The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1905-01-15
Municipal Ownership

nlclpal ownership of the water works
and In recent number Of the Min
ers Magazine Mr. Thos. Annesr reports
on the results that have been gained
MI. Annear was formerly member OF
the lower house of the general as
sembly and also served a term as
state senator and is now county treas
urer-elect of San Juan county.
The perplexing problem of the mu'
nicIpal ownership of public utilities
has been met and solved by the citi
zens of one town in Colorado to the
satisfaction of the tax payers and citi-
| zens generally. The town of Silver
ton owns its own water, electric light
and sewer systems. Aver expert
menting with privately-owned water
and light systems for many years the
people became very tired of corpora
| ton methods and decided that they
| could do their own business without
| the aid or assistance Of any corpora
! tlOn The people began to think that
| corporations did not operate water and
light systems for fun. and if com
pany could operate them at a profit.
why not the people operate them.
|
| nome. II it was a good thing for a
/ company to operate light and water
systems and make the people pay for
II, then 1t should be a much better
proposition for the people to do it
| themselves. So The people of Silver
| ton decided that they no longer need
ed a guardian to supply them with
| light and water. but that they would
supply their own light and water and
no longer pay interest on watsred
stock, high salaries, etc, to private
companies. The water company
claimed the right to charge enough for
water to net them 10 per cent profit
on 81 ,0G0, claiming that the water
system was worth that amount when
the city claimed it could be dupli.
Gated for less than $4,000 At the
same time the assessors books show
ed the water company was only pay
ing taxes on a valuation of $751; 900. In
other words, the water company de-
manded the people should pay them
10 per cent on watered stock to The
amount of $7T000 when they had
sworn TO the assessor that the system
was only worth $4,000 for the pur-
poses Of taxation. / believe this is
the usual method under private own
ership.
The city paid the water company
S2,2OO per annum for nineteen years
Ia tlre hydrant rentals, making a total
of $41,SO0. or more than the city claim
ed the entire water system was worth
and at the end of that time we did
not own any more of the
water system than when the
city first - gave the water
company its franchise At a special
election held September. 1901, quail
fed electors voted $4,000 for a city
water system ~ After a very bitter
fight and many threats on the part of
the city to begin condemnation pro
ceedings the water company sold its
riant for $4,000 In April 1902. the
electors at a special election authoriz-
ed the board of trustees to issue $11..
500 worth of ). per cent bonds for the
erection of an electric light plant.
The city began the erection of the
plant and had same in operation April
q, 1903
The old company openly boosted
that it would put the city out of bust
ness in a short time and issued
circular saying that they could fur
nish light so per cent cheaper than
than any municipal plant on earth.
After very hard fight for over one
year the old company sold its machin-
cry to a secondhand Jew junk deal
er in Denver, folded it's tent like the
Arabs. and silently stole away" We
have improved our water system until
today we have enough water for a city
of 10000 inhabitants. This was done
to meet the demands of growing city.
Our water system has cost US and is
today worth $4,000, and we do not
owe l cent on it except $4,000 of <
per cent bonds. Our electric light
system has cost us $4,000, and all
We owe on same is $11 500 of ) per
cent bonds. Our sewer system has
cost us $16.500 on which the city does
not owe ] cent. These improvements
on the light and water systems would
never have been done if same were
owned by private companies. The
city did not issue one single bond
to pay for any improvements, but paid
for them all from the profits of the
two plants. Silverton is a town of
over $500 people. and we intend to
show that ito municipal ownership
idea is a correct one. We have no
city taxes of any kind, the entire ex-
pense being paid from the profits of,
the water, electric light systems and
ordinary business. Electric light
rates are 90 per cent lower, and water
rates % per cent lower, than under
private ownership, and when our bonds
are paid off we will be able to still
further reduce our light rates 20 per
cent more and our water rates 40
per cent more and still have a profit
for the city so that taxes will be I'M
necessary. We pay the very best
wages to all city employees and have
never had trouble of any kind Our
bonds are held by our own people
and are held at a premium. The in
terest stays at home and is not sent
out 10 swell the profits of some out
side corporation. We do not pay
any interest on watered stock and
wages go to our citizens and not to
someone sent in from the outside, as
was the case under private owner
ship. We have expended many thous.
ands of dollars on our light and water
systems. but with all the improvements
and the reduced rates we have
enough money to defray all expenses