20160705Comments (3 Total).pdf

Reference Case no. MNV-W-16-0L
Re: Morning View Water Company Proposal
Customer Concern regarding Morning View Water Companies request of increase
To whom it may concern,
First, I am completely floored to even think that a proposal was submitted for a water rate increase in
the amounts suggested. Set aside fixed incomes or limited incomes, it is the responsibility of
Nolan/Morning View Water Company to plan accordingly as a business owner for the needs of the
company. This includes the growth from the existing homeowners and the need to increase the amount
of water consumed, while keeping water pressure and quality at a required level for all customers.
Having been in our home for just over two years we have had issues with water pressure, as have many
of our neighbors. What is most concerning is that from my understanding from other Morning View
water customers is that the 55.00 surcharge was intended to alleviate the concerns of raising the money
to construct the building around the pump and the digging of the needed well. This surcharge has
continued to be applied to every bill. Was this intended to be a permanent surcharge? From what I was
told by other customers it wasn't intended to be but has become such. I am also confused as to why
there hasn't been a request to increase incrementally the amounts over the last few years to offset
costs. This shows lack of business knowledge and proper planning. Taking out a loan financed through
the Drinking Water Treatment Facility is the responsibility of Nolan and the Morning View Water
Company. lf the loan account needsto begin to be repaid then he should have had a professionalor
outside source take care of his finances, again lack of control of a business or the ability to properly
attend to the business needs is apparent. As an example, from information retrieved from
http://home.costhelper.com/well-drilline.htmlfor instructional information, if I had a well dug at a
depth of 400'at the higher end of cost per foot it would cost roughly 512,000. lf I were to break down on
an amortization schedule (which I have done) at a 5% interest rate over a 30 year period the scheduled
monthly payment would be 564.42. Again this is an extremely deep well for any of the size homes under
the watch of Morning View by themselves. So asking such an absolutely outrageous amount should be
thrown out immediately. With actual city water costing much less and including more with it I would
rather pay a city or county tax to extend city water to be metered in our area and homes, instead of this
proposed plan as it only seems to benefit the building of the company of Morning View rather than aid
the customers they are looking to drain every penny from. lt appears that the business side of matters
has not been attended to in the proper way if they need such a dramatic increase. To add insult to injury
on top of the increased proposal they want to also meter for anything that goes over what "they" feel is
necessary is just plain highway robbery. How does Nolan and his company expect to do business and
keep the power on if the owners/tenants occupying the homes can't pay. lf he doesn't get paid an
income to pay the bill he could potentially lose his business. lt might be interesting to actually look at full
financials since the last rate increase and actually see where it went. To run and operate a business you
should be in a professional setting. When walking into the "building" on the corner of 200 and 4000 in
Rigby it is a shambles, outside and in. I have heard recently that they have more than one home
(primary and a cabin, outside of business property). Although it's up to each person to spend their hard
IqECEIVED
'iill6 -lUL -5 A'r4 9: h5
,,,;1r. ;.f ,iiiestaFi
earned income how they please it seems odd that someone who is so concerned about keeping a
business up and running can have so much and propose such a drastic increase on others who in this
area cannot afford those luxuries. Lastly, I would say that the fact that the proposal was made to
increase the rates in such a short amount of time so as to not give anyone ample time to combat these
outrageous proposals before they were desired to go into effect is another red flag that as a company
they only care about their profits and not actually about the people they are supposed to be serving
with goods and services (even though the Commission rightly suspended the effective date already).
V/R,
Adam Koepke
(480) 208-0s88
[e-mail] or [e-mail]
Jean Jewell
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
secretary
Saturday, July 02, 20LG 7:2L PM
Jean Jewell; Diane Holt
FW: Morning View Water Company Proposal
From: Mary KurE
Sent: Saturday, July 02,2016 L:21:25 PM (UTC-07:00) Mountain Time (US & Canada)
To: secretary
Subject: Morning View Water Company Proposal
To Whom it May Concern:
I tried to submit this comment via your website, but have repeatedly had it rejected. Please post it in the
comments section if possible. This is concerning case number MNV-W-16-01. Thank You.
We are very concerned about the proposal to raise our water bill to such an outrageous amount. Morning View
Water Company has not provided adequate water quality or pressure for so many years, and now has finally
updated their system in order to provide what they should have been providing in the first place. The quality
has been so inadequate at times that we have received notices stating that the water may not have been sanitary
enough to drink. It leads me to believe that the company has not been managed properly for them to need this
kind of increase and their customers, who have been suffering from a lack of quality, should not be further
punished for this. You will be very hard pressed to find a customer who is satisfied with the water quality that
they have received in the past. I don't know any reasonable person who would consider $80-$100 a fair amount
to pay for water every month, including winter months. This is a IOOVo increase, not adding a few dollars to our
bill. We are disgusted with this proposal. I would consider $40 per month more than fair for the services we
have been provided. I also think it is important for the committee to know that over half of the people who are
required to buy water from Morning View Water Co. are living well under the poverty level, and qualify for
government assistance. $40-$50 per month is a lot of money for us, and I think it is wrong for Morning View
Water Co. to even submit this type of request. Please consider how you would feel if this is how you had been
treated by your water company, and then they asked you to pay twice the amount of your regular bill for their
service. Please try to consider how this would affect your families if you were low income. We have genuinely
discussed moving from this area if our rates are increased to such an outrageous amount, and we are hoping that
the cost of our utilities will not make it more difficult for us to sell our home. Please look for a more reasonable
solution to this situation. The current proposal is absolutely ridiculous.
Jean Jewel!
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
rvv atsonT 7 07 12 @ g ma i l.com
Friday, July 01, 2016 L0:59 AM
Beverly Barker; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness
Case Comment Form: Rachel Watson
Name: RachelWatson
Case Number: mnv-w-l6-0L
Email : [e-mail]
Telephone:
Address: 3975 e 180 n
Rigby lD, 83442
Name of Utility Company: morning view water
Comment: I do not agree with this! 5100 per month is ludicrous! We would be paying more than anyone in the STATE!
Morning view spent most of last summer digging holes and making a mess to put meters in. Why spend the time and
money to put meters in if you're not going to use them? I will pay for water I am using and it won't add up to 5100 a
month! Especially in the winter! So they have a loan that needs repaid. There are plenty of morning view customers to
help cover it without charging StOO per month. Rates haven't gone up in ten years. That's morning view company's fault,
not the customers. Meter our water and charge us for what we use. That is fair. 5100 a month is not fair. Nobody in the
subdivision uses that much water! Morning view water does not discuss ANYTHING with their customers and that is not
right. We deserve to know what's going on before they make a decision. For the past many years, we, the customers
have had to deal with no water pressure because they only had one well to try and cover over 155 customers. They tried
to make us pay for water we weren't using then and they're trying to make us pay by overcharging us for FINALLY
getting up to code. 100% increase! Really?! Ridiculous! Charge us by the meter. Do what's right and fair.
Uniq ue ldentifier: 97 .32.68.L7