Evening star., 1925-06-09
PHONE VALUATION
APPEAL IS ARGUED
Commission Cuts Property
Appraisal to $18,578,956,
Against $26, 900, 900.

Justice Hoehling of the District SUI
'preme Court today heard arguments
of counsel on the appeal fled by the
from the valuation placed on its prop
erty by the Public Utilities Commits
sion and for an injunction 10 prevent
the placing into effect tomorrow OF
the new schedule of rates based on
the recent valuation.
The commission placed value OF
t1s.57s,956 on the company's property,
and counsel for the corporation claims
1t should have about s26 100000.
Attorneys George P. Hoover, Alex
ander Britton and p. A. De Vane ap-
oeared for the company. while Cor
Doration Counsel Stephens represented
1he commission.
Reproduction Cost Contested
+ Before the argument began MIR.
Stephens filed the answer Of the COM
mission, in which it is claimed that
The reproduction cost as figured by
the company's experts exceeds the
amount of capital invested in the en-
terprise by nearly so per cent. The
commission. not being satisfied with
shose figures, Glade its own valuation.
which, with proper depreGiAl ion, IL
elaims TO be s1S,57S.956.
F.: The commission tells the nurt that
il considered carefully all the testi-
smony as To the value of the land
owned by the company hearing from
real estate brokers, auctioneers and
the District assessor. and struck a
fair value by adding 30 per cent to
the assessment figures. Ii excluded
three parcels OF real estate from the
Valuation because the land was not
actually used and useful for the con
venience of the public and was not
an element of fair value. In respect
TO the value Of the buildings OF the
corporation. the commission says. it
followed the same rule as to the Ia nd
and increa sed the figures OF the as
SCISSOR by 80 per cent.
In valuing overheads and intangibles,
SAYS the commission, the method was
followed which met the approval of
the United States Supreme Court in
the Des Moines Gas case, 238 u. :. 1853.
The commission denies that 1t failed to
allow for ''gonig value" and declares
1t considered the company as a going
and successful concern and that the
element of such value was included in
the valuation OF overheads and in
tangibles.
Followed Practice.
Proper allowance was made for
working capital, the commission sub
mits. 1t made an allowance of 81
for materials, 81 for working capital
and 81 for supplies per station, fol
lowing the practice in New York and
New Jersey. The commission also
SAYS 1t provided IN elastic method by
which such allowances could be ad-
Justed easily owing TO the rapid in
crease in stations established BY the
corpora ton.
The commission also asserts that
the depreciations fixed by the commits
sion were fair. and that the amount
asked for such depreciation by the
petition of the company Is excessive
The commission also points out that
the valuation sought by the company
also includes radio property. which the
commission decided to exclude Ii Is
admitted by the commission in it's an
swer that the company Is being con-
Quoted efficiently. but not that its
business Is being run economically.
The rates set by the commission,
the court is advised. will yield a re-
turn OF Z per cent on what the com
mission considers fair valuation. and
Will not reduce To only 5.54 per cent
the return to the compa ny, as claimed
by counsel for the corporation. Lastly,
the claim is made by the commission
that the rates are not confiscatory
as asserted in the company's petition,
and that no injustice or unfairness
will result to the corporation II the
court upholds the rates established BY
the commission.