The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1915-03-11
DECISION FAvORS
WATER BLIGHT co.

Over a year ago, hearing was held
IN Winnemucca on the complaint of
number of citizens against the mini
mum charge made by the Winnemucca
Water & Light company for water and
light An opinion has been rendered,
written by Commissioner Simmons, as
follows:
Opinion
This proceeding was brought by the
citizens of Winnemucca, August IL,
1918, against the Winnemucca Water
& Light company, complaining that
discriminatory and unreasonable rates
were being charged for water and
light. On September 30, 1913, citation
was issued to the company, and answer
to same was made October Is, 1913.
In this case complaint was made
against the charges for both light and
water, both services being rendered by
the respondent company No complaint
was made of the quality of either SER
vice, the complaint being solely upon
the ground of excessive charges for
the service, and discrimination as be-
tween the different classes of custom
ers.
With reference to the complaint of
excessive charges generally, the com
mission is of the opinion that this is
not well founded, either from the
standpoint of the cost of the plant or
by comparison with the rates of other
companies serving communities simi
larly situated. No salaries being paid
to the president or other officers of
the company, and only reasonable
compensation paid to the superintend
ent and assistant superintendent, it
cannot be said that the administrative
expense is other than reasonable.
The evidence shows that since 1901
The stockholders have received in div
idends $3.50 a share, and paid $28 a
share in assessments. From this show
ing it does not follow, however, that
the company is not earning something
above operating expenses. 1t merely
goes to show that instead of paying
in dividends the net income over oper
ating expenses, the money was used N
additions and betterments, thereby in
creasing the physical value of the
plant. The prospects of this company
could scarcely be compared to that of
one operating in a mining community
OF more or less uncertain period of
town in prosperous and rich country.
We now come to the other cause of
complaint--discrimin as between
different classes of customers. This is
question that is somewhat difficult
of solution, particularly as regards
charges for water under a minimum
charge. The commission is of the opin-
ion that a minimum charge is a cor
rect and necessary charge, as compen-
sation for maintenance and readiness
to serve a customer when called upon
to do so. The question to consider is
the reasonableness of that charge, and
whether it should be the same to all
patrons, irrespective of the service
rendered. 1t is quite evident in this
case, as in many others of a similar
character, that under a fiat charge,
many customers are getting more than
they are paying for, while others are
paying for more than they are get
ting. By comparison with other water
companies operating in this state un
der similar conditions, it would seem
that the quantity allowed, 10000 gal
lons under the minimum charge, was
large, and, according to the evidence, |
greatly in excess of what most of
those without connections in their
houses, and without sewer cOnnec- !
tions or baths, would use. Houses with |
baths and sewer connections might |
use the quantity allowed. The meter
rate seems reasonably low, by COM
parison, and some slight adjustment
might be made by the company in the
meter rate and quantity allowed under |
the minimum charge, which would take |
the burden from those who are getting
less service, and who are less able to
pay. The commission is of the opinion
that some adjustment should be made
in the minimum charge for both water
and light, so that the charge will be
more equitable as between consumers
using much less than the quantities al
lowed, and those using the maximum
allowed. An order should be entered
accordingly.