upr000255 261

Mr, Robert A. .Allen Page 2 August 20, 1053 general business and is a competitor of Mr, Henderson, As a result of those negotiation#, w© revised and reduced our charges and published a rate under Hate Mo. 55A, approved by your (toned eel on and effective September 1, 1061, of *50.00 for plants of this character having a capacityin excess cf 2500 cu. yds. which vac the capacity of the plant of Young A Bmlth and which, incidentally, Is the capacity of the Henderson plant. Hie same basic charge is now being made to the lender-son plant plus an additional charge of $2.40 for his office ?water facilities, #1.80 for two public water closets, or & total of *54.20 to Mr. Henderson. 1 do not have data re­garding total charges made to Young & Smith but presume, if he has accessorial facilities ouch as Mr. Henderson has, that he pays not only the basic charge of $50.00 but the additional charges such as have been described above being chargee against "Mr. Henderson. As you know, the Water District is planning to call a bond election for some time the latter part of September. I respectfully suggest for your consideration, that we let the present rates ride d o n g until the outcome of that election is determined. If the bonds are voted, the Dis­trict will presumably take over shortly thereafter and it may desire a complete readjustment of all rates. Any special tariffs filed (incidentally X understand Mr. Henderson is the only one making any objections to these increases) would not become effective for thirty days prior to which very possibly the Water District question may have been settled. As you know, these ready mix concrete plants use a very large volume of water and since Mr. Henderson*e competitor, Young A Smith, agreed to the #50.00 basic charge, it would seem that Mr. Henderson would have no serious grounds for objection. Very truly youre 1. 2. Bennett Ene BOO: Messrs. Bates, Reinhardt & Oory with enclosure JEEBsAFK