The City That Forgot How to Ride: Seattle’s Battle for Short-Term Streetcar Franchises

The question of whether a long or short term street railway franchise shall be granted to the company which seeks to control the principal lines of travel in this city, will probably come before the city council next Monday night. The matter is one of great importance to the people of Seattle, and should receive the severest consideration, not only by councillors, but of all citizens who are interested in the future welfare of the community.

There was no question as to the desirability of improvements in the street railway facilities of Seattle. New construction and better equipment is desirable if Eastern capital will come to Seattle for the purpose of taking the transportation matters in hand to the benefit of both the investors and the city, well and good; but let the fact be made apparent from the outset that the city is to get a dollar's worth of benefit from every dollar's worth of privileges accorded.

In its issue of May 11, the Star called editorial attention to this matter and reviewed at length the objections raised to long-term street railway franchises. The fact stated was that in most of the large Eastern cities a preponderating sentiment has developed against the granting of franchises for terms involving many years, owing to the fact that the corporations holding long term privileges are inclined to become very independent in their attitude towards the people, and pay little regard to their needs, to say nothing at their whims.

The short term franchise helps to keep the corporations civil in tone and more accommodating in manner. Another reason why franchises should be limited to short periods is to be found in the rapidly changing conditions of the present time. Less than another 20 years have elapsed before another 50 years have passed, the present methods of transportation may have become obsolete, and up-to-date improvements will require sweeping changes, as great as those which occurred when the old-fashioned horse car gave place to the improved cable and electric car a few years ago.

Cities tied with long term franchises would then have nothing to prevent them from revoking such short term policy which permits municipal bodies granting the same. San Francisco today has an object lesson very much to the point. On two of her ear lines leading through the heart of twenty, horse-drawn cars drawn by mules are still in operation, protected by a franchise that the car would only be torn up annually. Heavy damages costs are being paid in the courts there, brought against the city by one street car company operating on Market street, because a network of useless old tracks have been torn up to make way for modern thoroughfare.

Forty years will pass a marvelous development in Seattle, and the street railway privileges will enormously increase in value. Twenty-five years will witness great changes, and the corporation seeking to control transportation in this city can well afford to be content with a grant for that one month of time. Some persons advocate the municipal ownership of street railways to be operated at cost for the benefit of the people. This sentiment may increase with the years and become dominant long before a 40 year franchise would expire.

It is not wise to tie up the City of Seattle, with franchises reaching far into the future.