My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/19/1977 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1977
>
10/19/1977 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:41 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 9:05:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/19/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED FURTHER THAT TESTS WERE DONE WHICH <br />SHOWED THAT THE WATER DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STATE STANDARDS. HE <br />CONTINUED THAT THE TESTIMONY HE REVIEWED SHOWED THAT THERE HAD BEEN <br />NO ATTEMPT TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF THE WATER NOR ANY SPECIFIC <br />INDICATION THAT ANYTHING WILL BE DONE. CHAIRMAN WODTKE POINTED OUT <br />THAT MR. FOX TESTIFIED AS TO THE PLANT AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND <br />AS TO THE QUALITY OF WATER IN THIS AREA, BUT ADMITTED THAT HE HAS <br />NOT PERSONALLY MADE ANY TESTS TO BACKUP HIS EXPERT TESTIMONY. <br />CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED IN PARTICULAR THE GREAT NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS <br />MADE BY THE RESIDENTS WITHIN THE FRANCHISE AREA AND STATED THAT HE <br />WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM APPROVING THE RATE INCREASE BASED ON WHAT WAS <br />PRESENTED. <br />COMMISSIONER LAY CONCURRED WITH THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENTS <br />AND ALSO SAID SHE DID NOT BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IN ANY WAY INDICATED <br />ANY PROPOSAL TO UPGRADE THE SYSTEM OR PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE. COM- <br />MISSIONER LOY FURTHER NOTED IT WAS INTERESTING TO COMPARE THE TESTIMONY <br />MARKED `EXHIBIT 2 - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RATE CASE" WITH THE RATE CASE <br />PRESENTED IN 1972 AND SEE THAT THE FORMAT HAS BEEN CHANGED CONSIDERABLY. <br />NOWHERE IN THE NEW MATERIAL DOES IT INDICATE THE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS <br />OR THE GALLONAGE THEY ARE USING OR PROVIDE IN ANY WAY AN OPPORTUNITY <br />TO FIGURE OUT APPROXIMATELY WHAT THE RATE INCREASE WOULD MEAN TO THE <br />CUSTOMER, THOUGH ALL KINDS OF INFORMATION WAS SUPPLIED AS TO EXACTLY <br />WHAT IT WOULD MEAN TO THE COMPANY. COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT SUCH <br />A BREAKDOWN IN REGARD TO THE CUSTOMERS WAS SUPPLIED AT THE HEARING IN <br />1972 AND ASSISTED THE BOARD IN THEIR DETERMINATION IN MAKING AN INCREASE <br />AT THAT TIME. COMMISSIONER LOY STATED THAT SHE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO <br />SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR A RATE INCREASE BASED.ON THE TESTIMONY PRE- <br />SENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER STATED THAT HE CONCURRED WITH WHAT <br />HAS BEEN SAID BY THE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER LAY, AND HE FURTHER <br />POINTED OUT THAT THE COMPANY SAID THEY WERE NOT KNOWLEDGEABLE OF THE <br />COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE WATER SYSTEM. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER SAID HE DID <br />NOT SEE HOW THEY COULD DENY THIS KNOWLEDGE SINCE ALL THESE COMPLAINTS <br />WERE REGISTERED AT THE PREVIOUS RATE HEARING AND THERE WAS NO WAY FOR <br />THEM NOT TO KNOW ABOUT THEM. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER CONTINUED THAT HE <br />49 <br />0Cl 19 1977 . • <br />80% 31 wil-as <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.