. authority for holding that inasmuch
as no time limit is prescribed in the
grants to the General Electric COM
d pany's subsidiary companies, they are
mere licenses which may be with
drawn at any time by the city council.
This, however, is not the view of the
Minnesota supreme court, as inferred
from it's decision in the Northwestern
Telephone Exchange company case.
Tho litigation might change the
present status of the General Electric
companys right to use the streets, it
is manifest that it largely controls the
situation now. That being the case,
it will not accept in lieu of its present
licenses or franchises new ordinance
that is not to it's liking. In other
words it is likely to come pretty near
shaping the final form of any ordi-
rance 1T may elect to accept. It will
demand a franchise that shall run
for not less than thirty years, it will
refuse to grant uniform rates, and 1t
will probably object to fair gross
income tax III payment of the fran
chise. The only vantage ground the
city has in negotiations now is the
ccmpany's fear that some radical as
SCISSOR may in the future greatly I'M
crease the valuation of it's franchise.
The company may make some conces-
sions for the sake of obtaining GER
tafnty in taxation. Possibly. there is
some advantage, too, in the company's S
fear that litigation over it's present
franchise might result adversely to It's
interpretation of them 1t is not
likely however, that these considera-
tions will eait to concede much.
This is, therefore, poor time to
make a bargain with the company.
The Journal is informed that
the temper Of the council is such that