The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1933-02-27
FUR FLIES ON BEST
way OF OBTAINING
UTILITY RATE CUTS
Railroad Commissioners, Rich.
land Senator Seek Same
End; Differ on Details

Claws were barred and 1ur rev
Monday . members Of the state rail-.
road board and Senator A. =. 4ouser,
Jr., Richland county, debated the best
way to obtain reductions In public
utility rates In North Dakota before
the house committee On state affairs.
In the heat OF battle statements
were made only to be met BY charges
that they were untrue, but the heat
died out Of the argument before 1t
was finished as both Senator Bonner
and the commissioners sought to Inn
press on the committee that they
wanted the same thing, . fair and
equitable valuation OF public utility
properties for alternating purpoee&
Basis for the dispute Was m argu.
ment Is to which Of two bills was
best suited to the purpose. Senator
Bon1er's measure would require the
railroad board to ascertain what the
cost Of a valuation would be ana
bill the utility affected for that
amount. In the meantime. II . Is.
percent cut could not Be obtained
by negotiations, the railroad board
would order Z summary reduction OF
Is per cent. The utility would keep
the money. however, until such time
IS the rate case had been decided,
later using the fund to pay IN reduc.
ton, which would be retroactive 70
the date Of the complaint.
The bill supported by the railroad
board would provide 4 revolving fund
OF $4,000 to be used In making utll-
ity valuations. As the money WAS
spent the utilities would Be billed
and thus keep the fund up TO par.
Would Mean Delay
Commissioner G. w. Mcdonnell,
leading the railroad board argument,
said the bill proposed BY Bonner was
q monstrosity In that It would handi-
cap the state In giving the consum.
ers : square deal BY causing delay.
II the utility company failed to pay
IN advance on demand, he pointed
out, 1t might be three years before the
process Of collecting It by taxation
could be completed. In the mean.
while nothing would be done. Under
the bill approved by the board the
work could begin at once. he said.
Mcdonnell also pointed out that,
under the Bonner bill, Is per cent Of
the people in any community would
have to sign q petition for . rate
hearing and investigation. Under the
existing law, passed in 1919, McDon-
nell said, the railroad board has Ill
the power It needs. All 1t has ever
lacked Is money TO appraise public
utility properties for rate.making
purposes.
Bonner asserted that many utilities
have lower valuations for taxing pur.
poses than for rate.making purposes
and charged that the utilities, partic-
ularly the insult properties, have
neen grossly overcapitalised. An argu-
ment developed over whether the
capitalization Of . utility has any
thing to do with rates, Mcdonnell
pointing to the practice Of the board
IN holding bond issues to 90 per cent
Of the known value Of the property, II
In good condition, and less II in poor
condition.
ADMITS 00Ar0 handicapped
Bonner, during the course Of his
argument, charged the railroad board
with having done nothing for II
years and asserted 1t was time for ac-
ton. declaring that his bill would
put teeth" into the utility law.
Later he admitted that the railroad
board had been handicapped In OBJ
tanning rate reductions because It
had no means Of finding the value
Of the properties involved 20 that q
rate might be fixed.
What would happen II the utility
companies refused to abide by either
bill and appealed to the courts, to-
gether with the constitutionality OF
the 0onser bill. was discussed ct
length. The commissioners said they