[PRCo] Tarentum generates its own power

[Fred Schneider]

IT AMAZES HOW MANY INDEPENDENT POWER COMPANIES REMAINED IN THE 1930S.  IN THIS INSTANCE WE HAVE THE CONUNDRUM, IS IT BETTER TO CHARGE TAXES AND KEEP THE ELECTRIC RATES LOW, OR KEEP THE POWER RATES HIGH AND LOWER THE PROPERTY TAXES?  I GUESS IF ALLEGHENY LUDLUM STEEL USED A LOT OF ELECTRICITY, THEN SALES OF THEIR PRODUCT MAY HAVE SUBSIDIZED LOCAL TAXPAYERS.   HOWEVER, THAT DOESN'T COME OUT IN THE ARTICLE.   ED AND I BELIEVE THAT THE LOCAL TROLLEY COMPANY, TB&B PROBABLY BOUGHT ENOUGH POWER FOR ITS FOUR CARS FROM ALLEGHENY VALLEY.    THE LINK DOES LEAD TO PICTURE WHICH I CANNOT CAPTURE SEPARATELY.   




http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=X3EbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=kksEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2878%2C1990389

 

Pittsburgh Press, Jan. 27, 1935, page 46

 

TARENTUM TAXPAYERS BENEFIT FROM MUNICIPAL UTILITIES

 

   The tax burden of Tarentum is borne by its electric consumers.

   Incongruous as it may seem this Allegheny Valley borough made a profit of $1,000 more from its municipally owned light plant than it collected in 1934 taxes.

   For 34 years Tarentum’s light plant has been its biggest asset.  An original investment of $25,000 grew in value to over a half million dollars and today shows a yearly profit of $48,000.

   The Tarentum taxpayer, not its electric consumer, has profit from this investment.    Since 1932 the borough tax assessment has been cut from 13 to nine mills.   The proposed 1935 tax rate will be seven mills.  

   For the man who pays the light bills the picture is not so bright.   The Tarentum consumer pays approximately nine cents a kilowatt for electricity that costs but three-quarters of a cent to produce and two cents to distribute.  

   On this basis a Tarentum home with a $4,000 assessment and an average monthly light bill of $2.50 is billed $2 more for electric than it is for borough taxes.

 

More for Electric

 

   Tarentum consumers are asking for a reduction in rates.  Tarentum Council admits the justice of their claim, but at the same time points out that what is taken from the lights must be added to the tax bill.

   “Ninety per cent of Tarentum homes are occupied by their owners,”  W. G. Ross, the borough clerk, said.  “These home owners have not complained of our rates because they are the ultimate beneficiaries.

   Tarentum borough officials, while likely to cut electric rates, would rather attack the problem from the point of electrical consumption.   The daily outpout from the plant is 15,000 kilowatts of electricity while the plant could easily manufacture 48,000 over the same period and at smaller cost.  

 

Higher Sales Urged

 

   The idea then, according to C. J. Baker, superintendent of the plant, is to sell the consumers the idea of using three times the present amount of electricity at the present cost or lower.   The use of additional electrical appliances, that is, if the consumer can afford their purchase – is the solution of the future.

   The plant has without question been the means for major improvements in the borough that are never figured in the borough’s budget and never touch the taxpayers’ pocket books.

   The Tarentum Riverside Park, running the entire length of the town along the Allegheny River, was conceived with electrical receipts.  So were three fire houses, thousands of dollars worth of modern fire-fighting equipment, innumerable street improvements and the street lighting system, in addition to an outlay of $20,000 for a piece of ground for street-widening purposes.

   At the time Tarentum is building a new water plant at a cost of $135,000.  A water-softening unit in this plant will give the borough consumers a better grade of water.

   The borough’s bonded indebtedness is $450,000, which is being paid off from the borough sinking fund, exactly one half of its tax assessment.   Meanwhile there is $75,000 or more in the electric fund to answer any need that the borough may have for it.