Thursday, June 13, 2013

PUC will investigate proposed rate increase by Columbia Water

LANCASTERONLINE
The state Public Utility Commission on Thursday voted to investigate a proposed 21.1 percent rate increase by Columbia Water Co.

Under Columbia Water's proposal, the annual bill for a typical metered residential customer using 48,000 gallons would rise $77.64, from $367.92 to $445.56.

Including the impact on the proposal on all classes of customers, Columbia Water would see its annual revenues grow by $773,210, or 19.2 percent.

With Thursday's action, Columbia Water's request is suspended for up to seven months while a PUC administrative law judge makes a recommended decision.

Columbia Water serves about 8,700 customers within Columbia and Mountville boroughs and West Hempfield, Manor, and Donegal townships, the PUC said.

MORE HERE:
http://lancasteronline.com/article/local/861001_PUC-will-investigate-proposed-rate-increase-by-Columbia-Water-Cp-.html

15 comments:

  1. yay. thank you for at least looking into it.......amen.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I find it interesting that they serve all these areas but are only looking to increase our bills here in Columbia. Maybe they thought we where dumb enough to just go along with it. Thank-you to all involved with getting this at least looked at.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope the request for increase is denied. It's outright crookery.

      Delete
  3. I for one believe a larger increase is in order. After all, those who own the water company are deserving of it. I plan to write a letter to the PUC demanding a larger increase. While I would like to do it today, I will have to wait until I am released from the institution where I am currently housed as I am not permitted to have sharp objects, such as a pen or pencil.

    ReplyDelete
  4. what a kick in the head....the columbia water co IS a PRIVATELY owned co that first STEALS THE LAND FOR ITS NEW PLANT OR UPGRADE......AND THEN TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY ASKS THE PUC TO INCREASE OUR WATER BILLS 21 % ???????? but oNLY in Columbia. REALLY. I CERTANLY HOPE SOMEONE IS PAYING ATTENTION. this is a blatant misuse of 1. stealing the land oh "eminent domain" and then charging us 21 % more for the upgrade. for Gods sake-THEY DIDN'T EVEN PAY FOR THE LAND......HOW IS THAT RIGHT???? and you people STILL think all is ok in the world

    ReplyDelete
  5. i agree. NO ONE should have the right to STEAL ANY LAND... EMINENT DOMAIN IS SO VERY WRONG ON OH SO MANY LEVELS...but the even harder pill to swallow is......IT DID INDEED HAPPEN. PERIOD. What gives the water co the right to steal land that does not belong to them? and where does it end? Boro watch out, the water co may want to steal the River Park next. then what?

    ReplyDelete
  6. You have to remember the Golden Rule, they who have the GOLD makes the RULE!! Flat out simple!! :O(

    ReplyDelete
  7. exactly. and soooo not right....at least the PUC is looking into this. I hope the PUC realizes that the water co STOLE THE LAND ! and now after stealing the land they want to raise our (Columbias) only rate 21 % ....PUC i hope you do the right thing here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AND lets not forget the Floridian who is trying to buy all Mr N's stock at Donegal insurance co.......you had mention of it here awhile back, i need to go find it and read it again.....wonder if someone is looking into that too.

    ReplyDelete
  9. its a good day when the PUC looks into rate increase request for 21%
    TOO BAD no one looked into STEALING THE LAND.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Did the mayor lutz know about this land taking?? I didnt see anything in the deeds recorded!

    ReplyDelete
  11. the columbia water co NOT the boro stole the land by eminent domain. the columbia water co is a PRIVATE OWNED CO. it has nothing to do with the Mayor.

    ReplyDelete
  12. hope the PUC also investigates the breach at the water tower a few months back...no security no nothing..weren't sure if water had been tampered with or tainted....can not believe with Homeland Security there are no requirements????
    can we send all these concerns to the PUC?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.