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conflict herewith are hereby repealed and this ordinance shall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