|
floe
<br />adopted.
<br />
<br />adopted.
<br />
<br /> the decrease in the cost of Iaber and material since telephone rates were fixed as now charged.
<br /> I also asked the TeIephone COmpany to furnish me with a statement showing the gross revenue,
<br /> total receipts, expenses, depreciation, taxes, investments,~ etc. of their company for the past
<br /> five years, for the City of portsmouth. Ifurther asked if they were unable to determine whe-
<br /> ther they could reduce their charges in Portsmouth fifteen per cent, that they make an imme-
<br /> diate reduction of ten per cent, with the understanding that their rates would be further ad-
<br /> justed as seen as a complete survey and determination Ooutdbe reached, as to what adjustmemt
<br /> should be made.
<br /> After several conferences with representatives of the Chesapeake and Po%emac
<br /> Telephone Company, we were advised by the Telephone .Company~ under date of September let, 19~3,
<br /> that our request had been given careful consideration and they would be glad ~o give ua thezr
<br /> views on the matter. The Telephone~Compan~, after attempting to explain why telephone rates
<br /> have not followed the downward trend of commodity prices, stated that it is not permitted by
<br /> law to earn a greater rate in times of prosperity than is necessary ~o enable them to meet the
<br /> service needs of the community. I may observe here that the Telephone Company is now and has
<br /> been paying eight per cent dividends on its stock. After giving what it apparently feels are
<br /> numerous other reasons why the telephone rates in Portsmouth should not be reduced, the Tele~
<br /> phone Company expressed its regrets that it would be unable to comply with the City~ s re~ues~
<br /> for a reduction and thereby further impair its earnings. In addition to declining our request
<br /> for reduction in charges, they failed to furnish us with statement of. their earnings, expenses,
<br /> operation, investment, schedule of rates charged, etc. in Portsmouth.
<br /> On October loth, 1933, we extended this information to the State Corporation Com-
<br /> mission with request that the Commission order an immediate reduction of telephone charges in
<br /> Portsmouth of ten per cent with the proviso that .they would be further adjusted as soon as a
<br /> complete survey and determination could be reached as to what adjustment should be made. We
<br /> also asked the Commission to furnish, or have the Telephone Company furnish Portsmouth, with-
<br /> out delay, the information requested under date of June 19th, 1933, regarding earnings, ex-
<br /> penses, investments, rates charged, etc. in Portsmouth.
<br /> For ~our information, I am attaching copy of my letter to the State Corporation
<br /> Commission, dated ct. loth, 1933, in which we requested a reduction in telephone charges in
<br /> Ports~outh~ You will note we advised the Corporation Commission that we feel telephone rates
<br /> inPortsmouth should be adjusted downward, also that we had been informed by a nationally know~
<br /> firm of appraisers and engineers what a reasonable telephone rate would be for a population
<br /> area such as Portsmouth. This rate is much lower than the rate new being charged in Portsmouth.
<br /> After considerable delay and after tracing the ~tate Corporation Commission for
<br />a reply to my letter, they advised under date of December 6~h, that if the Corporation Commie-
<br />sion ordered a ten per cent reduction in telephone rates as suggested by us, without formal
<br />hearing, and an opportunity afforded the Teleohone Company te oppose such reduction, or unless
<br />the reduction was agreed to by the Telephone ~ompany, it is almost certain that the Telephone
<br />Company would go to the Federal Court and obtain an injunction restraining the Commission from
<br />p~tting much an order into effect.
<br /> The reply of the State ~orporation Commission shows that they have not attempted
<br />to reach an agreement with the Telephone Company for a reduction in rates, and are no~ going
<br />to do anything about the matter, although we stated we felt the telephon? charges were too high.
<br /> It is requested that you initiate legislation at this sesszon that will make it~
<br />compulsory for the State Corporation Commission or utility companies to furnish cities in which
<br />they operate, statements of their investments, earnings, e xpeses and rates within such cities,
<br />when requested by the city authorities.
<br /> I suggest also that you initiate whatever legislation is necessary to bring about
<br />a fairer adjustment between the assessed valuesby the State Corpora%ion Commission of proper-
<br />ties of the utility comnanies for taxation purposes, and the values allowed by the Corporation
<br />Commission for rate-makkng purposes. The recent decision of the State Corporation Commission
<br />with respect to charges of the Virginia Electric and Power Company allowed this company a val-
<br />uation on theLv property for rate-makin~ purposes of ~oproximately forty-five million dollar~,
<br />while the same corporation commission only assessed the properties ef this same company, ap-
<br />proximately thirteen mill'ion dollars for taxation purposes. Such actions as these, on the par%
<br />of the Corporation Commission are not fair to the people served by these utilities, and '~
<br />trust it will be the pleasure of you gentlemen to see that the proper legislation is enacted
<br />at this session of the Legislature to prevent any further injustice of this kind on the com-
<br />munities and their people.
<br /> If additional information is desired regarding the above subjects, or any other
<br />subject affecting the City of Portsmouth, I shall be glad to come to Richmond at any time for
<br />the purpose of assisting you in every way possible, with such matters.
<br /> With kindest regards, I am,
<br /> Cordially yours,
<br />
<br /> H.B. Anderson, City Manager."
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Brooks to consider by items, was adopted.
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Brooks that Item 'A' in reference to the consolidation of the of-
<br /> of the Coroner with the office of the Director of Public Welfare, be laid on table, was
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Brooks to concu~ in I~em ~B~ relating to Liquor licenses, was
<br />
<br />a op e .
<br />
<br />adopted.
<br />
<br />Notion of Mr. Hutchins to concur in Item ~C~ relative to Gasoline Tax, was
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Brocks to concur in Item ~D~ relative to Telephone Ra~es, was
<br />
<br /> Notion of Mr. Brooks to concur in Item ~E~ relative to Valuation of Corporation
<br />property for rate-making purposes and valuation for tax purposes, was adored,
<br />
<br />
<br />
|