Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000279 213

Image

File
Download upr000279-213.tif (image/tiff; 26.38 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000279-213
    Details

    Rights

    This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

    Digital Provenance

    Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

    Publisher

    University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

    ? 4 (b) I t would be h e lp fu l to know said possibly have testimony from a lo c a l banker as to the rates of in te re st ©barged various types o f loans In Las Vegas, and these to be compared or re la te d to sim ila r rates fo r loans mad® in C a lifo rn ia . While I do not know, 1 more or le ss assume that the loan rate might be 1/4 to 1/3$ higher in Nevada • This would be h e lp fu l in supporting the higher rat© of retu rn in comparable u t ilit ie s received in C a lifo rn ia . DISCUSSION While no computation has yet been made on the revised basis fo r 1950 and 19§1, using Investment Cost, i t is clea r that the gross revenue d e ficien cy under th is la t t e r basis w ill be le ss than under the O rig in a l Cost b a sis. Likew ise, under the Present-day Cost b a s is , the revenue d e ficien cy w ill, of course, be su b sta n tia lly in excess of the O rig in a l Cost b a sis, and as w ell as the $90,000 that is being re ­quested. This pattern, o f course, conforms to the fig u res o rig in a lly developed in the November re p o rt, but w© do have (or we may have) the problem o f having our o rig in a l cost estim ate as to the revenue d eficien cy required as le ss than that which was requested in the amount o f $90,000. Nr. Renwiek suggested that i t might be w ell to have made a computation on the Investment b asis w ith land Included at the reduced acreage - the same as that included under the other two bases. I presume, however, in th is la t t e r instance, i t should be set up on the b a sis of book eosts at the re ­duced acreage. We w ill have such a fig u re a v a ila b le . I t is fu rth er thought desirable that the November report be made a vailab le to both the C ity of Las Vegas and the Nevada Commission by March 15th, and that the supplemental report be made a v a ila b le at a la te r date, but before the hearing, in order that both p a rties have a v a ila b le the m aterial that the Company w ill present at the hearing, in order to a ffo rd time fo r study. I f th is is not done, I am sure a continuance w ill be asked. I t w ill probably be asked In any event, but ce rta in ­ly A pplicant w ill be in a better p o sitio n to r e s is t such re ­quest i f the m aterial is made availab le ahead of time* I t would likew ise be d esirable that such reports be given In person so that necessary explanations may be made. S im ila rly , that the Company have a vaila b le prepared statement fo r the Press, in order that the Press w ill have a vaila b le at le a st one release and Is understanding^ w ritten w ith reference to the fa c ts . GC - Mr* Wm. Reinhardt ^ Mr. E. 0. Renwiek Nr. W, H. Johnson Mr. R. L . B erto lacel