20250320Comments_4.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: John Dennis
Submission Time: Mar 19 2025 5:36PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 772 Skyhawk dr
Spirit Lake, ID 83869
Name of Utility Company: Gem State water
Case ID: GSW-W2-24-0
Comment: "I received the letter regarding the new price increases. I have to start by saying
each time our water company is sold the new owners ask for a price increase this time it's a
79% increase on the base rate and a lowering of the base amount of water.It looks like the
new conglomerate head quartered in Portland sees an opportunityto take the Gem State
customers to the cleaners.
I hope the Idaho PUC will reject this large increase and protect the current customers from
this corporate greed.
Thank You for your time
John Dennis "
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Gary Tillery
Submission Time: Mar 20 2025 7:59AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 20348 N Ramsey RD
Rathdrum, ID 83858
Name of Utility Company: Gem State
Case ID: GSW-W-24-
1

Comment: "The proposed Gem State rate increase appears to be inflated beyond its
expenses and cost of doing business. Most customers would recognize that Gem State
should receive a fair rate of ROR and should not have to absorb inflationary expenses
beyond their control. The rate increases proposed give every indication of that Gem State
may be disguising rate increase as a result inflationary times, when in fact it is
opportunistic and endeavoring to receive a much higher ROR beyond reason.
The financials of Gem State be carefully and with great due diligence reviewed by the PUC
before approving the rate increase. Surely if the proposed Gem State increases factored the
number of properties that are using zero gallons of water(such as mine) during winter
months when owners are not occupying their residence; it would reflect an even greater
percentage increase since my base rate does not change during those months. In other
words, Gem State only has to read the meter with no water pumping expense five months a
year"
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Jennifer Thaxton
Submission Time: Mar 20 2025 8:07AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 17258 N. Wrangler Rd.
Rathdrum, ID 83858
Name of Utility Company: Gem State Water
Case ID: GSW-W-24-01
Comment: "I am very concerned about this case of the Bar Circle "S" median water bill
raising such a high percentage.This will cause a financial hardship on my family to be able
to live on our acreage. I am in support of keeping it the way it is or raising it at a substantially
Lower percentage over several years as to not incur a financial hardship for the families who
reside on the properties."
2

!a►T AI�Li fr{'�
James C. Johnson
1290 E. Margaret Ave 702514AR 20 AM g; 54
Coeur d Alene, ID. 83815 4
i'CSLIC
7 I i I--S C0�AMISS10N
3/13/2025
IPUC, GSW W 24-01
Regarding Gem State rate increase request, in particular Troy Hoffman. The
2024 rate increase approved, our monthly base charges were not $27.50 as
submitted, rates were billed $27.50 every other month over many years.
Whether or not this factual error for Troy Hoffman Water was
acknowledged by those making decisions remains unknown to those of us
affected. The $35.00 EACH month that was approved had this effect(new
$35.00 monthly divide by $13.75 (V2 $27.50) a 255% base increase + usage
increase, more than the increase presented that affected Troy Hoffman
customers.
A year later a 79% increase request. I hand watered, sprinklered trying to
keep our monthly summer bill under $60.00, dam near V2 acre, a pain to do.
The $62.65 new monthly request divided by the $13.75 old rate from a year
ago if all approved is a 455% base increase + usage from a short year ago
for Troy Hoffman customers.
What's enough with this ownership?
Sincerely,
Jim Johnson