20040302Comments.pdf

~.
~tf
~ A..
I- ~3Jlr
RECEIVED
!LED
J~ ~ H
oZ/lb/p
1"1
L.~
w:C Ol..l-~e, rER 21 ,AM ~: 42
Li~ .
~~j
COt'H11 S'SION
...
~. .A-
..
c1~.L;;;-~4.J ~~b'
Z;..I~J
~""
V;cGII4-
~. ~. ~....~..~..
/d.
-t;:;~
t~:;:
~.
711'.
~~~
R~...
-fv~
",-~. ~..~....
fW~d4L...
~)
-1: /rL4"
~~ . .....
~l;:~
~_'d
.. ~. ..
7 .
~-
eX. h,;7;/7 7~ ..
lB/6
$-L
Jtt: .f;:
/,.,
jJyfl'~Jean Jewell
11d
p,.
l..\
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ed Howell
Monday, March 01 , 2004 3:05 PM
Jean Jewell; Ed Howell; Gene Fadness; Tonya Clark
Comment acknowledgement
WWW Form Submission:
Monday, March 01, 2004
3: 05: 22
Case: (UWI-W-04-
Name: Inger Bishop
Street Address: 10812 Sandpiper St.
City: Boise
State: 10
ZIP: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail:
Company: United Water
mailing list _yes no: yes
Comment description: "--we read in Idaho Statesman about United Water seeking approval to
implement a new budget billing process. We are against this proposall and are upset that
we found out about it in the paper and that it was not mentioned in recent billings from
the United Water.
The $72 0000 price to implement the procram that the company wants to recover from
customers in its next general rate case is pure greed by the company. Our household was
added to United Water through the sale of South County Water a few years back and our huge
water bill has been a thorn in our home maintainance budget ever since. If customers
desire a level pay scale, they need to add their last six bills, devide by 12 and put
aside that much each month and NOT create a$72,000 cost to the company.
It was interesting that this side-bar article (Feb 11th) was next to an article on
businesses helping the environment by reducing paper and this move (if approved) would
double paper consumption involved in billing customers as it would go from bi-monthly tomonthly! !
When we moved to our home on 1/2 acre in 1980, we had a flat fee for water which made it
desireable to live here, (our covenants also promised pressurized irrigation). The
irrigation never materilized, we were put on meter , and South County sold without an
opportunity for homeowners to band together and perhaps purchase the neighbor well and thecosts escalate yearly.
We have been impacted by recent lay-offs (HP) and are readjusting to a much lower income
is challenging--we did not need increase utility costs which have occurred this past year.
We certainly are against another UNNECESSARY expense.Please deny United Waters request.
Thank You--Inger and Steve Bishop
Transaction 10: 311505.Referred by: http: / /www. puc. state. id. us/ scripts/polyform. dll/ ipuc
User Address: 205.186.82.228
User Hostname: 205.186.82.228