Showing posts with label water rates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water rates. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Golden State meeting on water rationing

Golden State Water Company will hold a public meeting tonight to explain their new staged system for water rationing.

The meeting will be held today at 6:30 p.m. at the Double Tree Hotel, Sequoia Room, 555 W. Foothill Boulevard, to explain the rate process and to receive public input.

Written public comment by GSWC customers can be sent to the California Public Utilities Commission's Water Division at 505 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, 3rd Floor, Room 3102, or e-mailed to regulatoryaffairs@gswater.com.

For a full report on the water rationing plan, be sure to check out Saturday's issue of the COURIER.

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Water rates hearing

A note of correction for COURIER readers. In today's issue of the paper, one headline reads: "Hearing set for Saturday on water rate increases." The hearings are scheduled for Thursday, February 5 at 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. at the Hughes Center. (Reporters don't usually write the headlines and sometimes things get muddled.) We apologize for the mix up.

The city hopes to see plenty of residents show up for the 2 meetings. The more people speaking out, the bigger impression it will have on the PUC.

The following are some issues brought up by the city as to why the California Public Utilities Commission should not approve a proposed 37% water rate increase by Golden State Water Company over the next 3 years.

* The proposed overall rate increase is more than 35% higher than current rates.
* An overall rate increase is unreasonable in the current state of the economy, with people losing jobs, facing foreclosure and not being able to afford higher utility bills.
* The Wrightwood pipeline project being built in another town located far from Claremont. Because of the regionalized rate structure, citizens of Claremont will subsidize the pipeline project through their rates, but receive no benefit from it.
* GSWC is not establishing the required connection between the cost of the proposed conservation measures and the benefit/savings to local communities. Citizens care deeply about conservation, but want to see conservation measures implemented properly and effectively.
* Return on investment sought by GSWC is unreasonable in this economic climate. GSWC shouldn't be making a higher profit, when other businesses and citizens are merely trying to stay afloat.