UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
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
Transcription
Las Vegas - March 8, 1950 ¥ 23-6 Mr. Vs. Reinhardts ( co Mr. S. E. Bennett Farther in connection with proposed application for increase in water rates. * r a 2-. 5/ Z,${ ?%£$ ,if /?•%(» ,76 2~/0 Buie lo of cor regulations provides the Company nay charge #5.0Q for tapping the water sain. This charge nay have been fairly representative of costs 19 years ago when the present rate schedule was adopted* when labor was 62k cents an hour, Chi. pips 6 cents per foot and fittings in proportion, but these costs have more than doubled as you will note from the following table? 7 '£&*/*&* O&lw. ? Copper Long Line C@rpJn Cock ®1.2? #1.27 it Curb Stop 1.51 1.51 1.51 Reducing Ell .14 .61 .14 Street Ell .19 — .19 Ripe - 3/4* 10* 1.27 3.08 .50* 6.35 i? Material 4738 6.7? 9 M Labor, 3 men, 2 hra & |1.27 hr. 17.62 7*62 36.10 Repl&oe Oil Bound «**»«*«• 12.50 ——- 412.00 445.56 & jgppl We sustain a loss of f|pp to 140.00 per connection, according to the length of service line to be run, and X feel this shofcld be adjusted to a more eats!table basis. I® A. M. Folger jD (xt 4*&t- Ibwp Plh faLVcLp ||
