White Bluffs spokesman. [volume] (White Bluffs, Wash.) 1907-1938, 1935-07-11
Whitehead Would
Tax Public Utilities
BY j. b. Whitehead
Secretary, Benton County Utility Di

Secretary, Benton County Utility Dist.
Several weeks ago the Los Angeles
Times carried an article under the
heading: "LOST-$2 900 900 in TAXES
which was widely published and COM
mented on by some of our state and
county newspapers.
This article stated that the private
utilities had about one-third of the
electric business OF the city of Los An
geles and paid approximately $1,173,0OO
in federal state and local taxes, and
that the publicly owned utility, doing
twice as much business as it's privately
owned competitor, paid no taxes, but
If 1t were taxed on the same basis as
the private utility it would pay into
the public treasures the sum Of 3d.
346 ,O0O
This article did not sound just right
to me so l started a little tax inves-
tigation for those interested in power
at cost. The Los Angeles Times has
been for years the arch enemy of the
Los Angeles Power and Light, Char
acteristically reactionary in It's general
policies and universally recognized as
viciously unfair with respect to pro-
gressive public policies" 1t is notorious
for it's distortion Of facts regarding
pubic ownership of our natural re-
sources.
The City of Los Angeles says "the
last part of the Times statement is
not true, but were it taxed the same
as the private utility, the Bureau Of
Power and Light OF Los Angeles woulc
pay approximately $1,6oo,o0o for fed
eral, state and local taxes.
The state law and the charter of
Los Angeles requires that the citys
municipal plant must earn, and does
earn, not only sufficient revenues to
provide for operation, maintenance and
depreciation, but must provide out Of
revenues, in addition, enough to pay
off the proportionate part of the bond
ed debt"
Last year there was paid from the
power revenue fund: all matured cleo
trio plant bonds outstanding, 81 ,349 900;
interest on bonds, $1567,754; trans
ferred to the general fund of the city,
$1,133,067; and transferred to the re-
serve fund of the city, $165,000. TN
the same year the citizens of Los An
geles saved approximately $4,500,0O0 as
difference between the total charges
actually paid to the electric utilities
iy,er yryif1 I,n nit cf
geles and the charges they would have
paid had they been billed at rates
charged by privately utilities in
municipalities located adjacent to Los
Angeles"
The conclusion is apparent that even
if the Los Angeles Bureau Of Power
and Light had paid all taxes that
would have been rightfully paid as
privately-owned utility, it would still
have benefited the Los Angeles citi-
zens by several million dollars
I have often said at our Grange
meetings that all public power utilities
should pay a direct tax, the same tax
as paid by any individual or company
This would remove the club now used
by the power companies TO keep the
conscious, uniformed public be-
lieving that they, the private power
companies, pay the tax.
In another article I want to tell you
something about the taxes paid by Ia
coma and Seattle, and in closing I
quote one statement by j. D. Ross, SUI
perintendent Of City Light of Seattle
I'VE get very little credit in the eyes
Of the people for any street lighting
wrongly given for nothing. The pro-
cedure Of taking 1t as direct tax
would show the City Light customer
who supports the plant the amount
that we really pay as taxes, for through