The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-01-26
THE CITY is LOSING MONEY.
On a Fire Per Cent. Basis the Water
Works Cost $2S, 8St a Year.
INTERESTING FACTS AND FIGURES.
Superintendent BoIlin;'s Clear statement.
lie Recommends the Minimum Rate
for water-A Subcommittee APP
poiDted-sidewaiks.

Reform. to which was referred the ordi-
nance regarding the proposed water
metre ordinance. with instructions TO as
certain facts and figures as TO the supply
and cost Of water. the revenue derived
by the city under the present ordinance
and what II would be under the proposed
ordinance. held a second session last
night. and. after long discussion and the
examination OF figures submitted by the
Superintendent OF the Water Works, APP
pointed a subcommittee 10 look carefully
into the matter and report at an ad-
journed meeting Of the committee 10 De
held Tuesday night next.
According TO a calculation by MT. bDei'
the city. on the basis of > per cent on
its investment. yearly loses $2s,SSl through
its water works.
The committee met at o'clock. Mr..
Otway :. Allen in the chair and present
Messrs. Ebel. Rountree, zimmerman
HARRISON, and John j. King
SUPERINTENDENT Charles f.. Boiling, of
the water works, in accordance with the
request of the committee, presented a
statement, showing the effect OF metres
upon the revenue from water received
by the city cor seven years past.
MIR. BOLLING'S FIGURES.
Mr. Bollings report was a comprehen-
give series of questions and answers as
follows:
O. What was the revenue from sale OF
water under the ordinance rate?
A. The receipts from water in 1890, win
143 metres in use was $l25.1S64i; in 1881,
with 1s6 metres H. use. $1Sf,2IS.O4. an in
crease Of per cent; in 1892, with 2oo
metres in use. tlil,4il.A, an increase OF
: $40 per cent: in 1893, with $50 metres
IN use Ni3 $3.50. a. Increase or J-lO per
cent: I'm 1894 with 00l metres in use,
Sl3s .645.5S. a decrease Of 3l-lO per cent
i'm 1895, with ! 2s3 metres in use, Sl3s.5'b.5l'
i'm 1896. with ], J32 etres I'm use, Sl3S, 5''
In 1891 with 2AS7 notres In use, Sl3l fOS.o5'
4 decrease OF per cent. From the above
statement / assume that the greatest reve-
nue. chat for the year 1893 is the
answer-say $li3.6lj30
q. What would be the revenue by the
metre system (each tap having a metre)
without minimum rate?
A. / estimate there would be loss OF
30 per cent from the revenue for the
year 1898. and think il would be about
Sl.S0O per annum.
O. what would he the revenue leach
tap having metre with the minimum
rate as given in the ordinance?
4. estimate IT would be sl22Ol2.
THE PRESENT REVENUE.
O. What would be the revenue under
the present conditions?
A. Basing my estimate on last year.
with the present number Of metres, l
answer. Sl27 800.
O. What is the cost Of water per 1000
palons. estimating the value of the water
works at 100000. and the interest on
same at per cent, and including the
cost Of maintenance. repairs, &c?
A. 1t costs $40 cents per 1000 gallons.
IL the quantity Of water used by the city
I'm all the department was deducted. the
cost is estimated to be 6-lO cents per
1000 gallons
Mr. Boiling was closely questioned by
members OF the committee. and gave
clear explanations Of the figures he pre-
scented. He also read TO the committee
the rates I'm a number Of cities.
Mr. Boiling also stated TO the committee
that II would require between $4,000
and $4,000 to metre the entire city, there
being about loco taps The superinten-
dent went on to speak Of the great i'm
portance of the minimum charge. lie
| took the ground that II should be COM
pulsory TO use a certain quantity # wa
ter in the interests of cleanliness. lie be-
| neved thai with IL minimum rate a sufii-
cient quantity Of water would be used
| by all. and the revenue derived would be
sufficient. and more than sufficient, FOL
the needs of the department.
After some further discussion Mt
| Rountree moved that the committee adopt
| as its report the very clear and admirable
| statement submitted by the Superinten-
| dent of the Water Works, and submit
! that report to the Council.
| After some discussion as to whether
| the committee was expected to go int
| the merits of the ordinance, which wa
| decided in the negative. the committee
began to consider the report OF the super
! ;ntendent, and found that the city while
| If would receive Sl22 O72 annual revenue
under the minimum rate. each tap havinl
| meter would be paying 100000 interes
| on the cost of the plant and $4,000 OF
| appropriation. a loss each year Of $40.
, 600 II was contended that under thes
! circumstances II would be necessary L
| increase the rates TO make the plant self
] sustaining.