The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-05-23
.DEY EXPOSES
MONOPOLY GRAB
City Attorney Files Opinion Analyz-
ing Proposed Ordinance.
COUNCIL PUTS OFF ACTION
PRESENT FORM TOO RAW FOR
EVEN FERNSTROM.
4 T THE meeting of the city council

A T THE meeting of the city council
- last night City Attorney G. g.
Dev. 10 whom the ordinance con-
+ soIidatiug and extending the various
/ franchises of the Utah Light q Rail
way company were referred q week
( ago. to point out wherein its provisions
differ from those of the existing fran
/ chises. submitted written report in
which he summarized the proposed or
duauce and the ordinances passed By
/ the council granting franchises to the
/ Utah Light & Railway company and
/ its predecessors. He showed succiuct-
/ " how much more the monopoly was
{ seeking To grab.
After Judge Dey's report or opinion
/ was read it was laid over without COM
meut. To- be taken up again when the
1 ordinance consolidating and extending
7 the cumpauy'S franchises WIS reached
! IN the regular order other business
/ was then taken up and disposed Of
/ II was expected that lively time
would euSue when the time for taking
Up the ordinance arrived NOLWItH-
standing the iuciemeut weather, "a
/, strong subcommittee Of the citizens
protective committee WAS present 10
watch the interests Of the people ana
also 60 note the gyratiOUS of the mem
/ beTS OF the council, either known or
| supposed 10 be iuimical to the future
/ welfare of salt Lake City i'm the mat
4 ter Of favoritiSm To the Utah Light q
/ Railway company.
/ Judge Dey in mis- communication
/ called attention to a number of mat
! ters that the friends of the Utah Light
I q Railway company among the cOuu-
Ciimen could not ignore, and they de-
cided that il would be iuddViSable To
attempt to put the ordinance ON its
final passage. So they concluded st.
would be well to- defer action on the
ordinance until next week The couU-
+ Cilmen who are opposed to the extern
sion were not anxious to take up the
/ ordinance, and so when Councilman
Z Wood moved that 1t be laid over until
/ the meeting to be held next Monday
night there was no opposition
! Councilman Ferustrom said he
( thought the ordinance ought to go
. over, i'm view of the statement by the
. city attorney that some Of the prices
. of gas would he increased" He said
that ne helped prepare the ordinance.
but ne was not aware that it would
/ increase the cost of gas. and If the
cost was increased it ought not To be-
The motion To defer action on the
ordinance was then put and uIaul-
UoUsly adopted.
Opinion of City Attorney.
Following is the text Of city Attorney
( Dey's opinion:
To me Iienorabie President and Members
J of the City Council
. Gentlemen In obedience to the request
z OF the city council for a report wherein
+ tie proposed franchise 10 the Utah ir-U.
i. Tnsr---
. company presented May u, $780, rt-
. leases the company from any Obligation
; or differs in rights given city J now
submit the following, as the result uL tHy
/ Investigations
In re Street Railway Franchises
! The torn would be extended an adrt-
/ loual eleven years under seventeen
franchises about ten and Uue-HHf years
under one about nine years under one
and about eight and 0ue-half years under
The provision for tracks=e arrauEr-
meut@ with other street way com
. terminus would be SO amended ass tH
limit same to interbUrbaH companies
Rights to construct and operate ON
. streets named iu said proposed fran
. chiSn. with one exception would 0- ADJ
. ditiouaI As to those. bv iuadEerteura
no doubt. the usual conditions imposed
seem 10 have been overlooked and not
. referred to-
. Transfers. reduced rates on two classes
OF fifty tickets and free transportation
: to city policemen and firemen in uni-
/ form.
In re Lighting Franchises.
I EXTENSION or TEBlL-six fran
cnIses are sought TO be extended 20 ths
Utah Light d Railway company. and one
10 the Utah Power company. The term
of extension for the SIX would be-
81 years under one franchise
dor ono F-sr rgf-lr
J. years under three franchises
s years under one franchise
And the term for the one franchise 10
/ the Utah Power company would De an
. additional thirty-four gears
/ Two of the franchises sought to be ex-
c gTge@ 70 to Pn Franc frSnehiSe Of kuE
/ 80. 1859. TO the salt Lake City Gas com
: pauy. also "a franchise granted TO salt
. Lake Power. Light * Heating company,
Jan II. ISL were reIiuquished and be
. came null and void and of no effect IN
{ May. 1888. revised ordinance $500 leay-
{ ing four existing franchises. viz
CD To the salt Lake & Ogden Gas &
Electric Light company. Of May % 1Nf-
as amended March 10, 1898, and Dec 81
7 % To r. NJ Jones. Of July g. 1875.
I a. amended Dec 81, 1903
g. To 5 F Walker, Of Dec - 1919.
as amended Dec. 81. 1905
CD To Pioneer Electric Power com
pany. Of May 2, 1887, as amended Dec
These four franchises. upon the in
corporation of the Utah Light & Power
company Dec 30. 1899, passed TO and
merged IN the Utah Light < Power com
panyr ana thereupOn by ordinance OF
Dec IL lS3, the Titan Power company
was recognized as the owner of said four
franchises ana operating hereunder. tt
tnuS appears that only four of said six
( franchises are valid existing franchise
! and that said four franchises cover the
! same territory, and that all four fran
! chiSeS grant the privilege for supDIyir4-
| electric lighting. and all EXCEPT the
Jones franchise for furnishing gas.
Rates and Standard of Service.
BY the proposed franchise the rate for
natural gas would be advanced from Hl
| cents per thousand cubic feet under the
| Walker franchise TO 80 cents Also the
| rate for gas for Illuminating purposes
would be advanced in price from 81 -
per Leo cubic feet under the Pioneer
| franchise to N95. Also. the rate for gas
| for fuel purposes would be advanced
! from SLtJ Der 1000 cubic feet under the
| Pioneer franchise to S140-
Comparison of the maximum rates
| fixed BY proposed ordinance and exist
| ing maximum rates for electric lighting
| service is complicated by reason 0f dif-
! feTent prescribed standards of efficiency
| both Tor arc and incandeScent lighting
| In the proposed franchise arc HEht
| standard Is 30 watt enclosed carbon
| arc lamps while in the four existing
| franchises sought to be extended the
| standard IS 2 600 candle power"
| query IS 499 watt enclosed carbon
/ Assuming the same efficiency ii have
! no doubt II IS practically the same by
reason Of the enclosed Iamp) then there
| VIII be feductiOn from 81 90 TO sfI25 on