upr000279 42

Mr® I® C. Renwick Rate Spread (continued) Further Increasess To the $312,882 must be added $5>500 Tea* miscellaneous revenues other than from sale of water, that was a part of the 1951 estimate. This gives 1318,382 for 1951* This will yield k»3% on the Historical Goat basis after paying the full return of n to the Production Company. If operations are integrated, the over-all return becomes approximately 5»3$* The $318,382 will provide an increase of $76,182, compared to the $9k,k86 originally developed as the increase from the proposed rates in Table R of Exhibit A. The loss is due essentially to the present proposed lower rates for the Motel Service* A review of several of the commercial accounts, such a*bottling work? ice cream manufacturersj laundries, hotels shows that the rates now charged and those proposed are low. Outside of the hotels, the amount of added revenue that could be secured would not be great in the aggregate. A general increase would probably cause much adverse sentiment and possibly concerted opposition* An Increase in the hotel rates would bring In some additional revenue - but not a great deal - as the charge for toilet and bath facilities are within a nickel of the residential. The charge for each additional room could be increased a dime - raising an added $59.00 per month. Likewise, the minimum for the first 10 rooms could be raised - but no money is involved and we run into high percentage increases over present rates. In order to secure any amount of additional revenue, we must look to the residential group. The following schedule of further increases would pick up about $16,213 annually! Residential Ho. Units (1) Homes 5903 (2) Motels 63 (3) 873 (k) 3? (5) Restore 20 Total on the yards Increase Annual Per Month Increas* 200 200 Ilk,167 050 151 52k 100 k? Ilk, 889 1.32k w u On the historical basis, the Las Vegas Land and Water Company would net about 5»k$ and, on an integrated basis, both Companies sharing equally, the return would be 5*8£. to the Investment Basis, with reduced land acreage, the resulting over-all return would be or better.