20241105Comment_1.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Benjamin Preisler
Submission Time: Nov 5 2024 6:39AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address:920 Loveland Ln
Fish Have, ID 83287
Name of Utility Company:Aspen Creek Water
Case ID:ASP-W-24-03
Comment: "We own a property that has service provided by Aspen Creek Water Co. in Fish Haven
Utah. The request for increase in water rates was received after the required deadline.
The request states that the current water bill is$25 per month with a proposed increase to$134 per
month. This is a 436% increase for the monthly bill.
We understand that periodic increases may be necessary. However,this is a significant jump.
There are several factors that should be considered in this matter.
1 st—The fact that the Company has not raised rates since 2002 is insignificant. It should not be the
fault of the customer that timely increases were not applied for.
2nd -There has been significant development to the south of our property and this development has
required additional water connections for Aspen Creek Water. This additional strain on the water
supply should not be transferred to the prior customers.
It is also my understanding that the developer of the new subdivision is also the same owner of the
Water Company. If this is true, it appears that the developer is attempting to pass the additional
expense incurred for this development on to the existing customers.There is no record provided if
the cost of connections were actually paid to the water company by the development company
considering that the developer and the water company are one in the same.
3rd—Many of the properties within the service area are vacation homes with occupancy only part of
the year. It should be considered and there is not year round use for many of the properties.
I understand that maintenance and other expenses are necessary. The meters are already in place
for the properties and as such a metered rate would be easily applied.
Our primary residence is located in Weber County Utah and is a 3900 sqft home with 7 occupants.
Our current water bill is less than$75 per month for full time occupancy. A rate of double that for a
home that is only occupied the equivalent of 2-3 months per year max is ridiculous.
I understand the need to have capital to cover expenses but it appears that the actions of the
owners of the water company and the development that has created the increased need is the
same and as such should be born by the applicant.
The increases should be for necessary expenses of the water company only and not cover other
expenses incurred. I would ask the Commission to consider a metered rate to address this. "