Arizona republican., 1916-06-08
MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC PLANT AND REMOVAL
 OF TOWN DITCH OCCUPY COMMISSIONS TIME

Two of the most important matters that have been considered by the city commission in many months were brought to the attention of that body yesterday afternoon by Commissioner George N. MacBean at the commits sioners' regular session. The first had to do with the expediting of action with relation to the proposed munich pal electric lighting and gas plant and the other with the proposed elim- ination of the Salt River Valley canal from city limits to city limits. Both of these projects are vitally before the public at this time. The former, by virtue of the possibility that the reclamation service may sign another contract with the Pacific Gas & Elec- tric company, which it is contended would either give the local concern a virtual monopoly, as far as the city | Is concerned, or would make the erec- ton of municipal plant a much l more more comprehensive proposition 1 than it would be if the city's inter- ! ests. were considered before the pro- posed new contract is entered into | pany, is being considered by various committees of business men and busi- ness organizations. The latter is pre- sented by Commissioner MacBean in manner that he believes is calcu- lated to win more popular favor than any yet advanced, in that it is more economical, reclaims more land and eliminates the ditch from the entire city limits.
 In anticipation of the bringing up of the matter of the municipal plant, ! there was a liberal attendance of interested citizens and taxpayers Commissioner MacBean inaugurated the discussion by handing in letter he, as vice chairman of the commis- sion, had received from Chief En- gineer A. P. Davis of the reclamation service, and a copy of his reply
 These letters, which are self-ex- planatory, follow:
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, UNITED STATES RECLAMATION SERVICE, WASHINGTON. D. C., May 21, 1916.
 MT. George N. MacBean, Vice Chair- man, Commission of the City of Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona
 Dear Sir:
 'This office has received from the Interior Department the following tel cgram sent by you:
 Copy of resolution: Be it resolved by the commission of the City of Phoenix that the secretary of the in- terior be asked to withhold the exc cution of any contract between the United States and the Pacific Gas & Electric company of Phoenix, Arizona, for furnishing of hydro electric en- erSy for use and distribution within said city of Phoenix until an election may be had for the purpose of voting upon the matter of a proposed muni- cipal plant. Passed by the commis- sion of the City of Phoenix this 17th day of May A. D. 1916''
 Inasmuch as the United States al- ready has contract with the Pacific Gas X Electric company. signed more than six years ago with over three years yet to run, the merit of the above request is not seen. It is SUD- posed to refer to the pending contract which has recently been advertised for discussion in the city of Phoenix but as the existing contract binds the United States to sell current tt the company for distribution in tho city of Phoenix and binds the United States not to sell it for the same pur. pose to anyone else or to enter upor this business itself, and as this con tract is binding for over three years the purpose of your request is no clear. The existing contract however while conveying to the United State the exclusive rights formerly pos sessed by the Pacific Gas & Electri company of the development of powe upon the canal system, does not bint the company to take any specific, amount of this power, and the rate therein are so high that the com pany announces it's intention of gen erating it's own power by the erection of steam plant. If this should b done the city of Phoenix would be n better off than it is now, but on tn contrary would be in more difficul position in case it desires to instal l municipal system, as the company investment would be much heavie than now
 It will be noted that the propose contract as published in Phoenix pro vides for the establishment of thes restrictions at the same date as pro vided in the old contract, so that the new contract is executed, it woul leave the city in better shape than the old one were continued and steam plant built: and if the stear plant be not built, it would leave tn city in exactly the same shape a under the old contract.
 The parties primarily interested the sale of this electric power are tn water users, and unless it can [ shown to be to the interest of tl water users to reject the new cor tract, the wisdom of so doing is nt apparent. Very truly yours,
 A. P. DAVIS,
 Director and Chief Engineer.
 Vice Chairman MacBean replied ; follows:
 May A, 1916. Mr. A. F. Davis, Director and Chi
 Engineer. United States Reclam;
 tion Service, Washington, D. c.
 Dear Sir:
 Your letter of May 24th received answer to the resolution of the Con mission of Phoenix of May 17th.
 When we sent you the resolutic passed on May 17th, we fully unde