upr000207 128

V adequate e a te r (a t le a s t fo r immediate fu tu re) w i l l be more acceptable to the people and the commission than going on meter b a sis as ooat to users would be le s s under th at arrange­ment. In th is connection, X b e lie v e we have a strong argument in s ta tin g that i f we are not perm itted to in crease e x is tin g f l a t r a te , me above mentioned, i t w i l l be necessary to place a l l users on meter b a sis in accordance with ra te schedule T om 14| however, i t i s my understanding that Commission ©an reduce th is ra te. From a n a ly sis o f fig u r e s contained in statements Z t and 3 I t i s shewn th at the most fa vo ra b le method i s that recommended} namely, Id . 3, and i t i s thought th at Commission cannot req u ire Water Company to operate a t a lo s s although, as o u tlin ed in my J-394, o p p ositio n to any in crease in r a te * w i l l be con siderable and the outcome o f action recommended cannot be foreseen . Reports made by Auditor to Public U t i l i ­t i e s Commission have been examined and i t is b e lie v e d that Inform ation contained th erein w i l l not be detrim ental to ap­p lic a tio n f o r increase in ra tes. R e ferrin g p a r tic u la r ly to Mr. J e ffe r s * F-1S7, i t w i l l be noted that a l l fig u re s set fo rth agree v^ry c lo s e ly w ith those g iven above, and the su bject o f conserving water supply has been s et fo r th in severa l instances. endeavor was made to p oin t out th at we cannot conserve the supply as present source i s Springs and flo w in g w a ll, the flo w from which, i f not used, w i l l go to waste, and although users are w astefu l we are not warranted in making the expenditure to conserve supply u n til population in creases con sid erab le, o r «• 5 —