OCR Text |
Show Farm Bureaus to Fight Power Rate Increase Local Organization Joins With Sevier County In Fight Will Ask Rehearing Before State Utilities Commission. I Believing that the recent raise in power and lighting rates granted the Telluride Power company by the Stato Utilities commission is unjust, and co-operating with the farm bureaus bur-eaus of Sevier county the local farm bureau, together with other local prote.stants, will go before the state utilities commission with strongly signed petitions asking the commission commis-sion to set aside the findings and open op-en the case for rehearing. The meeting was held at th Relief Re-lief society hall last Monday evening and more than 100 members of the l Farm Bureau and others were present. pres-ent. G. A. Chrlstensen, representing represent-ing the Farm Bureaus of Sevier county, was present and outlined the. plan proposed by the farm bureaus bur-eaus of Sevier county. Mr. Chrlstensen Chrlsten-sen urged immediate action and to this end State Representative C. M. Madsen, of Gunnison, Hyrum Olson, of Mayfield, and Dan B. Funk, of Centerfield, were appointed a committee com-mittee to solicit names to the petition peti-tion which will be presented to the state utilities commission. The petition which has been prepared pre-pared to be presented to the Utilities Utili-ties commission, says in part: That approximately all members of the Farm Bureau are users of electric lights and power furnished them by the Telluride Power Co. That petitioner is informed and believes, and upon such information and belief alleges: That on the 27th day of December, A. D. 1921, this commission made an order raising the rates of all of the members of the Farm Bureau of Sevier County, State of Utah. That the Farm Bureau did not have notice of the application of the said Telluride Power Company for permission to increase its rates in time to prepare and present to this commission reasons why the said rates should not be increased; that the said Telluride Power company mailed postal cards to some of the members of the Farm Bureau stating stat-ing the time and place that said hearing would be had at Richfield. Utah, but that said postal cards were not delivered to many of your petitioners peti-tioners in time to retake a protest, and that some of them received the said postal cards after the date set for said hearing. - That your petitioners were not in formed as to the provisions of the law relating to hearing of that kind before the Public Utilities Commission, Commis-sion, and were not represented at said hearing; that the said Telluride Power Company did not give its customers cus-tomers sufficient notice to be present pres-ent at said hearing and to make protest pro-test to said : ilse. 5. Your petitioner alleges on information in-formation and belief, that on the 24th day of May 1921 a hearing was had before this commission at which the city of Richfield and the Richfield Rich-field Commercial club were represented repre-sented by counsel, and protested the granting of any increase in rates, but that your petitioner was not present nor represented at said hearing and did not know of said proceedings. 6. Your petitioner alleges that the rates established by this commission are unjust for the following reasons: (a) That the operating expenses of the Telluride Power company as . found by this commission are ex-' ex-' cessive, and are based on "the highest high-est operating .expenses that have ever been attained, and that the cost of labor and material has greatly decreased de-creased since April S, 1921, the time of the filing of the Application of said Telluride Power Company, and that the operating revenue is constantly con-stantly increasing while the operat ing expenses are constantly decreasing. decreas-ing. (I) That the community served by the said Telluride Power Company Comp-any is devoted largely to agriculture and stock raising, and that' by reason rea-son of a raise by this commission of the local freight rates the products j generally raised and produced by the community served by said Telluride Power Company have very little value, val-ue, and that it is difficult and many times impossible to find a cash market mar-ket for the same; that the farmers belonging to the Farm Bureau of Sevier county, Utah have not been able to sell the products raised during dur-ing the year 1921 for more than enough to pay the taxes assessed against their farms, and in many instances the farmers have not produced pro-duced gross receipts sufficient to pay the taxes assessed against them, and as a consequence thereof the farmers farm-ers have had a loss during the year 1921, and that they will be unable to produce enough from their farms and otherwise to earn their expenses in the year 1922. . And your petitioner alleges that the raise in the rates allowed by this honorable commission to the Telluride Power Company is unjust, inequitable, arbitrary and confiscatory. confisca-tory. - (c) That the operating expenses of the said Telluride Power Company as found by this honorable commission, commis-sion, are excessive, and that said Telluride Power Company is negligent negli-gent and extravagant and uses money for other purposes than for the services of the public. (d) That the said Telluride Power Pow-er Company expands large sums of money in locating power sites and buying lands in the vicinity of its operations for the purpose of preventing pre-venting competitors, and discouraging discourag-ing other companies or persons in like business from entering the field of its operation. (e) That the rates found by your commission are inequitable and are not uniform to all of the consumers of the same class. (f) That the rates found by this honorable commission are excessive, and your petitioner alleges on information infor-mation and belief, are higher than they are for any other public utility furnishing electrical energy on as large a scale within the State of Utah.' tg) That schedule number thirteen thir-teen of said report entitled 'Tower For Irrigation Pumping" discriminates discrimin-ates against the farmer. (h) Your petitioner' further represents re-presents that there is a large area of fertile tillable farm land within Sevier County owned by the persons whom your petitioner represents which lies above the gravity canal systems of the county which said land would be brought under cultivation culti-vation and developed rapidly with electrical power for pumping purposes pur-poses available at a reasonable rate, and that by reason of the power rate established by your commission that the farming industry of Sevier County Coun-ty has been hampered and retarded. (i) Your petitioner alleges on information in-formation and belief that the rates in the town of Fillmore and Delta, Millard County, Utah, were on April S, 1921 the time of filing of application applica-tion for reductions, the same as the rates in the Cfty of Richfield, and the Counties of Sevier and Sanpete; that although the electrical energy is carried from Richfield across a range of high mountains a distance of approximately twenty-five miles to the town of Fillmore and approximately approxi-mately sixty miles to the town of Delta, Del-ta, the said towns of Fillmore and Delta have been favored by the said Telluride Power Company by leaving the rates the same as they were in Sevier and Sanpete Counties, State ! of Utah, prior to the raise in rates I complained of herein. That Sevier (Continuid on Page 4) Farm Bureaus To Fight Raise (Continued from Page 1) , ami Sanpete. Counties are more den-.; den-.; populated, and have larger luuns and furnish more custom to t ne Teliuride Power Company than to the towns of Fillmore and Delta; that the line constructed to Fillmore and Delta is comparatively a new-lite", new-lite", and that towns of Sevier and Sanpete Counties are discriminated against in order that the said Teliuride Tel-iuride Power Company may favor the towns of Fillmore and Delta. (j) On information and belie' your petitioner alleges, that the valuation val-uation shown by the petition of the tered into th" field of Sevier and Sanpete Counties for the purposes of recuperating the loss it sustained by its mining venture in Heaver County, Coun-ty, and that it is unjust and unfair to the consumers of electrical energy in Sevier and Sanpete Counties to compel them to pay an unreasonable rate on the investments of said Teliuride Tel-iuride Power Company wlie h but for the Counties of Sevier and Sanpete San-pete would have been almost a toial loss to the said Te'.luride Power Company. i m J That said commission in its findings misunderstood the issue raised with reference to the steam plant located at Sevier, Utah. That the issue at the former hearing relative rela-tive to the Sevier plant was to the effect that the original plant twenty years ago was of the value of $25,-OUO.ui), $25,-OUO.ui), and that a depreciation of five per cent per annum the amount claimed by applicant would leave nothing for the value of the plant, w hile the said Teliuride Power Com- pany valued said plant at approximately approxi-mately $05,000. 00. (n) That the decision of the commission com-mission raising the rates of the Teliuride Tel-iuride Power Company is against public policy for the reason that the! commission has held that said com- j pany is entitled to a reasonable rate ! of Interest on its investment at a time when the persons represented I by your petitioner and all of the j persons engaged in agriculture and I stock raising are not able to produce j enough to pay their taxes although j said producers have large sums in-j vested in their farms; that the alle- gation that the Teliuride Power Company is entitled to make a rea- I sonable rate of interest on its in-1 vestment by raising the rates paid by customers who are not able to produce pro-duce enough to pay their taxes and support themselves and families (who also have large sums of money invested) has a tendency, in this period of unrest, to drive many of the consumers toward Bolshevism and Anarchy. WHEREFOK, petitioner prays that a rehearing may be had in this matter and that at said rehearing petitioner be given time in which to prepare for the same and present to the commission evidence to prove said Teliuride Power Company, and found by this commission, is speculative, specu-lative, imaginery, fictitious, and has no relation to the actual value of the property of the said Teliuride Power Company. (k) That some of the lines constructed con-structed by said Teliuride Power Company have been constructed and are maintained in sparsely settled districts vhere there is little prospect pros-pect of development, and others are constructed through country where the maintainance is excessively high when more feasible routs at lesser expense are available. (1) That the said Teliuride Power Company first established its power plant in Heaver canyon, Beaver County, Utah for the purpose of supplying sup-plying electrical energy to the mines at Newhouse and other mining camps, that because of the fact' that said mines ceased operation they entered en-tered the field of Sevier and Sanpete Counties, and in order to acquire a monopoly on the electrical supply of said counties purchased the electrical plants that were then operating in said territory; and that much of the property that they purchased remains re-mains idle, and is of no use whatever, what-ever, and that the price of said plants paid by the said Teliuride Power Company has no relation to the actual value of said plants, that said Selluride Power Company en- the allegations herein, and that said Teliuride Power Company be required re-quired to produce actual evidence of its expense and of the valuation of its property; and that at said rehearing rehear-ing the order heretofore referred to j raising the rates to the customers of the Teliuride Power Company be rescinded, re-scinded, and that the rates of said Teliuride Power Company to its customers be reduced to a rate that is equitable between the public and the Teliuride Power Company, and for such other and further order as to this commission may seem just and equitable in the premises. |