OCR Text |
Show fin Open Letter to Cedar City Citizens There is a concerted effort being be-ing made by a group of individuals individ-uals to incite and inflame the people of Cedar City in opposition opposi-tion to the Council's action renewing re-newing the franchise of the Southern Utah Power company to sell power in Cedar City. I admit that every man should have his opinion and voice it. I further admit he has a right to ask for a referendum if enough of the people agree with him, but, there is one point where he exceeds his rights and that is the right to mislead people through untruths and half-truths. It is because of these untruths and halftruths that I write this letter. The City Council did. on Feb. 19, 1953 in regular session, after carefully listening to the case and proposition of the power company and making counter propositions to the company which were acceptable, LEGALLY LEGAL-LY AND LAWFULLY renew the franchise of the Power Company by a unanimous vote. The members mem-bers of the Council present and voting were the three men who are not up for relectlon this November, No-vember, and the vote would carry car-ry next March as well as it did in this meeting. In addition, the City would get an additional $2,000 for 1953 from the Power company by acting now. The facts presented and freely discussed were: 1st. The old franchise had been lived up to with the exception of removing the six poles from the North South streets and this was to be completed this year. 2nd. The company, as soon as it was freed from the shackles of the court-appointed trustees on Aug. 6, 1950, began an improvement im-provement program that increased in-creased the power generation facilities fa-cilities from 9,700 KW to 16,700 KW with the addition of two diesel units and completion of the new steam plant in Cedar canyon. This was a net increase of 7,000 KW. 3rd. The company had expended expend-ed In excess of 2Va million dollars dol-lars in improvements since Aug. 6, 1950. 4th. The company needed financing fi-nancing for long term bonds to replace the temporary bank 193ns in the amount of $350,000. 5th. If the franchise were granted now it meant better interest in-terest rates pn the new bonds. 6th. By renewing the franchise now It meant $3,000 for the City for the year 1953 instead of the $1,000 called for in the old franchise. fran-chise. 7th. The $3,000 per year for the first 10 years was l7c of the gross sales of the company in Cedar City fur the year 1952, or 10 times the 110 of lrr of gross' sales paid as license for all other businesses and trades in Cedar City. 8th. V'h the increase to $5,000 per year for the second 10 years and the other items regarding park lighting, line to the City well, the installation of the control con-trol panel at the Enoch well, and the maintenance of all facilities owned by the company and used by the City, the Council felt it was a very good lead for Cedar City. 9th. The franchise was not exclusive ex-clusive and would not preclude the giving of a franchise to anyone any-one else, nor would it prevent the city from bu.'ldinfc- a municipal muni-cipal power plant should it so desire. The concensus of feeling was that the power comapny had kept faith with the Kple of Cedar Ce-dar City and vicinity in making the Improvements when they had no guarantee of the right to sell power in our city. The Council further felt that all open-minded, clear-thinking people in a spirit of fairness would naturally expect ex-pect the council to grant an extension ex-tension of the franchise, mutually mutual-ly beneficial to both the company com-pany and to the citizens of Cedar City. I sincerely hope that if you are approached to aid in voiding the proposed franchise you will think clearly and study carefully and weigh the results and make your decision in the light of facts 1 t : 1 1 dliw iiw iruin c-iiu'iiuiiai jjiftts and personal prejudices. Thenj and only then consent that yourl name be used on either side of the question. L. V. BROADBENT, Mayor Cedar City Corporation. |