Los Angeles herald., 1910-04-19
HOWL
HEARD BY COUNCIL
Realty Board Makes a Protest
Against New Exactions
of City Fathers

''I take it that the day when anyone
can walk into the city council and re-
| quest the issuance of franchlse 10
any undisclosed principal, as was done
in the river bed franchise matter, mas
PASSED. The city is entitled to know
with whom it is dealing" said Meyer
i Tjssner president of the board of pub
lie utilities, at a meeting OF the ooard
with the city council last night to con-
slider a protest made by the realty
board against suggestions made by the
board Of public utilities to the coun-
ell concerning the granting of fran
chises.
The conference was called at the in
stigation of the council. number OF
men representing the realty board, IN
cluding Herbert Burdett, secretary or
the board: William Garland and VIC
tor Kleinberger, City Attorney Leslie
r. Hewitt, number of interested
property owners and all members OF
/ the city council were present. Coun-
Gilman Washburn presided.
1T does not occur to us" continued
Mr. Lissner, that we are suggesting
anything unreasonable when we ask
that the relations of the city with the
companies should be placed on bus
/ mess basis; for example, when busl-
ness man executes lease of his prop
erty he usually makes 1t his business
to see that the lessee is a responsible
person--in a position to carry out the
! terms and conditions of the lease-and
the lease usually prescribes that it
shall not be assigned without the con-
sent in writing of the lessor first had
and obtained.
WAS NOT UNREASONABLE
rs it unreasonable for the city of
Los Angeles to make a similar rule in
connection with the granting of fran
chises? In my opinion, the city should
never grant a franchise to dummy or
! an irresponsible party, or even an
/ agent who may be responsible, but is
not in a position to conduct the busi-
ness described in the franchise, and all
franchises should provide that they
shall not be assigned without the writ
ten consent of the city first had and
/ obtained, and before such consent is
| given, the proper city authorities
should see to it that the assignee is at
| least as responsible as the original
! grantee or the assignor
"The statement has been made that
| the principal owner of the railway
lines operated in the city of Los An
geIes has stated that he will not accept
twenty -one-year franchises. That this
statement is not founded on fact is
shown by the records of the city of
| LOS Angeles WHtISt III d hulllDSA VI
| instances, the companies have accept
ed such franchises, either directly or
| by assignment, which amounts to the
| same thing, for it would certainly seem
like childs play to say in one breath
that the company will not accept a
| twenty franchise and in the
next that it will accept an assignment
of such a franchise.
/ "I am informed by the city clerk S
office that:
Franchise No. 1876, granted to Ed
wards q Wildey on Melrose avenue,
was assigned to the Los Angeles Rail-
way company March %, 1910.
franchise No. 1852, on Sixth street
was granted to and accepted by the
Pacific Electric Railway company di-
rectly.
Franchise No. 1850, granted to w
H. Workman on Boyle avenue, was
assigned to the Los Angeles Railway
company February 26, 1910.
Franchise No 132S5, granted to M
j. Nolan on Washington street, was
assigned to the Los Angeles Railway
company February 6. 1909.
Franchise No. 16,520, on South Park
avenue, was granted directly to the
Los Angeles Railway company, but
the ordinance granting a franchise was
, held up on a referendum petition and
denied by the citizens at the subse-
QuGll titCllOL.
Franchise No. 1928, on Tenth
, street, was granted to A. n. Davidson
and assigned to the Los Angeles Rail-
| way company August 49, 1907.
Franchise No. 1881 for overhead
crossing on Los Angeles street was
granted directly to and accepted by
the Pacific Electric Railway company.
/ Franchise No. 14,615, on Pico street.
, granted to Robert Marsh, was assigned
to the Los Angeles Railway company
May q, 1907
Franchise No. 1929, on Pasadena
: and Piedmont avenues, granted to w
c. Weaver, was assigned to the Los
Angeles Railway company March q
1907
Franchise No. 1886. on East Sew
) enth street, granted to M. Welch, was
assigned to the Los Angeles Railway
company June 12, 1908.
Franchise No. 1855, for an over
head crossing on Alhambra avenue
was granted directly to the Los An.
} geles Interurban Railway company.
"All the above are 21-year franchises
"In addition to these the following
/ two franchises have been granted fol
extensions to the Los Angeles railway
; lines but no assignment is yet on rec,
ord in the city clerks office:
Franchise No. 1855, from Ninth
} street and Park View avenue, west
granted to Fred W. Forester.
franchise No. 1872, on Fifty-fourtt
street, granted to H. f. Vollmer.
INDEBTED TO RAILWAYS
It is true that the city of Los An
geles owes a great deal to the street
railway lines operated by the Hunt
: ington interests, which are entitled tC
7 fair and generous treatment in theil
dealings with the city. Much credit i!
l also due to the splendid enterprise
shown by the real estate men of the
city of Los Angeles, who have sub
divided and opened up and brought int
the city large tracts of suburban land
but no interest in the city Of Los An
geles is large enough to rightfully de-
mand that the city of Los Angeles dea
: with it on other than business basis
In other words, reiterating that there
is no desire whatever to in any man