Seattle’s Early Debate Over Public Power
The Chamber of Commerce considers whether the city should break from private monopoly and run its own electric grid.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The Chamber of Commerce trustees yesterday adopted a report from the committee on sewers and city lighting, advocating the erection by the city of its own plant unless the contract for the next year can be let below a certain figure. The committee found that during the past six years upwards of 126 cities in the United States have established and operated their own lighting plants, securing better service at a lower cost than private companies. They believe that, owing to the fact that a municipal lighting plant in this city could be run in connection with the water works at very little additional cost for generation, the cost for arc lights could be kept below $40 per light. However, in view of the necessity of keeping bonded indebtedness down, they recommend the city advertise for bids for one year; if those bids are not within reasonable limits, the city should establish its own plant.
“Unless the private companies furnish a better service at a lower price than at present the city should adopt the plan of owning and operating its own electric lighting plant.”
This 1893 report captures the origins of Seattle City Light. The city's move to public power would eventually create one of the most stable and affordable utility models in the nation, mirroring current municipal debates over infrastructure control and corporate service vs. public good.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.