The daily sentinel., 1913-07-22
COLORADO SPRINGS LIQUOR ORDINt7lCE
TO Be OFFERED TO COMMITTEE 1JF 70
CORRESPONDENCE Between COMMITTEE
AND UTILITIES COMPANY WARMING UP
Series Of Questions Pf0pOunded by Griffith and Associates May
Bring an End TO Future Negotiations for the
Purchase OF the Local Plants.


The controversy between the sub-
committee of the committee of seven
~ and the utilities companies warm
ed up pereeptibly today and If 1t CON
4 tinues Will doubtless develop no little
bitterness. The subcommittee sub
mltted a communication to the COM
/ pany today that exhibited d trifle of
spice and the staid and dignified cor
respondence of the past few days Is
slightly enliyened by the latest mis-
sive.
| The letter proposes seven ques-
tions, each of them fraught with con-
siderable interest. The first de-
mands that the property items of the
company be given specific valuations.
the second refers to the company's
paving bonds and the third raises
/ question about the interest rate on
the bond issue by which the city may
take over the utilities. The fourth
query affects the size of the floating
1 Indebtedness referred to by the com
pany. suggesting that such tremen-
dous issue might he unstable and so
the whole proposition might fall OF
its own weight.
The committee also asks for a dis
tinction between outstanding and
contracted bond issues and wants to
know whether the sums are optional
or obligatory. The sixth and seventh
! interrogatories are abstract and ap-
ply 10 the basic differences between
the advocates of private and public
ownership of utilities. However, If
they are answered by President Sum
I derlin they will serve as interesting
documents on the subject.
Ii is extremely doubtful If the cor
respondence Will he longer continu
ed. The committee of seventy meets
Thursday night and the sub-commit-
I tee must submit its report at that
time. 1t has been suggested today that
the committee of five will express its
doubt if the negotiations for the pur-
chase of the utilities can be success
fully carried out and urge that the
committee act at an early date TO
determine whether or not the men,
/ bers favor the ownership of the cleo
I tric plant by the city. If this is af-
| firmitively decided it is believed that
/ the future actions of the committee
will be made on the supposition that
the only method to be mutually
agreed upon for the acquisition of the
utilities is condemnation.
The letter from the subcommittee
today to the light and railway COM
panies is as follows:
Grand Junction. Colo.
July %, 1913.
The Grand Junction & Grand River
Valley Railway Company, and the
Grand Junction Electric, Gas &
Manufacturing Company:
Gentlemen: In order that we may
have more definite data to report to
the committee of seventy. at its meet |
ing next Thursday evening, would be /
pleased to receive further informa- |
tioon in addition to your proposal and |
inventory upon the following sub |
jects:
/. AS we understand your pro- |
posal, you claim the 5 1913, 10000 TO |
be the actual bona fide Indebtedness |
of your company, and also the physi- |
cal value of its property, excluding |
all franchise or intagible values. If
so. what portion of this amount was
incurred for the railway plant; what |
portion by the electric light and pow /
er plant; what portion by the Fruita .
plant; what portion by the gas plant; I
and what portion by the ice plant, as .
near as may be. as per your inven- |
tory?
2. Does your proposition to sell /
to the city for 81 1913, 100000 include
your payment of the paving bonds
which your company contracted to Z
pay, or would the city have to pay the
same in addition to the s 1888 |
10000?
3. Why do you ask that our
bonds to you bear per cent instead
of per cent interest, the rate of our
water bonds? Are your railway
bonds selling at par. and would not
3 per cent bond of the city be
worth as much as the company's
present G per cent bonds?
4. What was the cause of so
large a floating Indebtedness as
$3.50, 900 and why cannot you take
bonds instead of cash for that
amount? 1t might be impossible for
the city to place that amount of
bonds for cash, in addition to the ST.
333,OOO.O0 of other bonds required
by your proposal. Would not such a
requirement give You the power to
defeat the city's efforts for municipal
ownership, even after the bonds had
been voted?
5. You say "the outstanding and
contracted bond issue of the company
at this date is approximately sl.OS3,-
000." How much Of this is out
standing" and how much contract
ed?" What are the contracted items
and are they at present optional or
obligatory on the company?
o. What is the basis of your
claim that it is the effort for munici-