The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-11-16

smelling stock, &c per 10.
FRANCHISE FIGHT TO GO
BEfOtE COUNCIL FLOOR
Continued from First Page.l
wires, and off furnishings light and
power by electricity" together with
two certain bids Herewith submit
ted. to-wit, one from Arthur Upper
Il Company in the sum of FIVE thou
sand dollars t$5,000) and one from
the Richmond and Henrico Railway
company in the sum of ten dollars
($l0), with the accompanying papers.
beg leave to report as follows:
Without determining the question
as 10 the propriety of the city grant
ing competitive franchise until it Is
affirmatively shown that the service
rendered by the existing company Is
not adequate or that the prices are
unreasonable, your committee beg
leave 10 reeommand thatnhoth ofs,the'
bids submitted to said committee be
rejected and that the franchise be
not granted TO either OF SAID pIuueIS
for the following reasons:
The pending franchise is not In the
best eF proper form to protect the city
and at the same time secure an ade-
quate service. The city attorney has
advised your committee that this
franchise was not in the best form
and that he would not draw fran
chise in this form. The best form
of franchise should designate the
streets to be occupied by the works
of the proposed company, and in the
absence of such designation should
prescribe the sections of the city to
he successfully occupied from time to
time. and the time within which the
construction should be completed.
This franchise fails to conform to
the opinion of the city attorney since
it Is general grant and does not
designate the streets to be occupied,
but undertakes to delegate to the
committee on streets the power to
designate streets and routes and to
what extent the rights proposed to be
granted can be exercised by any
grantee, this absolute power being
granted to the committee on streets
AS a condition precedent to the exer-
else of the franchise
Section 8. clause ?. gives to the
city the power TO require the grantee
to extend its lines to any part of
the city, but this is open to the OBJ
lection that 1t imposes on the city the
obligation of taking the initiavle to
require any extension. and that cit
liens who desire extensions OF lines
built under such a franchise would
first have to obtain at the hands
OF the council an ordinance requiring
such extension. On the other hand
your committee is of sle opinion
that under the terms and conditions
of the franchise the grantee Ia con-
ceded the right, irrespective of the
wishes of the council or street com
mittee. to use any and all streets OF
the city, and the council have no
power to deter them from using any
route they may select or tearing up
any street
Under the ordinance there is no
time fixed within which the proposed
work is to he completed except the
general provision as to developing
5000 X. W: rated capacity within
twelve months.
Your committee are Of opinion that
If competition Is desired, provision
should be made to secure compete
| tive service in all parts OF the city.
! This can be accomplished, as was
| suggested by the city attorney. by
| providing that the work should be
constructed in certain designated sec
| tons of the city, within certain spe-
Gifted times, Under proper regu1a-
tons and providing adequate penal
| Ties and forfeitures in the event OF
| their failure to comply.
| Your committee also calls atten-
| ton to the fact that there Is no bond
| required for the removal of the works
| Of the company from the streets OF
! the city at the expiration OF the fran
| chise They are Of optnion that such
! a provision should be incl <sed In any
4: franchise granted by the city.
| The delegation Of the power to the
] street committee to designate routes
. and the extent thereof gives to the
J committee the power to say to what
( extent the franchise may be exercised
| and Is therefore open to serious Cd
| lection. The legality of that pro-
I vision has been vigorously assaiied.
! The city attorney advises us that II
| is legal. but regardlaS Of Its legaiity
! IL makes the value Of the. franchise
| depend upon the within or caprice OF
| future committees or the council. ana
| therefore renders the franchise OF un-
| certain value. which would prevent
| the city from realizing a proper re-
turn for the valuable rights in the
this kind should not be indefinite as
to its terms and should not be mace
dependent upon future contingencies
or committee or council action. II
should ile so definite that any bidder
would be able To ascertain its value
and make q fair bid. that the city may
get q fair return for the privileges
granted.
There ia NO provision in the fran
chise which would secure to the citi-
gems electricity at lower rates than
those now charged by the existing
company. but, ON the contrary. q pro-
vision has been inserted which re-
auires the supply OF current at rates
which shall not exceed a greater sum
than ten cents a thousand watt hours.
which is In excess of the maximum
rate now charged by the Virginia
Railway and Power company.
Your committee are of opinion that
II is highly improper that this rate
should be fixed in the ordinance. In
- 49, 1T -