The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1914-06-19
RATE DECISION PLEASES OFFICIALS
Superintendent Of Water Works Plant
Reserves Opinion Until Official
Finding Of Committee Reaches City

some Of the findings in the published
decision appeared Inconsistent to him.
but declined to make a public state
meut until he had received the Off
cial ruling OF the commission and had
had time to thoroughly digest It. 1t
! Is believed that the company officials
were greatly surprised that the COM
! mission did not provide a minimum
! rate provision and abolish the meter
Echarge.
President Bavis. of the board Of pub
Flic works was much gEatffied with the
commissioner decision. He said that
q choice had to be made between a
minimum rate,without, q meter charge
Tor a meter charge. such as fixed by
the commission, 81 year. without a
minimum rate, he would much prefer
1.-THE latter arrangement
Statement of Bavis.
Fer the board Mr.. Bavis made the
following statement:
The consumers Of water IN Rich
mond have scored a decided victory
While the commissions ruling does not
| harmonize with detailed conclusions
Of the board of works in all matters
| surrounding this question. it does dem
strate that the interests of all parties
Of by the commission.
THE question Of valuation is set
,, tied by the commission We accept
that decision. In doing so. however.
We do not admit that the Richmond
kCny WatersWorks has ever invested
l,in cold cash $76os000 The physical
| value Of the plant has been augmented
considerably by unearned increments,
to which, perhaps, the company is just
lily entitled and their right to use this
fvalue fer rate mskinE purposes meets
with the approval of the utility COM
mission.
Where HuIine Differs.
THE decision handed down differs
with the contentious of the city in re-
| CARDS division of revenue as represent
! ing fire protection and domestic con-
sumption. We considered and We
thought City Attorney Bond clearly
demonstrated that 20 75-100 per cent
was a fair proportion for fire protec-
tion and the commissions decision
does not increase that amount when 1t
increases the city's part of the revenue
to 80 per cent the difference between
90 75-1O0 per cent and 10 per cent Is
made up by the increaSesin the city'S
rate per 1000 gallons from.6 lilo cents
per | 900. to 10 cents per loco gallons,
as the proposed schedule provided
The people of Richmond will prob
ably be disappointed insofar as me-
ter charge of $500 per year is main
tanned The commission considered
the company was evidently entitled to
that amount to recoup them for de-
preciatton interest on investment, etc.
We don't like the idea of meter rent.
but when a charge of 81 90 a year for
meter rent is substituted for a mini
mum charge of $500 per year. it looks
good to us. despite its name.
What the Gain Is.
Now the question that naturally
arises is, What has been gained by this
fight?
"First-The valuation of the plant
has been reduced from over a million
dollars to s75O,000. which amount on
the basis of 6 per cent profit. saves to
the people of Richmond $4,000 per
year.
"Secondly-Meters formerly $500.
now $500, saves the people S3.212
year.
.Thirdly-The commission has ruled
| that a fixed charge of $4,000 shall be
| charged against the earnings. which
| amount will mean a net increase to
| city. township and county of $1,000 in
| taxes.
"Fourtlly-No charge is to be made
| for tapping the main which heretofore
was $40. a total known saving OF s25.-
600 a year. irrespective of the reduc-
| ton in rates.
We have not analyZed the ruling Of
| the commission very thoroughly. but
we think from what we have read. the
| decision is a decisive victory for the
city and REFLECTS great credit to City
Attorney Bond.
The city has already received num-
erous requests for copies of the COM
| missions findings
| Factories Gain Little.
| Large consumers of waters. such as
| factories, are inclined to believe that
| the new rates offer but small benefit
to then. but nearly all of the large
consumers questioned today said they
had not yet had the opportunity to
| thoroughly consider the matter and
! would have nothing to say until they
| had done so.
Mr.. Bond has interpreted the ruling
| to mean that a minimum charge is not
provided for water used in automatic
! fire prevention sprinklers used in busi-
/