OCR Text |
Show Water rates complaints Dear Editor: An agreement between Vernal City and Naples Water Company dated 28 November 1961 states that Vernal will permit the perpetual use of its own water lines from the Ashley springs area through Vernal City to Naples so that Naples stockholders may be assured a supply of domestic water. With money acquired from the sale of water and from connection fees imposed im-posed on new water users, Vernal City must (1) operate and maintain the water system and make needed repairs and replacements to it (2) pay the principal and interest on general obligation bonds that were to be issued to improve and extend the water pipeline system (Vernal City should create a fund to defray the cost of such pipeline extensions to meet expanding needs) and (3) create and maintain all bond interest, redemption, reserve, and depreciation accounts required by the bond buyers. Only after the above obligations are met, may funds be used to pay for subscribed domestic and municipal water. All monies derived from the operation of the water system which are not used to meet the above obligations shall, to the extent necessary each year, be utilized to pay pro rata the subscription of Naples, Glines-Dayis, Ashley and Vernal City, for domestic and municipal water under the subscription contracts with the Uintah Water Conservancy district. "Vernal agrees, in consideration of Naples making its water and water rights available to Vernal, that its rates and its rules and regulations will at all times be just, fair, and reasonable, in regard to the service of water to the Naples area." Nowhere in the agreement between Vernal City and Naples Water Company Com-pany is permission given to Vernal City to use income from the sale of water and from new connection fees for purposes other than those described above. In 1961, Vernal doubled the water rate of the water users living outside the city of Vernal with the understanding un-derstanding that the mill levy imposed on Vernal City's residents would be increased to pay for water costs. Such a mill levy to defray water costs was never imposed. Hence, the water use rates for residents and non-residents of Vernal should be equal. The water use rates imposed by Vernal City on water users are escalated with increased water use. I consider that practice to be grossly unfair. Actually, the expenses of providing water to users probably decreases per gallon with increased usage. Thus, the water use rates probably ought to be de-escalated with increased use. According to the Vernal City Financial Statement for fiscal year 1977-1978 (1 July 1977 - 30 June 1978) published in the "Vernal Express" on 2 November 1978, the total operating expenses for the Water Works Department equaled $393,845 and the operating revenues for that department equaled $554,297. The difference in the total operating revenues and the total operating expenses is the operating income and it equaled $100,452. Non-operating Non-operating income equaled $11,266. Thus, total income equaled $171,718. That income was used to almost compensate for losses in the Sewer and Sewage Disposal Department ($36,005) and the Refuse Collection and Sanitary Landfill Department ($88,154) as well as to contribute to non-Water Works Department funds ($48,999) ana to pay an interest expense ($4,754). The Water Works Department income was short by $11,827 in being able to pay for all those expenses. Sewage and refuse collection services ser-vices are available only to Vernal City residents, some of whom are not even municipal water users. Thus, water users who are not residents of Vernal are subsidizing services from which they are excluded. That practice is obviously unjiifit. The Water Works Department income in-come of $171,7I!I is 43.0 percent of the total oi-rat inc. expenses. Hence, if revenues from the Water WorkH d i;irtrni'nl were only used within Hint department as they should be, water rates to water users could have been reduced by 43.6 percent. Within the Water Works Department, paid salaries and wages equaled $146,830 and employee benefits equaled $33,433. Those earnings seem exorbitantly exor-bitantly high for work done solely in the Water Works Department. Indeed, the city manager was allegedly paid out of Water Works Department funds for 37 weeks. Also, the cost of the special departmental supplies (45,882) should be examined as should the operating expenses in general. If, as is suspected, some of the operating expenses of the Water Works Department are actually expenses of other departments, those invalid expenses ought to be summed and divided by the total operating expense. The resulting quotient is the percentage of the Water Works Department operating expense that is invalid. After water use rates have been reduced to compensate for inappropriate doubling and for improper im-proper use of Water Works Department revenues, they should be further reduced by that percentage. Vernal City owns only about 40 percent of the water shares that it controls. In 1978, based on meter readings reviewed during an audit, only about one-third of the water entitled en-titled to the water users of the Naples area was indeed used in that area. Vernal City used the other two-thirds. Water use at the Vernal municipal swimming pool is not even metered and at least until recently was not metered at the Vernal municipal golf course. The water rate for Naples area water users should be decreased by two-thirds two-thirds to compensate for the use by Vernal City of water entitled to Naples area residents. I am a resident of the Naples area. Even assuming that an escalating rate fnr InproQcwt iico nf ic fair anH for increased use of water is fair and that there have been no invalid operating expenses in the Water Works Department since I began using domestic water on 1 January 1978, my water rates for January 1978 through June 1978 ought to be halved, then reduced by two-thirds, and then finally reduced by 43.6 percent. Until the financial statement for fiscal year 1978-1979 1978-1979 and fiscal year 1979-1980 are published, it will be assumed that the same inequities that existed in fiscal year 1977-1978 existed and exist in those fiscal years. Accordingly, I have been overcharged $653.59 by Vernal City and have overpaid tham $227.59 which should be credited to me along with enough interest on that amount to compensate for inflation during the period that the overpayment was made (approximately 12.0 percent). My total water bill should be further reduced if an escalating rate for increasing water use is deemed to be unfair and if there are invaled operating expenses in the Water Works Department. Water pressure at my residence is deplorably low. During most of the daylight hours of the summer, there is enough pressure only to weakly drive one sprinkler. Such a condition could have been obviated had Vernal City used water funds solely within the Water Works Department because those monies could have been used to upgrade the water system by such actions as installing water holding tanks in strategic sites of high ' elevation. A complaint very similar to this one has been issued to the Vernal City office. of-fice. Any other non-residents of Vernal who pay Vernal City for water use have a sound basis to make a complaint such as mine or to make a group complaint together with me. They may contact me by calling 789-3364. A. Gaylon Cook, Ph.D. |