The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-02-17
AUDITOR KEATING'S DEFENSE
 OF THE 20 YEAR CONTRACT

district and $6OO,00O in the Second district, for the first year, plus such sums each succeeding year, during the period of the contract, as the better ments made by the company to It's plant, should show to be fair ana reasonable.
 ''The statement of account between the city and company, under the pro visions of this contract, are. as fol- lows, for the third year of the con- tract ending July 1, 1906: Taxes paid to city by company on list of 1909, figured on the same basis as on prev ious contract of 1896, that is ' 2-10 mills in First district, or 16 mills in all.
 "on $427.so6 at 2-1o mills, $s,- G76.6O.
 On $77S,910 at 16 mills, $12,462.!O.
 'TOtaI amount of taxes paid by tue company to the city, $15, 5,539.3O.
 Amount paid by city to company for water supply for all city uses, ex- Cept street sprinkling, (which is eX- cluded as it was in previous contract) for third year of contract, SIS, ,4l9.O4.
 This leaves the amount paid by company to city, for taxes, $2,21O.20 in excess of the same paid by city tU company for water each year. The es- t1mated population of the city, at this date is at least 100000, or 10000 II: excess of the population in 1896.
 "As may be seen from the foregc- ing statement the assessed value of the company's property, was increas- ed by the terms of the new contract from $500,000 as in contract of 1896, to $1,206,225.
 ''And there was a corresponding in- crease in the amount of taxes paid by the company, from $6.24O under contract of 1896, to $15, 5,539.30 under contract of 1906, and there was re- duction in the sum paid by the city to the company for water, from $15,- coo under contract of 1896 to SIS, 419.04, under contract of 1906.
 "Now if we add this sum of $2,- 120.26, representing the amount paid by the company to the city for taxes ir excess of the sum paid by the city to the company for water under con- tract of 1906, to the sum of $S,76O.00 the net cost of water to the city un- der contract of 1896, it shows a gain of $1O,SSO.26 each year, in favor of the new contract. $1O,880.26 per year for 20 years amounts to $217,- 605.2O, the gain to the city during the entire period of the new contract
 ''This is based on the assumption which is not an unreasonable one, that the increase in taxes from the company for water, from year to year, will keep pace with the increas- ed amount paid by the city to the company for water from year to year.
 t'The gain to private consum CTS from the reduced rates made by the company, pursuant to the provisions of the new contract cannot be ac- curately determined, but are esti- mated at not less than $40,O0O each year.
 'If this sum is multiplied by 2O tha roriNd nf annfrQaf tho duct will be $SOO,OOO.
 Add this sum to the saving, pre- viously shown to the city itself in its corporate capacity and the gross saving to the city and it's citizens, for the 20 years of the contract will be in round numbers 7,605.20.
 ''In this statement there is no ac- count of increases, if any, resulting from water rates, where meters arc used, because the right of the com. pany to meter was, in no manner af- fected by the new contract.
 '"The city was practically metered so far as it's factories and large con- cerns were concerned, before July 1 1906, the date of this new contract and the company positively refused although requested by the commit. tee, to waive it's right, as previousI, exercised, to meter wherever and whenever it was deemed necessary, ir order to prevent waste of water
 ''I desire to emphasize this fact that this new water contract of 19C6 conferred no new right on the lily draulic company relative to meterine and therefore that any increases iT the rates of consumers due to the ill., stallation of meters, either before oI since the date of this contract, arc iJ no way fairly attributable to it, and are properly excluded from this state. ment.
 Mote also the fact that the in- crease due to yearly betterments o1 the conpany's property, for taxation purposes, will, if continued, at the same ratio, during the remaining portion of the term of contract, as during the past three years, moro than double the assessab1e value oi the company'S property, during tho period of 20 years.
 ''This provision, requiring the com pany t., list Improvements and bet terments, each year, is original ir this contract. It never appeared be- fore in any contract, between the city and the company.
 T think I have shown the hene- fits and advantages of this new con- tract to the city and it's citizens as com pared with the contract which ii Supplanted.
 "But It may be claimed that we are entitled to a better contract still ,uli- der the provisions of the Greene pro- position. That proposition was as understand it, to supply the city oi Bridgeport and it's inhabitants wiLt water as cheaply as any other city and it's inhabitants were supplied bS an individual or private corporation
 II believe that, judged even by that standard, the Bridgeport Hydrauli. Co.,, is now under the provisions of it's new contract, all things considered substantially performing that duty and is supplying Bridgeport and its inhabitants, as cheaply as any other city and it's inhabitants are supplied as aforesaid (New Haven not except. ed.)
 ''The Bridgeport Hydraulic Co. is paying taxes on $1,2O6,225 in Bridge on $1,090,74S in New Haven, differ port Co. And when we consider the relative size of the cities, both IT population and in area although Bridgeport pays a small sum for wa ter, for corporate use, while New Ha- ven gets it nominally free we may come to the conclusion that after al New Haven pays dearly for it's water It is conceded that the franchise o1 the Bridgeport Hydraulic Go. is not taxable, and this is, no doubt, it's most valuable asset. A great deal oI valuable property of the company is located in the towns of Huntington Stratford, Easton and Fairfield and all things considered the amount fol which the company is assessed here will bear favorable comparison with