View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

Valencia Water customers spout anger at rate increase

Some say they received protest notice on day of deadline

Posted: March 5, 2013 2:00 a.m.
Updated: March 5, 2013 2:00 a.m.
 

News of 20 percent hike in water rates over the next three years upset some Valencia Water Company ratepayers recently, but not as much as having missed the chance to file a formal complaint, according ratepayers who contacted The Signal.

The date offered by the water retailer to its ratepayers wanting to file a formal complaint was Feb. 4, according to copies of the rate notice.

Two ratepayers told The Signal they received their notice in the mail on Feb. 4 — too late to actually file a complaint,

“I can’t imagine it being fair to give consumers that little notice to complain,” Valencia resident and ratepayer Marina Vitek told The Signal Monday.

“What bothers me is that my invoice was dated January 30, I didn’t receive it until Monday, February 4, I didn’t open it until February 7 (after all, I knew it was ‘just’ my bill) and then I find this notice included which had a deadline of February 4, 2013, to file any formal protest to the application for rate increases,” Vitek said in an email she sent to The Signal.

“How can they mail something out on January 30 with a deadline five days later to object? If they were required to give notice of the application for rate increases, I can’t believe they were permitted to give only five days’ notice. This can’t comply with the regulations.”

Actually, it does comply with regulations set out by the California Public Utilities Commission, according to Keith Abercrombie, general manager of the Valencia Water Company.

Commission guidelines

The water rate notices were mailed in accordance with CPUC requirements, Abercrombie said Monday.

“The process we use when we file our applications is a process spelled out by the commission,” he said.

“No notice was sent out late,” he said. “I see what they (ratepayers) are saying, though.”

There are two ways, he said, to protest a proposed rate hike: One is to file a formal protest in which protesters agree — often with legal representation — to join in the ongoing CPUC meetings set to discuss the rate hikes. The second is to file an informal protest by writing a letter to the commission.

Valencia resident and ratepayer David Kirkham — who also said he received notice of the Feb. 4 protest date on Feb. 4 — compared the informal letter-writing protest to putting a complaint in a complaint box.

“They’re proposing a huge water increase and they sent out a notification,” he said. “I received it the day of the (indicated) deadline to protest.

“They are continuing to increase water rates but send me no information as to why. They don’t about talk about expenses. They only give you a point of view.”

Kirkham said he called the CPUC twice.

“Their response was, ‘You can send an email.’ Well, that’s like telling me to file it in the complaint box — which is worthless. It is a joke.”

Chance to fight

Any Valencia Water Co. ratepayer still has a chance to fight the proposed rate hike, Abercrombie said.

“Whether it’s one letter or a thousand letters, the commission uses those in reviewing the (rate hike) proposal,” he said.

The commission, in keeping with its protocol, is expected to call a public hearing on the topic before any decision is made, he added.

No date for a public hearing has been set.

And, as for concerns that the recent purchase of the Valencia Water Company by the Castaic Lake Water Agency is somehow tied to the rate hike proposal, those concerns are baseless, Abercrombie said.

He said it takes his staff months to prepare boxes of documents supporting any rate hike proposal; it is not something that could be turned around in a couple of months.

“It’s a complicated and laborious effort to create the support for a proposal,” said Abercrombie. “It’s not something that can be prepared in a month or two.”

jholt@signalscv.com

661-287-5527

On Twitter

@jamesarthurholt

Mar. 5, 2013 02:00a.m. EST Valencia Water customers spout anger at rate increase The Signal

News of 20 percent hike in water rates over the next three years upset some Valencia Water Company ratepayers recently, but not as much as having missed the chance to file a formal complaint, according ratepayers who contacted The Signal.

The date offered by the water retailer to its ratepayers wanting to file a formal complaint was Feb. 4, according to copies of the rate notice.

Two ratepayers told The Signal they received their notice in the mail on Feb. 4 — too late to actually file a complaint,

“I can’t imagine it being fair to give consumers that little notice to complain,” Valencia resident and ratepayer Marina Vitek told The Signal Monday.

“What bothers me is that my invoice was dated January 30, I didn’t receive it until Monday, February 4, I didn’t open it until February 7 (after all, I knew it was ‘just’ my bill) and then I find this notice included which had a deadline of February 4, 2013, to file any formal protest to the application for rate increases,” Vitek said in an email she sent to The Signal.

“How can they mail something out on January 30 with a deadline five days later to object? If they were required to give notice of the application for rate increases, I can’t believe they were permitted to give only five days’ notice. This can’t comply with the regulations.”

Actually, it does comply with regulations set out by the California Public Utilities Commission, according to Keith Abercrombie, general manager of the Valencia Water Company.

Commission guidelines

The water rate notices were mailed in accordance with CPUC requirements, Abercrombie said Monday.

“The process we use when we file our applications is a process spelled out by the commission,” he said.

“No notice was sent out late,” he said. “I see what they (ratepayers) are saying, though.”

There are two ways, he said, to protest a proposed rate hike: One is to file a formal protest in which protesters agree — often with legal representation — to join in the ongoing CPUC meetings set to discuss the rate hikes. The second is to file an informal protest by writing a letter to the commission.

Valencia resident and ratepayer David Kirkham — who also said he received notice of the Feb. 4 protest date on Feb. 4 — compared the informal letter-writing protest to putting a complaint in a complaint box.

“They’re proposing a huge water increase and they sent out a notification,” he said. “I received it the day of the (indicated) deadline to protest.

“They are continuing to increase water rates but send me no information as to why. They don’t about talk about expenses. They only give you a point of view.”

Kirkham said he called the CPUC twice.

“Their response was, ‘You can send an email.’ Well, that’s like telling me to file it in the complaint box — which is worthless. It is a joke.”

Chance to fight

Any Valencia Water Co. ratepayer still has a chance to fight the proposed rate hike, Abercrombie said.

“Whether it’s one letter or a thousand letters, the commission uses those in reviewing the (rate hike) proposal,” he said.

The commission, in keeping with its protocol, is expected to call a public hearing on the topic before any decision is made, he added.

No date for a public hearing has been set.

And, as for concerns that the recent purchase of the Valencia Water Company by the Castaic Lake Water Agency is somehow tied to the rate hike proposal, those concerns are baseless, Abercrombie said.

He said it takes his staff months to prepare boxes of documents supporting any rate hike proposal; it is not something that could be turned around in a couple of months.

“It’s a complicated and laborious effort to create the support for a proposal,” said Abercrombie. “It’s not something that can be prepared in a month or two.”

jholt@signalscv.com

661-287-5527

On Twitter

@jamesarthurholt

Copyright 2011 MorrisMultimedia . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

Comments

lars: Posted: March 5, 2013 10:40 a.m.

Valencia Water company was an efficiently run company. They were bought out by Castaic lake Water Agency. CWLA bought and owns Santa clarita water company, an inefficiently run company with poor customer service. So bad that they had to have an armed guard at their facility to ward off angry customers.

CWLA spend alot of money for santa clarita water, and raised their rates after the purchase. Now, after buying valencia water company, they need to recover the money, by raising rates in a underhanded manner. They mailed out notices one day before the protest day. POOR CUSTOMER SERVICE.

CWLA also needs to expand to provide water for Newhall Land and Farms new development off the 126. This also requires more money.

Whether you like it or not your rates will go up, doing anything with bought
off the cpuc is a joke. If you really want to send a message, please vote off any incumbant from the overly bloated 11 member water board of directors, or any other public seat they may be running for.

tom campbell
gary martin
william pecsi
william cooper
rj kelly
peter kavounas
jacque mcmillan
ed colley
jerry gladbach
dean efstathiou
bj atkins


BBennetts: Posted: March 5, 2013 11:27 a.m.

While it may be legal, that does not make it right. VWC basically sent out notices intentionally not allowing people the chance to file a protest. Shame on them, shame on Keith Abercrombie.


src: Posted: March 5, 2013 11:28 a.m.

Perhaps they could get their "S" together and start doing online billing. Efficient, my a$$. Their customer service is a joke as well.


legalcitizen: Posted: March 5, 2013 1:42 p.m.

src is obviously uninformed, I have been getting online bills for years. I have never had a problem with their customer service.


castaicjack: Posted: March 5, 2013 2:56 p.m.

I suspect the comment from lars regarding an expansion of CWLA for service to the Newhall Ranch mega-project off the 126 is likely a significant factor in the rate hike. They're preaparing for it and we're paying for it...


hoodoo: Posted: March 5, 2013 3:41 p.m.

Water is gold in California, does anyone really expect their rates to stay the same for 20+ years?


Bdeezine: Posted: March 5, 2013 4:10 p.m.

20% hike is HUGE!!! What a ripoff. No wonder they sent out the complaint forms too late. Interesting as we all struggle to get by and wages get reduced, these lying crooks want to hike the water rate by 20%. Between this and increased food costs, insurance and wall-to-wall taxes, just suck us dry already so we can start a decent violent overthrow.


waterguy: Posted: March 6, 2013 12:59 p.m.

What a shame so many are ill informed about the happenings in their community. Instead of criticizing you should check your facts before you make comments you know nothing about. Last I checked your water bill is the cheapest utility you pay. Don't forget that it's the one utility you can't live without which makes it a precious commodity that is worth every penny you all pay. Try going to LA and see what they pay for their water. All I'm saying is check your facts before you spew your propaganda BS about the big bad water companies.


CastaicClay: Posted: March 6, 2013 1:10 p.m.

Any company would plan to raise prices in the future. That is part of business.
I would like to see some dates and rates on the *boxes of documents supporting any rate hike proposal*


Bdeezine: Posted: March 6, 2013 2:39 p.m.

How interesting. The guy on here calling us ill informed has the name "waterguy." Dismissed.


CastaicClay: Posted: March 6, 2013 3:42 p.m.

If the company is profitable now why do they have to raise their prices? Because everyone else is charging more and getting away with it?

Everyone is tightening their belts, yet they are loosening theirs. Isn't Capitalism a two way street?

The current supply meets the current demand. Don't charge current users for additional future supply and demand.
Prorate any new development (Newhall Ranch, etc.) bills to reflect the cost of the additional supply and demand you are choosing to take on. Existing rate payers should not be paying for new and additional infrastructure for a for profit company. Expand your bottom line on your own dime.


chefgirl358: Posted: March 6, 2013 3:52 p.m.

Bdeezine, I agree with you about 20% being a HUGE hike, especially with all the other crap we have to pay for in taxes, etc. What blows me away though, is that enough people in this state voted to INCREASE our taxes via Gov Brown's stupid initiative. What the frappuccino possessed these nimrods to make all of us pay MORE in taxes for these stupid projects (bullet train to a grape field in the central valley, etc.)???

Waterguy...really? You really expect anyone to believe you have an unbiased or educated opinion when you go by the name waterguy? You immediately create skepticism for anything you say because one can only assume you work for the water company or something to that effect and have skewed priorities which are not in favor of the ratepayer. Comparing anything to LA is as poor an analogy as there could possibly be. Why don't you use a comparison to a well run city that has it's own utilities, such as Burbank? What does Burbank pay for their water? What does any well run city (obviously that takes L.A. out of the equation) pay for their water?


Bdeezine: Posted: March 6, 2013 4:11 p.m.

Chefgirl: What's even more ridiculous is this deception that we are in control (i.e. the vote on the tax increase). Meanwhile, the legislature "quietly" approved a 3 1/2 cent gasoline tax increase last Thursday. And they will continue to spend their days inventing new and different ways to extract more money from working people.


chefgirl358: Posted: March 6, 2013 5:38 p.m.

Bdeezine...Yes! So true. How come it's always just CA? Like we are the only ones who pay way more for gas because we have to make the "summer blend" and the "winter blend". We are like the freakin Jamba Juice of gasoline. Why can't we have the same gas the rest of the US has and their prices?


Bdeezine: Posted: March 6, 2013 6:41 p.m.

The state's "justification" for the gas tax increase is because after all these years of telling us to conserve gasoline, we ARE conserving. Now they say since volume is down, so is their revenue. How does the common person stand a chance with this kind of logic?



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...