upr000279 13

3 which wq compared unfavorably with the California companies was the matter of administrative and general expense. He did not take issue with the revenue estimates made by Mr* Wehe and X do not believe he east mueh doubt upon our operat­ing expense estimates* He recommended to the Commission rate of return of a and took issue with several of the items included in our rate base figures. On cross examination he was shorn to be in error with respect to some of the rate base Items which he discussed but X believe that the Commis­sion will give some consideration to his testimony recommend­ing the exclusion of amortised defense facilities and exclu­sion of the present day value of land from the rate base figures* Three different protestants appeared and offered testi­mony with reference to the subject of individual rates* The Motel Owners Association appeared in support of a revised schedule of rates which Mr* Johnson, acting Manager of the Water Company, had negotiated with them after the first hear­ing* The trailer park operators and the barters also protested the proposed increases in their rates* The presiding Commissioner had indicated that he did not wish to have briefs* In view of this fact and in view of the fact that we are anxious to have an early determination of the ease, we agreed to submit the case without briefs* X do not believe that this will be detrimental to us because the con­troversial Issues in the oase are factual rather than legal and have teen fully developed in the testimony* trader the law the Commission would be required to deelde the case by June 26, 1951* At the Commission** request and in order to enable It to have more time to decide the oase, we stipulated that the proposed tariff would be suspended until July 31, 1951. This will require the Commission to decide the ease on or before that date* j o o m m .n m m .m q m a aou