Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1916-06-23

guarantee
/ The treasurer Of the district, to whose
! eminent business Judgment we should be
! glad to defer, took view of this propo-
! sition SO much at variance with our own
that we feel it but fair to quote him liter
ally:
! Q. Are those persons who ask for an
extension paying higher percentage OF
the cost of construction than the average
| cost? What 1 mean by that. to make 1t
! plain, your present water takers are av.
construction. Now. why are additions
paying 10 per cent?
A. why because the average fellow IS
! right close at hand: the district doesn't
a man is in the outside district 1t seems
to me that unless you do charge him
higher. it brings the other fellow that Is
on the present pipe line higher.
I Q. If he pays as much as the rest IN
proportion to the amount of money you
are investing for him. isn't he paying all
he is getting?
A, l don't look at 1t that way.
4 The idea, 1t seems to us. may be stat
! ed in this way. A water system costs
$4,000 and the consumers pay an annual
! revenue of $3.50, per cent. new
street is added at a cost Of $1,000, the
new takers required to guarantee $40.
I per cent The system now stands a
$4,000, the revenue at s42o. still per
: cent. Certainly this hasn't brought the
other fellow that is on the present
pipe line higher" There may be less
margin in it for the district than from
a taker in the congested section, figur-
ing on what it actually costs per in
dividual for service. but profits neces-
Sarily are considerations in totals.
Otherwise. there would be a Slightly
different rate for every taker.
Free Municipal Service
/ We have said that the petitioners
should not be required to guarantee
more than per cent on the cost Of the
extension. We think that the rate
should be less than : per cent unless
the trustees discontinue certain discrim-,
nations now practiced.
We refer to the granting of service
to the city Of Augusta free of cost.
This is a practice SO widely INDUCED.
so fallacous in the reasons for its ex-
istence and based on considerations
whose legality is so generally misun-
de-stood, that we prefer TO give it more
attention than the amount involved in
this particular case might seem to
warrant
rs We have already stated, a condition
Of tie franchise grant to the Augusta
Water Company by the city of Augusta
was that the city should receive free
service for all purposes after the lapse
Of twenty years. This means fire pro-
lection. city building, schools and all
other municipal purposes. The so-called
private takers are carrying the entire
burden. The trustees evidently regard
it as a condition from which there is no
escape. and not an unfair one. Mr.. Ma
comber said: This is the condition
which exists, you can't remedy it at
the present time" And, later: They
1 domestic users) all participate in 1t
! (the fire protection). Every man who
| is water taker participates in this
protection. doesn't he? So there is no
unfarness in favor of one person, or
/ against anybody else
While we believe that the trustees of
| this district, in common with the off,
| GERS of many other public utilities, are
acting in absolute good faith in this
matter. we think that practically the
unanimous opinion Of publicists. COM
. missions ana courts is Inat the praCtlCe
is neither far or lawful.
Trst, as to its fairness It Is based
or ne theory that all Of the takers re-
ceiTe fire protection and should pay for
it. Assuming that they do they should
| pay: but not for others, and not in I'M
necessary disproportion to the benefits
received. Take a simple illustration
Brown owns A cottage house worth
$4,000: has kitchen faucet and a bath
room. and pays ST.. Smith owns store
and stock Of goods worth s50,O00 has
a faucet and water closet, and paws
s13, If there is no city charge for
water for fire protection. it is carried
as load" on the rates to other users
the amount contributed by these two
men being some part Of the $50 that
their combined rates amount to, Brown
! carries 1870 of this load on a $4,000
rick. while Smith carries 1880 on
$4,000 risk
| The Practice Unlawful