The Price of a Streetcar Franchise
Seattle council members clash over the conditions of a transit deal, pitting local home-industry mandates against corporate negotiation.
The house of delegates took up the extension of the franchise of the Madison street line. Dr. Mitten said he had about reached the point of resistance. He had come there in a conciliatory spirit, but he did not believe the council had as a body a right to do what would be unjust on the part of individuals. He had been intimated that he could not get the franchise unless he ceded the bridge. He had yielded that, and now they tried to impose upon him, after giving it up, to keep it in repair for five years, and perhaps rebuild it. Dr. Mitten called attention to the provision compelling the company to buy material in Seattle. He said no man in this city needed to be made a Seattle man by law. Yet it was not fair to place so many restrictions. No one was particularly onerous, but so many conditions made it very irksome and likely to jeopardize the sale of the bonds.
“He said no man in this city needed to be made a Seattle man by law.”
Public control of private transit franchises remains a central tension in Seattle's civic discourse, specifically regarding who pays for infrastructure upgrades (like the bridge) and how much government can mandate local economic participation.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.