The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1914-06-18

a valuation of $215.OO0 and a short
while thereafter when the same water
works company Is wanting the COM
mission to fix rate that it shall levy
upon the users Of its service 1t should
insist that that property is worth
about $1,000, 100000. We feel that it
is our duty to give some weight to
this item of evidence"
In reaching its conclusion as to the
value OF the property for rate making
purposes the commission said:
Rate Making Values.
After taking into consideration the
actual cost OF this property as shown
by the records of this company, the
cost Of it's reproduction now, the cost
of it's reproduction new less deprecia-
ton, the amount for which It is valued
for purposes of taxation, and all the
other evidence In the case, 1t Is our
judgment that the fair and reasonable
value of this property for rate making
purposes Is $4,000. In this estimate
we have included $4,000 for material
and supplies and $4,000 for working
| ca pital, and there is included in this
sum the contract for new improve
ments not yet completed, which i'm
provements are to cost $51 1929. and
| $4,000 for going value
Based on the system Of classified
| ton our engineering staff and includ-
ing in the estimate the two contracts
increasing the value of the transmits
sion and distribution system $o3,2o6.
we have arrived at the following con-
clusion as to the itemized value of the
property of the water works:
Land, $37,206; transmission and
distribution system, Sf2s,202; build
ings and miscellaneous structures,
! SG5 900; plant equipment, 500, 900;
general equipment, $4,000; paving,
81 ,82e; material and supplies, SIC. 900;
working capital, 5000; going value,
| $4,000; allowances to cover engineer
| ing, SUPPLEMENTARY, interest during
| construction, ETC., $52,7e3. Total
| s75O,0O0
Enginser1 Estimates.
I'VE have. arrived at the above esti-
mate by studying the evidence and
applying it specifically to the report
of our engineering staff. From the
estimates Of our engineering staff we
made the following reductions: Paw
ing not paid for By water works, $4o,-
917; service pipes paid for by con-
sumers, $34, 704; excess for allowances
for contingen cies, engineering, super
intendency, interest during construc-
ton, etc, $21,768; error il computing
II per cent on value Of land, $3,404;
excess in material and supplies,
| S6.973. Total, $1O7,76S.
| I'VE increased the value fixed by
our engineering staff in the light Of
| the evidence of other experts and
other testimony relevant to that issue
as follows: Error in appraisal OF wat
err rights. $1,000; additions to trans
mission system completed after the
appraisal and before the hearing, SILL
TT; additions to transmission and dis
tribution system, contracted for after
the appraisal and not yet entirely COM
pleted, $51,42o; increase in valuation
of transmission system, $1,000; build
ings, S4O36; plant equipment, $4,021;
general equipment, $S,573; allowance
for engineering. SUPPLEMENTARY. in
terest during construction, etc. in ex-
cess of the audit, $2,196; working CAPT
tai, $4,000; going value, $4,000.
Total, $4,000.
| Value Of Pavings.
ut is due to our engineering depart
ment to state that the value Of paving
is given at s42,146, as it now is over
all the mains OF the company, and
| that its report also shows that the
actual value OF the pavement cost by
|
of $34,704 showing the service pipes
paid for by consumers is not really a
question for the engineering depart
ment. The estimate made by our
staff for interest during the construc-
ton and preliminary expenses is based
on the uniform practices Of the rail-
way commiss1on of Wisconsin. We
have departed from it in the light of
the clear proof established by the
audit Of the records Of this company.
The ether decreases are self-explan-
atory."
On the subject of fixed charges the
commission said: The only fixed
charge against the water works is
taxes. The property was assessed for
$215.000 upon which taxes were paid
in the sum of S5,76196. In the brief
filed by the water works it Is con-
tended that the fixing of the true value
of this property by the commission
will increase the taxes IS per cent Of
the differences between $4,000 and
the value of the property as fixed by
the commission. We do not think that