The San Francisco call., 1904-02-11
WOULD REDUCE
PLANTS VALUE
Special Engineer Thinks Ap-
praisement of Spring Valley
Company Should Be Lessened
CUTS OFF FIVE MILLIONS
Files Report With the Board of
Works and Eliminates Prop
erty Not Used to Supply Water

Russell L. Dunn, special assistant en-
gineer appointed by the Board of Pub
lie Works to represent it at the inves-
tigation of the Board of Supervisors
for the fixing of water rates, filed re-
port yesterday relative to the appraise-
ment of properties of the Spring Valley
Water Company.
Dunn's report covers twenty-one
closely typewriter pages, in which ne
explains voluminously why certain
properties of the corporation should be
excluded from former valuations Of
the plant as a basis for fixing water
rates. The amount by which he re-
duces the valuation Of approximately
$25, 100000 as fixed by City Engineer
Grunsky aggregates So, 372, ,346 being for
property claimed by Dunn not to be in
actual use. On this reasoning Dunn's
valuation of the plant would be less
than $2O,000,000 Dunn does not attempt
to make an appraisement of the prop
erty in cold figures, contenting himself
with specifying the properties which he
thinks should not enter into the total
valuation upon which the Spring Val
ley Water Company is allowed an in
come. The report continues:
PROPERTIES EXCLUDED.
OF properties included and Of valuations
mace IN these appralsementS of 1901, 1902 and
19O5 there would be excluded from the proper
appraisement: Franchise, excluded because
II has no value) suggested valuation of ST.
oOoOOo value due to fact that business is
established; excluded because if II be a tan
glble property it is stiI not the property OF
the Spring Valley Water Company; 81 AGO.
OOO 3-Onice lot and building at corner of
Stockton and Geary streets San Francisco:
leAciuded because not property used; there
would In Its place properly be allowed office
rent as an administrative expense) 1880. 600.
4-Calaveras reservoir site lands; excluded
because not property used in the supply of
water to San Francisco); these lands are in
the 1901 appraisement at s621 360 in 1902 at
@'9l,OlO, and in 1903 at S419,346 5-San An
tonic reservoir site lands; iexcIuded because
not property used; the particular tracts are
not segregated but are included in the item
OF Land and rights of Suburban Water Com
pany transferred in 1902; possibly as much
as 500 6-Vallejo Mills tract OF land
near Niles, former situs of diversion of Ala
media Creek water right. now removed to
Suhoi' (eNcluoed because not property used);
somewhere in the appraisements l have noted
this appraised at about $40 coo. Water
works plant on Vallejo Mills tract of land and
old diversion plant including bridge etc; lex
eIGoed because not property used now: $751;
UOO. S-Construction accounts OF incomplete
works on Calaveras reservoir site on San An
MO reservoir site, and on Arroyo Vale Creek:
teXcluded because not property now used);
amounts not segregated from other construc-
llon accounts of works which are in service
9-EXclusive Of the preceding there are other
lesser properties which would be excluded as
property not used, the valuation items of
these being included in aggregates with values
Of properties which are actually used Total
sum of entirely excluded values Is certainly in
excess of S5.372, ,346
On the other hand the appraisements would
be increased by: 10-The difference between
the estimated cost of constructing duplicate
structures OF waterworks stated in the ap-
praisements and the actual investment cost
or the actual structures of waterworks as de-
clared in the books of the Spring Valley Water
company This difference would be a very
large sum, but how much cannot be known
TN the book investment accounts are known
1I-SeVeral millions OF dollars will certainly
be added to the valuations of water rights as
the result of determination of the unit value
OF water right (the value Of mean daily
flow Of 1,000O0 gallons)