Alto Utilities proposed water increase

[Vernon1]

I just received the notice with the Alto Utilities (private water system in east Winfield, Sherman Drive, etc) Sept 1st 2014 proposed water rates - a whopping 40% increase. The current rate is $44 a month and the proposed new rate is $61.50 to BRING IT INTO LINE WITH DOLC. Unfortunately the new Alto rate works out to $738 a year which is about 16% higher than DOLC rate of $635 a year. Rates increases from Alto are continuous and the charges have been steadily climbing over the last couple of years. Alto cites the increase in wages, hydro, insurance,fuel, property taxes and other products as the culprits for the Increases. It be nice if we all got a 40% wage increase to handle these other increases too, but I do not think it is going to happen.
Oh, and if you are on the fringe of the Alto system and were thinking of drilling a well, forget it. Alto wants to charge undeveloped lots (read non-users) a $369 annual rental fee for having the main run by your property.

Your comments on this increase can be sent to ;
Rick Couroux, Secretary to the Deputy Comptroller of Water Rights, PO Box 9340 STN PROV GOVT, Victoria BC V8W 9M1 before Oct 3, 2014

[kgcayenne]

Have you read the applicable sections of the....


Ohhhhh nevermind.

On an aside: Alto has better quality water than most of DOLC.

[2manyfords]

Sorry kgcayenne, but I have to disagree.

As a former resident of the Clearwater Subdivision (Cheryl Rd) the water quality was poor at best. It was extremely hard ( any chrome fixture was permanently etched) and often had a sulfur smell to it. My wife refused to drink the water. Not to mention it took a considerable amount of soap/detergent to make any suds.

So unless you had a wicked osmosis system/filters/water softener system, the water is at best, for irrigation purposes (although it still would plug up sprinkler heads with that "white crusty stuff".

That is aside from the whole water pressure problem up there which is well known.

[kgcayenne]

I can respect that response, the aesthetics are an important factor for many and for fixture repair/maintenance.

It is just not as important to me as is the elimination of the microbes and other grossness that can make people sick, that's all.

It would be interesting to see what happens to water rates if the District buys the utility in the future.

[2manyfords]

Yeah, I myself wasn't too concerned about esthetics ( I personally drank the water from the tap ) and I never worried about the quality as far as treatment was concerned, as there are standards that need to be met. After 12 years of living up there, I have had multiple water rate increases ( one significant, as far as i'm concerned ) with no change to the quality or the pressure of the water.

As it sits now, I currently reside on an acreage with my own well, and the water quality is significantly better without any treatment. If anything, the water is almost too "soft" (just a drop of soap will do ya!) and I don't pay for commodity/delivery, other than of course the power to run the pump.

It seems to me, Alto is increasing rates to play "catch-up" with their current inferior infrastructure,rather than use the increase to upgrade their system to meet the demand/standards of their customers.

But, alas, not an issue for me anymore.............

[knoet2007]

Rates increase for water, electricity, etc should be no more than the official rate of inflation by the bank of Canada
So that would be 2.11% anything more we should protest to.
http://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/relate ... alculator/
these are basic necessities of life and should be regulated.

[doghouse]

Rates increase for water, electricity, etc should be no more than the official rate of inflation by the bank of Canada
So that would be 2.11% anything more we should protest to.
http://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/relate ... alculator/
these are basic necessities of life and should be regulated.

anyone with concerns about this rate increase should send an email to

rick [email protected]

I did and rec'd an answer back within an hour. ALL letters will be read and discussed at their meeting. Send before Oct. 3

If you are a concerned customer this is a must

[fsbo]

Here is a copy of the rate increase application. There is also a spreadsheet (see jpeg) that shows how the money will be spent. The majority of the money will go to wages for the owner and the operator.

Some of the increases requested are completely unrealistic and the expenses are hard believe. Take note of the management fee he is requesting.

Re: Tariff Increase Application

Following you will find a document titled “Proposed Water Tariff No. 7” and a spreadsheet file supporting our tariff application. The comments within the worksheets provide the supporting rationale for the value of the entry. Additional information, where required, is below.
1. Changes to Tariff Document
We are proposing minor changes to the Tariff document itself which are self-explanatory. Where a change has been made, it has been indicated in bold. We have updated the Schedules with our proposed rate increases.

2. Tariff Changes
Our submission provides for a 40% increase in rates in the first year and modest increases in each successive year thereafter.
Late Payment Charge: The utility is proposing the amendment of the late payment structure from a flat rate charge of $10 to 2% per month. This is proposed for several reasons. Under the current rate structure, the $10 late payment charge amounts to a 3.9% interest rate for the initial invoice. Once the late payment charge is applied, there is little motivation for customers to pay promptly, at least until they are threatened with shut-off. And, as a utility, we are loathe to shut-off service for a number of reasons, not least of which is the risk of violence to our operator during such high conflict exchanges. In fact, we have had to, on a number of occasions, avail ourselves of the services of the RCMP to assist in these duties. Another reason for the alternative late payment structure is to allow the utility to benefit when customers carry small balances forward (usually under $100) for lengthy periods. The utility doesn't typically threaten service discontinuance when a small balance is carried forward. A monthly interest charge would encourage customers to pay off the balance of their account. Finally, some customers make monthly payments on their accounts. Again, in these situations, if a customer is making progress on their account, we typically do not discontinue service. Again, a monthly interest charge may encourage the customer to clear their account.

Auto: Between operating and managing the utility, we continue to travel a minimum of 20,000 km per year on utility business. Travel includes all travel associated with operating a small water system in a rural community. All professionals and supplies associated with the business are accessed in the nearest centre requiring over 100 km round trip travel for such things as submitting lab samples, meetings with engineers, the accountant, banking and trust fund management, picking up utility equipment, supplies and etc. The major travel however, is associated with the actual operation - daily checks in summer, flushing, maintenance calls, shut off / turn ons, and so on require frequent travel to and from the office to the well site and reservoirs. Often, business operations require two individuals travelling in separate vehicles, particularly for the monthly system flushing. At the current government rate of 0.52/km, the auto expense should reflect the actual cost of $10,400. It is inappropriate to expect operators or managers to subsidize the operation of the utility with inadequate mileage allotments or rates that are inconsistent with those reimbursed to BC government or municipal employees. If this figure is not approved, an explanation is expected with rationale and supporting comparable evidence.

Power: Power costs have substantially increased over the past number of years, in particular due to the restructure (two-stage rates) and increase in base rates. The increase proposed captures the increased costs and the substantial forecasted cost increases associated with the budget line. As one would expect, hydro costs are the most significant variable cost of our operation.

Management Fees: The utility has been budgeted on the basis of 1.5 days per week of management time, which continues to be appropriate. However, given the complexity of the organization and the risk associated with its operation, for which there is no other compensation, the rate has been adjusted to reflect the salary scale of a comparable position in the public sector (Job Code 183003 - Management - Strategic Leadership). The rate is established on the annual salary of $116,465.77 at 1.5 days per week plus a 20% premium for associated benefit costs. This salary is below comparable local municipal salaries which have a similar responsibility level.

Certified Operator: The utility has been budgeted on the basis of 2 days of support per week for the operations. This is insufficient for a utility of this age (over 40 years) and complexity. Between February and November, attendance on site is required almost daily, either through planned operation and maintenance activities or unplanned customer callouts. Often, these callouts require the attendance of two or more operators, particularly to meet Confined Space entry, working alone, violence in the workplace (e.g. collections) and other WorksafeBC regulations. The utility requires a minimum average of 24 hours per week to compensate for all scheduled and unscheduled activities that occur throughout the year. We continue to maintain the $150/month call-out charge to compensate for the requirement to be on-call 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.

The monthly rate proposed, $61.50 per month effective September 1, 2014, compares favourably with the local municipalities rates (currently $52.92 per month) which as you'd expect enjoy significantly greater economies of scale.
We look forward to moving this process forward.

[Meeko666]

To FSBO:
Can you please attach a link or a better picture of the j-peg you posted? I'm not able to view it clearly.

Also, I submitted a post prior to this one entitled "Increased Water Rates - Clearwater Subdivision" which has had no replies but feel it should be linked to this post. I was under the impression we could not post company names so didn't include it in the title.

Thanks in advance!!

[fsbo]

Here is a better jpeg. It will not let me upload the pdf. This is the max file size I can upload. Click on the image and it should become larger.

Please email your concerns.

You can get all the documents from alto by email, the email address is on the yellow notice paper.

[LTD]

I find it hard to believe they will be allowed to charge an annual fee for having there water main running near your property because your not hooked up good luck collecting that.