|
Demand eventually pushed prices higher, as drought during the late 1930s decreased
<br /> hydroelectricity production in Elk River and throughout the state. By this time,however, some
<br /> new players had been introduced. The Anoka County Cooperative Power and Light Association
<br /> had been created with assistance from the Rural Electrification Administration(REA), a federal
<br /> New Deal program that provided loans to farmers to form electric cooperatives. The Anoka
<br /> group, in turn,joined with other cooperatives to form the Rural Cooperative Power Association
<br /> (RCPA), which opened a 3,750-kilowatt generating facility in Maple Lake in 1940. The new
<br /> plant allowed Elk River to sever its unhappy tie with NSP and buy lower-priced auxiliary power
<br /> from the RCPA through the Anoka County Cooperative.42
<br /> Still, the Elk River utility's absentee owners were the target of vociferous complaints by local
<br /> consumers who found the quality of service low despite comparatively high rates. The Twin City
<br /> Milk Producers' Association, for example, contemplated building its own generating facility in
<br /> Elk River because rates were so much higher than at its other processing plants. The Elk River
<br /> Commercial Club grew increasingly concerned about the economic repercussions of poor
<br /> electric service. As the Citizens' Business League had done in 1914,the Commercial Club
<br /> unanimously approved a resolution urging the Village Council to investigate the feasibility of
<br /> constructing a municipal electric plant.43
<br /> Charged up for Change
<br /> Despite dissatisfaction with Baehr's operation,the Elk River Village Council was initially
<br /> unwilling to pursue municipal ownership. Instead, it encouraged the Anoka County Cooperative
<br /> to acquire the utility. In June 1942,the Cooperative negotiated terms and a price of$155,000
<br /> with the Baehr Organization. Upon acquisition, it planned to serve Elk River Power's customers
<br /> in the village, as well as Zimmerman and Dayton. The Anoka group intended to upgrade the Elk
<br /> River hydroelectric plant and maintain it for auxiliary service. In addition,the Cooperative hoped
<br /> to devote $300,000 to construct 300 miles of lines in rural areas around Elk River.44
<br /> Before arrangements could be finalized,however, Elk River's support turned to opposition. The
<br /> village initiated a lawsuit against the Elk River Power and Light Company to block the sale. The
<br /> suit, filed in February 1943,maintained that the Anoka County Cooperative's bylaws authorized
<br /> it to buy and distribute,but not to generate,power. Also, the Cooperative could provide service
<br /> only to its shareholders, while "plaintiff village and many of its inhabitants cannot lawfully
<br /> of Sherburne County 411,481;"Commercial Club Asks Council Investigate Electric Situation,"Sherburne County
<br /> Star News,April 23, 1942.
<br /> 42 Minnesota Department of Taxation,Transcript of hearing for abatement of 1947 personal property assessment,in
<br /> Public Utilities Records,State Archives,Minnesota Historical Society,Saint Paul,4;"Village to Investigate Cost of
<br /> Diesel Electric Power Unit,"Sherburne County Star News,November 8, 1945; United Power Association:Story of a
<br /> Rural Electric Cooperative(Elk River,Minn.:The Company, 1987),8-11.
<br /> 43"Commercial Club Asks Council Investigate Electric Situation";Elk River Village Council Minutes,April 16,
<br /> 1942.
<br /> as Leon Barrier,Our Silver Anniversary, 1937-1962:History of"25 Years of Progress"(Anoka,Minn.: Anoka
<br /> County Electric Cooperative, [1962]),21;"Negotiations Completed by REA for Purchase Electric Company,"
<br /> Sherburne County Star News,July 2, 1942.
<br /> 82
<br />
|