White Bluffs spokesman. [volume] (White Bluffs, Wash.) 1907-1938, 1924-08-29
Public Utility Taxes
Subject of Referendum

The taxation OF public utilities,
whether publicly or privately owned,
is discussed in the State Chamber
News, the official organ OF the Wash
ington State Chamber of Commerce.
in their August issue. The state body
is conducting statewide referendum
among it's members on the public
utility question.
The article in part says:
Cali of the light and power proper
ties of the public utilities in this state
are assessed in the same manner as
all other property in this state is as
sessed. Taxes are paid upon this prop
erty just as all other taxes are paid.
The amount of these taxes already eX-
ceeds two million dollars year, over
five thousand dollars a day. This
two million dollars necessarily de-
creases the taxes which every other
taxpayer in the state is required to
pay.
All of the property Of the municipal
plant is now tax exempt, and when
ever these plants take over property
which was formerly upon the tax
rolls, that property also becomes tax
exempt, and the taxes upon the home
owner are again increased The sue
cess or failure of municipal owner
ship can only be determined when the
municipal plant is required to per-
form the same service and meet the
same obligations as the public utili-
ties Sincere advocates Of municipal
ownership admit this and are willing
to submit to this test.
when the light and power COM
this state, it Immediately starts pay
ing taxes upon the investment just
the same as every other manufactur
ing concern and every home-owner.
This tax averages with all the light
and power companies 9.6 per cent of
their gross earnings. Out Of every
$100 of gross revenue which the COM
panies receive, they pay back to the
people $3.50 in taxes. This is in the
nature of an annual rental for the use
of these developed water powers. Mu-
nicipal ownership advocates maintain
that all the water powers in Washing
ton beiong to all the people of the
state. They have never maintained
that they belonged either to Seattle
or Tacoma. If then these two cities
are to develop the water powers be-
longing to all the people of the state
should they not also pay a rental
in the form of taxes to compensate
all Of the people of the state for their
use? What benefit does the taxpayer
in Spokane or Okanogan County now
derive from the development Of wat
er power, which they state he as a
citizen owns, when it is developed by
the City of Seattle or Tacoma?
"The argument that tax on mu-
nicipally owned light and power prop
critics would increase rates is certain
ly confession of weakness. Public
utilities furnishing the light and pow
er service are today paying over 8 pei
cent of their gross earnings in taxes
and yet are able to compete rate fol-
rate with the municipality owned
plants operating in their district. The
City of Seattle is fair comparison
The rates charged by the privately
owned utility and the municipal plant
are identical for all classes of service
although the private company main
tains a heavy burden of taxation. In
Spokane the average residence con
sumer pays less for his electric ser
vice than does the Seattle consumer
although Spokane has no municipal
plant and the public utility OPERATING
in that city pays in taxes $40 out Of
every 500 gross revenue it receives
If municipal ownership is the success
claimed, why does it fear equal com
petiton?"