The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-08-13
THE MAYOR's VETO.

II semes that the gas franchise of
the Excelsior Coke & Gas company
passed at the last council meeting, Is
still hanging in the balance Inc
nnayor is trying to make up his mlho
whether or not. to veto the measure
Public sentiment seems to be rather
against the franchise as passed oy the
citv council, especially among the
business men of the city. 1t Is Oh
course impossible to determine just
how people stand on such PROPOSE
tion but the indications are that
should the mayor veto the FRANCHISE
his action will be sustained and APP
proved by a majority of the people OF
Topeka
ON the other hand. it is serious
matter to veto franchise, especially
when it has been passed by the votes
of three-fourths of all the members
of the city council. The mayor might
we'll say that he does not feel 1ustlneo
in opposing such an overwhelmingly
large vote for the measure. II those
councilmen who voted for the fran
chise before are willing to stand by
their guns, they can carry the tran
| chise over the mayors Veto 1t woulo
/ hurt the mayors prestige with the
council to have such a thing happen'
and naturally he has some hesltancy
in taking the responsibility without
considerable assurance that the peo-
pie of the city are with him.
Public sentiment, however, is not
the only thing which should influence
the mayor He must be guided some
what by his own best judgment he
has an opportunity to understand the
1 cd "A u
| contract which is not enjoyed by the
ordinary citizen. The public some
times misunderstands propositions
which are pending before the council
and takes unwarranted prejudice one
| way or another. The law gives the
| mavor authority to protect the city
| not only from the mistakes of the city
| council, but from the prejudice OF
/ popular sentiment
There is a queer look about this
gas franchise business which all the
concessions of the gas company nave
failed to dispose of. Why was thu
franchise rushed through the counci
J in such a hurry? Why was the coun
Gil given no opportunity to CAREFUL!
| insnect the final draft of the docu
ment? Why does the company wan
: a new franchise at this time. when 1t
old franchise is only two-thirds gone
Why should the city grant thirty
wear franchise under any circum
stances?
This leaves entirely out or conslo
Grafton the question of rates IN
company is of course justified IN get
ting lust as high a rate and Just a
favorable a franchise as it can 1t
the business of the mayor and couhcl
, to protect the city's interests. Ii Tn
citv ties itself up to a thirty-year con
tract at $125 it will probably hav
v cause for serious regret Within
: few years, the present indications ar
that natural gas will be available i
Topeka. and despite the seeming Pre-
= lection which the franchise gives tn
t city in such a contingency, there
reason to believe that the passage
the franchise would tie the city
? hands. and place it to some extent
!. the mercy of the gas company
Y Topeka is big enough town TO
;. able TO get something out of its fran
chises. The present city charter a.
i is a bad thing for the municipalit
a and when it is amended, which it
lie almost certain to be by the next legl
IS Iature. the city will be in better pos
ton to get what 1t deserves for sue
a valuable piece of property as a g;
/ franchise.