The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20110908Comments.pdfIDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION GREG WYATT ioii SEP -8 AM 8: 35 VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER UTI fA fA I -0-/ / -0 ;) DEAR MR. WYATT: I WOULD LIKE TO ENTER A PROTEST FOR HIGHER RATES FOR OUR WATER. I FEEL LIKE lAM PAYING ALL I CAN AFFORD AT THIS TIME. BEING 80 YEARS OLD AND ON LIMITED INCOME, I MAY HAVE TO RESORT TO HAVING A BROWN YARD AND WHEN I DRIVE AROUND TOWN AND SEE THESE BROWN LAWN IT IS SO SAD AND A DISGRACE TO OUR CITY. SO PLEASE NO MORE HIGHER RATE~4AU~~~' THANK- YOU!!!! Jane 7160 W GILLIS DR BOISE, IDA. 83714 l~úter - ¿J,i/-O t2 R' ccr~ l ir r"l. . # r:: .~ V i\:: L,) ~- ": ~.-t k;t ?~f~~~v ~'. ~( ~:,'j) ~ ..~.~/I~vkr ~K~ i.cJ ~. -,. k~ ~~) '-#.i,~L ~ ~. ~-~--L ~ /9ro 4- l cJ,~' A ~ ~ ~~~':'7~'-CL , ~? _~%f ~~ 7 7 ~ ~ ~-k N~"j ~" tJ~ ~ ~..-, c:~ J-tÁ43 ~ &+~ /;""'~ ~~ ?: ;i A- dJ~-~ tf'¿. i ltk~ .XJ ~ff AiAu ~~~ì~'~'~- /Í . ¡J'cJ~~ 4l/(je-.u~ , ~~.4, err", 1ifS~4~A~~~~'~'/ 'Æ . /...~ 1-.' '.' ..._""ty~-i ~ ..... ~,-t.;'¡1~..( ~ 1\ "'.'/.~,E A...:; k :f 7J~.v"~~ ,i ¥J~ A ~; ~ ¿;()~ ~. '7~f ' 6~íU ~3 7.l~ ,w~uJ-\\~Od Idaho Public Utilities Commission In the most recent United water biling, I was notified of you proposed rate increase, If the average water consumption has gone down it is because most people can't afford to water the lawns at the rate we are curently paying, If your proposal goes through I wil take my yard out, There is only so much money to go around. KarenEwy 5421 N. Northwall Boise, Id. 83703 r-c: l'ri-0 Ico :::: co..("(" ::ma'~ ,.'\..;1 t)r:.~i=~\lFn r:~~ù- q!Ç.!''"ii'i;;i '\ ¡¡_ \,..;j_;; ., :,."" .~,."" - -",-" -, -, ---- Idaho Public Utilities Commission 2011 SEP -8 AM 8= 31 PORox83270 Lt Wl'.-w' t'lA) r..Boise, 10 83720-74 To: Members of th Public Utility Commisson I have recently been informed via my water bil that United Water is proposing a 19.9% rate hike to offset iost revenues due to conservation by water users and to cover improvement costs to the =:y::te;-. This follows a rate increase in 2010. I am oppose to granting this increase for two reasons: 1. United Water just received a rate increase in 2010. Did the need for improvements just become evident? I am guessing not. United Water needs to manage the water sy-em in a logical comprehensive manner, and present all their fact to the Utilty Commission when they request increases. It does not appear that these facts were presented to the commission last year when the commission decided to support a rate increase. If United Water cannot present their facts and their needs comprehensively (which they apparently did not last year), then they cannot expect the consumer to support such increases. 2. A twenty percent increase is a huge increase. My water bíl for the past two months was $261. In May and June it was $135, and I expect it to be $135 in Sept and October. This rate increase would increase my water bíl over a hundred dollars in just the summer months. Even though my water bils are lower in the winter an additional 19.9% would be added to those as well. This far exceeds the estimate by United Water that their rate hike would only add between 5 and 6 dollars to everyone's bil. 3. The statement that this increase Is needed to offset revenues lost due to consumer water conservation is a very poor reason. Raising the price wil only drive water use lower, and I am anticipating United Water coming back to the commission to raise rates again when water use declines. If conservation is the problem, a more logical solution for United Water would be to lower rates and stimulate consumption. If conservation (lower water use) is really the problem, United Water needs to look how to trim its costs to align their costs with the new reality of less water use. 4227 W High Meadow Drive Boise, 1083714 11765 West Peppermint Dr. Boise, ID 83709 September 2,2011 ,. r. I" r: l\ n:: !'i '\ ~ \...~. 'h..,.. ~'ú t",. it". Lon SEP - 7 AM 8: 23 tAtJL-tJ-II-O ~ Idaho Public Utilities Commission P. O. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0074 Dear Commission Members, I would like to protest the huge rate increase United Water is requesting. This seems completely unreasonable. This rate increase will double the cost of the actual water we receive. We are constantly asked to conserve our natural resources, and now we are being penalized for doing just that. This is not right. We had dealings with United Water at our previous home, and the situation was most unsatisfactory. They are a foreign-owned company, and this makes is very obvious that they are not concerned about the welfare of Idaho citizens. We are requesting that the Idaho Public Utilities Commission come to our defense. '~\i August 30,2011 RECEIVE 2011SEP'-,2 Pñ3: 32 Virginia Sim 3443 E. Mistood Boise, Idao 83706-6902 l; WI -w-/ / -o:? Mr. Greg Wyatt Vice Prsident and General Manager Idao Public Utilties Commission P.O. Box 83720 Boise, Idao 83720-074 Re: UnitedWaterldao's Ra Increase Dear Mr. Wyatt: Since United Water Idao was granted a two-phas increae in March of 20 10, it is my opinion their latest request for a $5.82 per month or 19 cents a day incree to residential customers should be dened.. In ths tight economy, everyone is requird to tighten their belts, and that goes for the French-owned United Water Idao Company. Did they bother to mention in their request for additional fuds tht they have numerous other means of fillin their coffers? I have had "Lea Guard", costg $12.98 every two months, since Novembe of 2002. Lat year, I signed up for anothr service offered by Unite Water and paid $53.88 for the whole yea. This year, they doubled th amunt to over $100.00, so I called to say I was not renewig the serce. United Water is in the process of changing the account numbers of all residents and commercial businesses. In order to help offt the cost of the chages, which began with ths month's biling, an will contiue though October when they anticipate the fial notifications to be completed, no doubt they are anticipain approval of the rate increae. Again, I ask that United Wate Idao's request for a rate increas be denied.vi;=ø~ Virginia Sim Jean Jewell From: Sent: To: Subject: rjpeck~cableone. net Tuesday, September 06, 2011 3:09 PM Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness PUC Comment Form A Comment from Robert T Peck follows: Case Number: ùtJZ-¿J-I/-O r- Name: Robert T Peck Address: City: Boise State: Idaho Zip: 83793 Daytime Telephone: Contact E-Mail: rjpec~cableone.net Name of Utility Company: United Water Idaho Acknowledge: acknowledge Please describe your comment briefly: Sept. 6, 2911 Dear Commission Members: I am writing to urge you to disallow a nearly 29% increase in United Water rates. At a time when everything seems to be going up in cost, raising rates on something as essential as water is an insult . With goods and services where there are competing businesses vying for customers, we have choices by which we can save money. With a public utility such as water there is no competition or choice. Clean water is a right in our society and the utility providing it ought to provide it for the public good and not for a profit. United Water's letter stated that water consumption has declined and that revenues are down as a consequence. A major use of water in my area is for watering lawn and garden (again, I have no other option but to use treated, drinkable water on my lawn) and if we are blessed wi th a wet Spring and require less water, why should we be punished for using less. Are we not encouraged to conserve water usage? It sounds to me that United Water (owned by a French company?) is in business to make a profit first, and serve the public good second. I don't begrudge them covering their expenses, but they should assume some risk if usage varies with the weather. Improvements should be budgeted out based on money in the bank rather that paid for after- the-fact by raising rates. I realize I do not have all the information on the subject, so I trust in your knowledge and expertise in this matter, for the public good. Sincerely, Robert T. Peck The form submitted on http://www . puc. idaho. gov Iforms/ipucl/ipuc. html IP address is 96.18.199.173 1 Jean Jewell From: Sent: To: Subject: robbcjohn~ctcweb. net Tuesday, September 06, 2011 12:54 PM Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness PUC Comment Form A Comment from Robert Johnson follows: Case Number: UWI-W-11-Ø2 Name: Robert Johnson Address: 9547 W. McAuliffe St. City: Boise State: ID Zip: 83714 Daytime Telephone: 2ØS-229-1155 Contact E-Mail: robbcjohn~ctcweb.net Name of Utility Company : United Water Acknowledge: acknowledge Please describe your comment briefly: I am opposed to United Water's proposed 19.9% rate increase due to decreased user demand. In my most recent billing, I used 2 CCF ~ 1.3521 for a total of $2. 7Ø. Then I was charged an 18.6Ø ttCustomer Charge", a fee I guess I pay for the privilege of being their customer. I suspect that some of this fee has been used to promote water conservation over the years and it seems completely unfair almost perverse that we users now be fined because our decreased usage is cutting in to Suez' s a foreign corporation with little or no regard for conservation in the United States, bottom line. I seriously doubt if any million dollar bonuses will need to be scaled back because United Water needed to upgrade a small amount of their local infrastructure. Please do not allow this rate increase to be implemented. Thank you! The form submitted on http://www . puc. idaho. gov Iforms/ipuc1/ipuc. html IP address is 66.232.82.27 1 Jean Jewell From: Sent: To: Subject: jtflys(§q. com Monday, September 05,20112:01 AM Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness PUC Comment Form A Comment from Jerry Terlisner follows: Case Number: !AwL -W-I/-O:; Name: Jerry Terlisner Address: 4015 Hillcrest Drive City: Boise State: Idaho Zip: 83705 Daytime Telephone: 20S. 859.7959 Contact E-Mail: jtflys~g.com Name of Utility Company: United Water Acknowledge: acknowledge Please describe your comment briefly: All I ever hear is 'CONSERVE' (gas~ water~ recyle trash~ etc.). This is the reward for being conservative. Double digit rate increases. Has the PUC ever turned down these constant increases? I have not seen it. Mear ly rubber stamp these requests. The form submitted on http://www . puc. idaho. gov Iforms/ipuc1/ipuc. html IP address is 71.33.111.250 1 Jean Jewell From: Sent: To: Subject: sweiser(§fiberpipe. net Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:01 AM Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness PUC Comment Form A Comment from stephen weiser follows: Case Number: úw:¡-tJ - / /- a ;; Name: stephen weiser Address: City: boise State: id Zip: 83702 Daytime Telephone: Contact E-Mail: sweiser~iberpipe.net Name of Utility Company: United Water Idaho Acknowledge: acknowledge Please describe your comment briefly: Re UWI' s application for rate relief of August 3 Like other utilities, UWI has been actively promoting conservation to safeguard a precious finite resource. This is appropriate. However, the utility' s 'lost' revenue should not be borne by users who do conserve water. Reduced revenue is to be expected if conservation measures are implemented by users. Do we expect the cost of, say, automobiles to go up if demand slackens? If everyone should adopt a no-carb diet, would Idaho's potato growers expect to see price increases to cover their expenses? You can't have your cake and eat it too! UWI should find internal ways to cover the costs of conservation. The form submitted on http://www . puc. idaho. gov Iforms/ipucl/ipuc. html IP address is 209.151.55.157 - - ----- - --- ------- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- 1