Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1914-03-03

THE CAMP HILL WATER RATE
To the Editor Of The Telegraph.

To the Editor Of Tie Telegraph:
Two articles have appeared in the
Telegraph recently The first was
statement by the Riverton Consoli-
dated Water Company. on January 23,
and the second an advertisement for
them on February 81, 1914. AS there
are two sides to every question, the
peoples side might as we'll be given.
In the earlier communication there
are several paragraphs with which
issue can be taken Complaint, is
made about the meter users. 1t is
we'll to remember that they conserve
the use of water and pay for all they
use because there is no guess involved
as to quantity.
Camp Hills contention for a Har-
risburg rate is stated as being CLEARLY
unjust" What are the facts? A mu-
nicipality is allowed the option to pro-
vide it's own water supply or to get it
from a company incorporated for that
purpose. Some boroughs try to be
foresighted enough to see that rates
are definitely agreed upon and are not
too high. They know that they can
supply water at lower cost than a
company because they must pay less
interest cost on money invested. In
the belief that the proposition was
fair, a contract with the water COM
pany was made by this borough. Is
there no protection for the borough
that tries to protect itself? Had the
present condition been foreseen there
probably would have been q public
rather than private supply.
The ordinance does not call for raw
Susquehanna river water" but the in
tention of the parties to the contract
certainly was reasonably pure water,
wholesome, and fit for domestic use.
The company admits that the filter
plant was erected to supply adequately
other patrons of the company" as
well as the lower end borough. Camp
Hill insisted on wholesome water and
the filter expenditure Is cited as neces.
sary for that borough only. A huge
trunk line" would have been two miles
instead of six If the borough had fur
nished Its own supply; the long one
wall necessary because other communi-
ties were TO be provided for as well
as Camp Hill. A part of this line was
laid in one position and within two
months taken UP and relaid in q
different location. Who pays for this
unnecessary expenditure?
One part seems uncalled for and
this Is the statement appreciation
has come in the shape Of a bill of
equity" Anyone familiar with the
methods Of the water company during
the last few years will realize that the
situation Is not as rose -colOred as their
statement makes 1t appear. There was
insufficient pressure, some inadequate
service pipes, unwholesome water
(first-class water now) and little busi-
ness courtesy. In many of the newer
homes 1t Is necessary to have water
for flushing purposes. When water
failed to flow 1t was the part of wis.
dom to know for what probable length
of time the shortage would prevail.
The cornpany's office refused to answer
any phone inquiries. Appeal was made
to the State Department of Health;
relief did follow, About a year ago
the company sought to have the con-
tract rates doubled because of filtered
water. The citizens met them in q
very fair spirit and sought a com.
promise of so per cent. increase.
These negotiations ended because the
company suddenly demanded that the
contract rates be multiplied by three
instead Of by two. Why was there
such a sudden change of base?
About this time authority was given
to increase the bonded Indebtedness
from $500, 900 to $1.000.000.
The annual minimum charge OF
| $40" is misleading. The new minimum
quantity supplied for this rate costs
exactly three times the contract rate,
! yet the impression given is that the
minimum has only been doubled
The illustrated advertisement gives
! a generally unfair impression. Most
! of your readers are unacquainted with