Loading...
4997i ORDINANCE NO. 'OV q1 - Y4 AN ORDINANCE PRESCRIBING A SCHEDULE OF RATES TO BE CHARGED BY THE SOUTIT,TESTERH BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY. WHEREAS, under the pover delegated to the City Council, the duty of fixing rates is placed with the City Council of the City of Little Rock, and WHEREAS, there has been no adjustments in the rates fixed by the City Council to be charged by the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company since January 26, 1925, m d WHEREAS, reduction in the purchase price of materials and salaries Paid wages paid to employees has made possible a lower cost -in o_oereting expenses thereby effecting a. saving which should be passed on to users of telephone service in Little Rock; now therefore BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK: Section 1. That from and after July 1, 10,32 the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company shall charge within the City of Little Rock the following and no higher schedule of monthly exchange rates: One Party Line Two Party Line Four Party Line Extension Flat Rate Station Business $6.00 $ .75 Residence 2.50 .2.00 $1.50 .50 Section 2. The rates and charges now in force for types of service not specifically mentioned herein shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. All ordinances and -carts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed and this ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after July 1, P SEP 12 1932 Attest: A y erk. 1932. CITY OF LITTLE ILO Date 193_ ROLL CALL —CITY COUNCIL — OFFICIAL YEAR 1932 -1933 WARDS Names of Aldermen; Long Term First Votes Aye No FIRST WARD Terral, Floyd Connor, C. M. SECOND WARD Leiser, H. G. Tuohey, J. H. THIRD WARD Wassell, Sam M. Muswick, George Adkins, Homer M. FOURTH WARD Winder, Ray G FIFTH WARD 1 Olive, A. i Turner, Roy C. Duttlinger, C. H. 9 U SIXTH WARD Shoffner, E. G. SEVENTH WARD Wherry, Geo. R. Jjy� Adams, George G. EIGHTH WARD Conner, Mrs. C. C. ! Fisher, Merlin NINTH WARD Scougale, A. 13 Gladden, J. R. CITY OFFICERS AND DEPART- Offi MENT HEADS 11 P ne REMARKS't I 1 MAYOR 111 I Horace A. Knowlton 4 -8416 y� CITY TREASURER Oscar D. Hadfield 2020 MUNICIPAL JUDGE Harper E. Harb II 4 -388 CITY ATTORNEY ---.K Linwood L. Brickhous_ e 4 -1123 II CITY CLERK I John L. Krumm j 96131 '1 CITY COLLECTOR II II James Lawson II 4 -12.78 CHIEF OF POLICE II II J. L. Bennett 1 4 -1234 CHIEF OF FIRE DEPARTMENT Charles S. Hafer 4 -2851 �I CITY HEALTH OFFICER Ij Dr. V. T. Webb CITY VETERINARIAN _5402 _ ` II _ Dr. T. M. Dick II 5402 11 MILK AND DAIRY INSPECTOR II �I Geo. D. Ellis 11 5402 1 CHIEF FOOD INSPECTOR II II Ewell Hopkins 1 5402 11 MEAT INSPECTOR _ A. F. Coots �� 6485 II PLUMBING INSPECTOR E. L. Gruber 4 -3000 CITY ELECTRICIAN !I II Lester E. Newland 4 -3508 CITY ENGINEER W. H. Marak I 4 -3000 SUPT. PARKS AND SANITATION 11 • 1 R. C. Rudisill 11 6813 SUPT. CITY HOSPITAL 11 11 H. K. Ford 11 7161 1 CITY LIBRARIAN Miss Vera Snook 8932 – INSPECTOR WEIGHTS & MEASURES II �� f` T R e c o m m e rd d a t i o n. ------------------------ - - - - -- The Finance and Utilities Committee recomzend passage of the ordinance originally introduced by T.'r. Tuohey reducing tele- phone rates. In doing this the personnel of the Committee feel it would have been much better for the community if the council had re- comltlended the expenditure of a small amount of money nexessary to make a preliminary investigation �-.,ith reference to this matter. Each effort i., t'e past to reduce utility rates has always been accompanied by an ordinance appropriating a sufficient amount of money to rr_ake such an investigation but two efforts to secure an appropriation have been banded by certain members of the City Council as efforts to kill the ordinance reducing the rates. The result of the passage of this ordinance .All give no relief' to users of telephones within the next three or five years because an injunction will prevent the City from putting the reduction into effect until the litigation is finally concluded dome three to five years hence. The signers of this reco mendation realize that the City cannot in its present financial condition afford to spend `,'15,000. to 125,000 on resisting the injunction in this case, and there are other utilities which it will require a similar amount to litigate. The signers of this recoirrendatio n would much prefer to appropriate sorie small amount to make an investigation in each _base so that an in recomrmendation could be :Wade rather than to go blindly into the litigation, which the City cannot finance but ;,rill have to be financed from private sources. A,ny substantial amount which the Council appropriates at this time will have to be balanced by the discharge of city employees in some instances, reduction of salaries in others and a transfer of funo.s from needed departments for this litigation, however, all efforts having; failed to dispose of it otherwise and certain members of the council entertaining the view that the City has no buPden in the matter, the signers of this recoimmendation, recognizing that ak majority of the people desire the passaf?e of his ordinance, and the members of the Council being merel,. the servants of the citizenship which they represent are undertaking; to carry out the will of the constituots. z 1932 Orr �s `� -_ 4 CITY OF LITTLE ROC Date 193_ ROLL CALL —CITY COUNCIL — OFFICIAL YEAR 1932 -1933 WARDS FIRST WARD SECOND WARD THIRD WARD FOURTH WARD FIFTH WARD SIXTH WARD SEVENTH WARD EIGHTH WARD NINTH WARD Names of Aldermen Long Term First Terral, Floyd Connor, C. M. Leiser, H. G. Tuohey, J. H. Wassell, Sam M. CITY OFFICERS AND Adkins, Homer M. Winder, Ray Olive, A. Turner, Roy C. buttlinger, C. H. Shoffner, E. G. Wherry, Geo. R. Adams, George G. Conner, Mrs. C. C. Fisher, Merlin Scougale, A.. Gladden, J. R. DEPART- 11 C Votes ye I No MENT HEADS 11 Phone Ill; Horace4A. Knowlton 4 -8416 CITY TREASURER Oscar D. Hadfield 4 -2020 MUNICIPAL JUDGE (I Harper E. Harb 4 -3886 CITY ATTORNEY Linwood L. Brickhouse I 4-11231 11 CITY CLERK I I� John L. Krumm 1 9613 1 CITY COLLECTOR II II James Lawson 1 4 -12_78 CHIEF OF POLICE II J. L. Bennett II 4 -1234 11 PRTM CHIEF OF FIRE DEAENT Charles S. Hafer �+ 4 -2851 CITY HEALTH OFFICER II II Dr. V. T. Webb 11 5402 CITY VETERINARIAN Dr. T. M. Dick 11 5402 11 MILK AND DAIRY INSPECTOR II Geo. D. Ellis 11 5402 CHIEF FOOD INSPECTOR II II Ewell Hopkins 11 5402 �I MEAT INSPECTOR I I F. Coots II 6485 1 —A. PLUMBING INSPECTOR 1 E. L. Gruber 1 4 -3000 CITY ELECTRICIAN 11 III Lester E. Newland 11 4 -3508 CITY ENGINEER W. H. Marak 4 -3000 SUPT. PARKS AND SANITATION 11 II R. C. Rudisill 11 6813 SUPT. CITY HOSPITAL II II H. K. Ford 1L 7161 1 CITY LIBRARIAN 1I Miss Vera Snook 1 $932 INSPECTOR WEIGHTS & MEASURES 11 d acna iI - -s - -- *r.,.�.m�.,o .L'_ M, REMARKS .(2x STATE OF ARKANSAS) COUNTY OF PULASKI S. S. CITY OF LITTLE ROCK CERTIFICATE I, John L. Krumm, City Clerk of said City fores,Ad do hereby certify thet I :gym the duly elected City Clerk of said City as end from ^,: -ril 5th, 1972, and I do hereby certify that the attached document label- ed "Recommendation" is -2 true and correct copy of said document, same being a part of a file numbered Ordinance No. 4997, and I do further certify that said document labeled "Recommendation' has been transcribed into the Council pro- ceedings held at a duly convened meeting; of the City Council of the City of Little Nock on the 12th day of September and appearing; in Council Record X under date of September 12th, 1972, and I do further certify that the original copy of said recommendation as vrell as Council record. X are both on file in the office of the ^ity Clerk of the City of Little Rock subject to inspection of the public and any or all interested parties. IN FITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand andseal as such City Clerk of the !amity of tittle Rock on this the 14th day of September, 1972. -1 - s SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY J/ 114 EAST CAPITOL AVE.,LITTLE ROCK, ARK. t t September 7, 193 \J W. E.GOSDIN TELEPHONE 2 -1701 DIVISION GENERAL MANAGER To the f,�ayor and the City Councils Gentl er:ena .onday night will again find you wrestling with the problem '"should or should not telephone rates in Little Rock be reduced". The recomr;endation of the Utilities Committee will be before you as you consider the question - what is best for the interests of the citizens of Little -sock! +e know, and you realize - only too well - that the voters are looking to you to do what is best for them. And you, as a legislative body, sitting in a cloistered chamber, must look the facts squarely in he face, and then decide the wisest course - alcne and unadvised by the thousands who trust in your judgment. In a sincere effort to assist you, we are writing this letter. You will find it presents for the first time our complete position - -- and there should be little possibility of misunderstanding after its reading. The first question you roust consider is, "Will an ordinance actually reduce rates!" For a moment, let's table that question as we review. we have presented financial c, Late, :ients showing our return here to be inadequate - less than 5 per cent. .,hat does twat mean! It means that telephone rates in Little Rock are at a level as to earn less than �5 a year on every nundred we have invested. "shat is less than simple interest. we have pointed out that the original invested money would cost easily 7 per cent and therefore, we are actually losing 2 a year on the turnover. These financial statej.,et_ts ive presented are from official records. the methods used in keeping these books are laid down in strict fashion by the i'ederal Government through the Interstate Corr.merce Commission. They are checked b,; that body and other regulatory oodies. The figures therefore are true figures. For exam- ple, the plant investment figure is supported by data, all properly RECEIVED and r ILED SEP 10 JOHN L. KRUMK CITY CLERK - 2 - - . '-k. audited, which backs up every dollar - even every penny - shown in our total investment figure of 43,8559719 in Little Rock. The fact that these statements showed a return of less than 5 per cent undoubtedly surprised you. In a period of decreasing costs in almost every lire, it does seem logical that huge profits night have crept into a business where the price level has been maintained. We, therefore, wish to point out again peculiarities -:f the telepher.e husir,ess as recognized by all who have actually investigated - th(, peculiarities -nd other factors which do rot permit great savings and which :..ake us an "exception that proves the rule": 1. The permarent nature of the "inventory ". Unlike merchants who can clear their stocks, we crust erect our cables, poles, dial syster..s for a long period of ti.i;e. They must serve customers, rust be kept in repair even though disconnections steadily coine in and income drasticly decreases. (This fact can be proved by investigation). 2. The fact that decreases in prices of rar. materials and other commodities have not saved us enough money to feel it. we can show ar.y investi`ator t1he relatively si:.all amount of these commodities used each year in Little Rock's telephone system. 3. -the recognized fact that our taxes &:re mounting steadily. An audit will show this figure to be about 10 per cent of our gross income. 4. Although our work has fallen off) (and the remainder divided anong all the employees on a part -time basis), the savings in wages to us have been more than cancelled by great decreases in income from lcst telephones. You will rem;eu.ber our loss was 2056 phones during the first 7 months of this year - a rate of loss twice that of 1931. 5. In 1924 you authorized the present rates on the basis of an increased number of telephones. There were 191,200 telephones here then. There are 19,005 now. In other words if the rates were rot too high then, can they be too high now? Especially is the question pertinent in view of the fact that an inventory and appraisal will show - -- 6. That over a million dollars in improvements have been added to the telephone plant since 1924. (4e have not sacrificed the quality of the service.) This sum, also incluced equipr,rent to care for 41000 tele- phones which swelled t:e total to 239000 at one time but which have been since disconnected. And now that the number of telephones is back to the 1924 level, we find - -- 7. !:.ore calls per tel___e�_hone now than then. Concentration of families, +Nculd It riot Ce an 1nCOn515L6rTi law WJJ-L% -1A V"w y— go up with everything else:" and another year says "you must go dorm, everything else is:" -e now return to the question asked earlier in this letter. still the passirg of an Ordinance actually reduce rates' ',,e do not think so• The conditions in our business as outlined in the 8 points above leave us but one course. pie shall resist any Ordinance not based on a complete investi- gation.. Ive are compelled to protect the interests of approximately 2,000 security holders in Little Rock and tree state, our 500 employees here, and ti;e quality of Little Rock service. The.t acticn, as your Committee pointed out, undoubtedly would postpone any reduction to tr.e customers fcr an indefinite period. It would be expensive for you and for us. For you it would mean a complete inventory and appraisal undertaken by the City alone. It would mean the employment of engineers and other technical assistance. For us it would mean similar action. Litigation is usually unpleasant. It is a last resort. ,.'me do not want it. tie are sure you would not knowingly involve the tax payers in it. We still offer you in the friendliest spirit and with a real desire to assist, the cooperation of all our forces. You have not denied that our figures are other than presented but we too are anxious to show the telephone public of Little Rock our actual financial condition. Vould not a preliminary investigation consisting of an inventory and appraisal give you a reasonable basis for action' '!would not the delay from that plan be snorter, more economical, more lcgical than the legal delays resulting from an ordinance passed now' 'tie offer again to begin immediately pn inventor and appraisal ivin You the �rivile.&e of checkir� it in manner you decide is best. The spirit of cooperation within the Utilities Cor:.mittee has already been demonstrated. 'de are confident that we can work with the Council as a whole in the sae.e friendly manner. Div 'ision General Lana er