Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING <br />CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR FIRE STATION $6 APPROVED <br />OCTOBER 30, 1978 <br />Change Order GC -2 in the contract for construction of Fire Station <br />No. 6 was submitted to the Board. The Change Order increases the <br />contract by $210.00 and covers the changing of glass from regular <br />insulated glass to tempered insulated glass. Upon motion made <br />by Mr. McMahon, seconded by Mr. Brunner and carried, the Change <br />Order was approved. <br />PETITION FOR RATE INCREASE - INDIANA CABLEVISION- APPROVED <br />Peter H. Mullen, City Controller, submitted the following letter to <br />the Board: <br />"After careful review of the request from Indiana Cablevision <br />Corporation for a rate increase, it is the opinion of my <br />staff and myself that this rate request has a basis of <br />justification. By applying Indiana Cablevison figures of <br />assets and liab <ilities with those assets and liabilities of <br />businesses within the same industry, the ratios certainly <br />indicate that they are not in a profitable situation. The <br />ratios definitely indicate the opening of anew business as <br />did actually occur when`Indiana Cablevision recently purchased <br />the franchise rights. It is evident from our studies that they <br />have a heavy commitment to the South Bend area and they are <br />"investing" in the long term. It is-evidenced from the figures <br />that were presented that.even with the rate increase, Indiana <br />Cablevision must virtually double their present customers to be <br />placed in a "break- even" situation. It is a fact of depreciation <br />and long -term interest that is placing Indiana Cablevision in <br />a loss situation for last year, as well as year -to -date present <br />situation. This depreciation and interest mainly falls into <br />the category of new capital equipment to modernize and <br />improve picture quality and service. <br />In their petition for increase, they have indicated that their <br />increase in subscribers has on:ly increased 8.9 per cent from <br />1975. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that <br />this increase in number of subscribers is not a fact that the <br />Board should address in addressing the rate increase, as this <br />was a condition of the market and not an area that the Board <br />can or should have any control over. It is sufficient to say <br />that this increase is something that we could not control and <br />that we should not be in a position to grant this increase <br />because of the small increase. In light of the above, I feel <br />that the supply- demand will take effect. It is the choice of <br />the subscriber to continue with Indiana Cablevision with this <br />price increase or to select an alternative of an antenna or <br />UHF Channels. This choise is not available with other federally <br />regulated or state regulated utilities in that there is no <br />alternative to their product. <br />Therefore, in conclusion, I feel that the rate increase from <br />Indiana Cablevision is justified based upon their financial <br />records and further based upon the subscribers to the service <br />have an alternative to cable television. <br />Sincerely, <br />s/ Peter H. Mullen " <br />Jeff Buford, General Manager of Indiana Cablevision Corporation, was <br />present. Mr. Brunner asked Mr. Buford if this rate increase was <br />comparable with surrounding community rates. Mr. Buford said they <br />are pursuing rate increases in Mishawaka and Elkhart. However, <br />1 <br />