Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1922-10-11
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP
How il Worked Out in the Case of
Seattle

t1dNlDS Hdu tcolt VI ooSiuiioei'
water and lived some years with {
socialistic electric lighting plant to
gether with numerous other socialis
tic fads and fancies, the municipal
socialists of Seattle, who seem to bt
in a majority most of the time, de
termined to have a socialist railway
So along about 1912 the city built {
little over four miles of street rail
way, paralleling the lines of the
Stone 4 Webster Corporation, which
at that time owned the street rail
ways at Seattle.
About this time a private real es
tate firm built eight and half miles
of street railway for the sole purpose
of selling lots. 1t was purely a real
estate deal and nothing else. 1t was
necessary to have transportation to
and from those lots in order to sell
them. After the real estate sale was
over with the owners no longer
wanted a white elephant in the form
of eight and half miles of street
railway. so they tried to give it away
to a private company, on condition
that they would operate the line
The private company refused to ac-
cept it. Later it was offered to the
city on the same terms and the city,
of course accepted, because the city
wanted socialism. This nearly
thirteen miles of street railway never
paid; there was a growing annual de-
felt. and at the time | made per-
sonal investigation the actual losses
amounted to $4,000 a year. The
service was poor l remember that
there was a standing joke in the city
to the effect that on one of the routes
of the city-owned lines if a stranger
happened to ride the conductor
shook hands with him and con-
graduated him on the fact that he
was adding to the income of the
socialized lines!
Still the city was not satisfied
with her socialistic plunge. She
built a dam on the Cedar river, about
5000 yards below where it should
have been constructed. More than
one engineer warned the city that
the soil on the north bank of that
river would not hold the water; it
was mainly gravel. However, poll
tics said build the dam at the one
place where the enthusiastically in
clined members of the city govern
ment wanted it built, so the dam was
constructed and ever since the peo-
pie have been damning that dam! it
cost $1,500,000. 1t was worthless
because the water ran through the
gravel bank like it would run
through fine sieve. Then the city
began spending more of the peoples
taxes to seal up the bank. The last
report that | have is that some
100000 has been expended for this
purpose, and now they are talking
about blowing up the dam with dyn-
amite! One funny citizen said:
Socialist dams come damn high,
but they don't hold high water"
Way back in 1905 the city of Sc
attic took over the street lighting
plant. From this year to 1910 great
improvem were being made in
the lights, l. e., the kind of lamps
used in all progressive cities. The
old arc lamps that were installed in
Seattle in 1898 were used for several
years by the city, when other Pacific
coast cities. like Portland, Spokane,
etc, were discarding them as inefhcl-
ent. In 1911 the socialistic poll
ticians then in Office managed, some
how, to get municipal-owned utilities
exempted from state regulation.
Evidently they did not want an in
telligent examination Of management
and results The municipal socialists
boast that it was due to municipal
ownership that the rates came down
from 20 cents per kilowatt hour to
5 cents. There is nothing to this
statement except boasting. It's not
true. In the first place, in 1904 the
actual rate was little over 10 cents,
under private ownership. In state
ment issued in 1911 the city govern
ment said: When the city plant
company to reduce it's price by 40 per
cent. from 20 cents down to II cents
per kilowatt hour"
Now, the private company did
not have either a 20 or a 12-cent
rate, so that statement was far from
the facts. In 1913 the city auditor
stated in his report that it cost SIS
cents per kilowatt hour to light resi-
dences. There was demand at this
time for a scent rate, but the super
intendent said a scent rate would
mean an annual loss of $4,000 that
is direct loss; taxes are lost any
how. Nevertheless, the rate was re-
duced, and in order to make up for
the loss which resulted, the socialis-
tic statesmen voted to increase the
cost for street lighting, which comes
from all the citizens in the form Of
taxes! In 1914, before convention
of the Pacific Northwest League of
Municipalities, one of the Seattle
councilmen stated in a speech that
the city was lighting its streets at
loss, and yet the price was actually
higher than the private company had
charged eleven years ago. At that
time the city had 100000 in
vested in it's electric lighting plant
and was not paying a penny for
taxes.
Taking all facts into consideration.
we find that it cost the city in 1914
almost $50 per light to light its
streets, and this was about the high
oct rate in the I1nitad States at that