upr000276 133

%* Mr, MoBamees #2 April 1, 1952* faking a rep resen tativ e month In 1929, daring the month o f February our gross revenues were #1685.18; com­pared with gross revenues fo r February 1932 o f #5787.06, an in crease o f w ell over 100 per c e n t. during th is same period, the only in crease o f any r e a l importance in operating expense was in the r e n ta l o f R ailroad f a c i l i t i e s , the cost o f which was increased from #200 per month to #1445.58 per month, pay­ment being made d ir e c t to the R ailroad Company; th is point the •Commission was apparently w ell informed o f, as Commissioner Malone c lo s e ly questioned the various w itn esses a t the open hearing in la s Yogas held in May 1951, regarding th is larg e in crease in expense. When we prepared our requ est fo r in crease of r a te s on the b a sis o f 100 per ce n t, we were unable to prepare e x h ib its to show operations which would Ju s tify any each in ­crease, and l a t e r reduced them to approximately 60 per cen t, and th is was fu rth e r reduced by the Commission to approxim­a te ly 30 per c e n t. Our judgment in th is m atter was. I b e lie v e , c o rre c t inasmuch a# the valu ation s prepared by our Bngineeriag D epartm ent, which was our b a sis fo r the six ty per cent in cre a se, were p r a c tic a lly elim inated, as we were unable to su b sta n tia te these" e x h ib its . 2?hle was determined prior to the hearing, in personal conference with the chairmen o f the P ublic Service Commission, Mr* Gray * s l e t t e r to Mr* Knickerbocker s ta te s th at there were nine item s on which we requested in crease o f 100 per ce n t, based only on such items as are shown on both the old and the proposed new schedule. However, there were many items where no ra te was shown under the old schedule, where the proposed ra te was increased 100 per cent over the old r a te charged; fo r example apartment houses, bungalow cou rts, cab in s, ten t houses, h o sp ita ls and h o te ls were form erly a l l bases on the ’’house” r a te , and the proposed new ra te was in ­creased in proportion to the "house** r a te , or 100 per c e n t. Some o f the item s which did not show a 100 per cen t in crease in the proposed new ra te over the old r a te , a c tu a lly were in ­creased that much, and in some cases more, ^or example butcher shoiss, old ra te #1.50, proposed r a te # 2 ,0 0 ; but in ad d ition we provided a charge fo r r e fr ig e r a tio n machines ranging from #1.00 up, making the minimum charge #3,00, and in one in stan ce as high m