(Please make sure you edit the last line, your name and email before you send
NOTE the graphs below will not copy when you “Select All”. You will need to pick each graph,
copy and paste
Also, if you have other relevant datapoints that should be included, please bring them to my
attention by emailing rkumar @ saratoga.ca.us}
May 30th 2017
Tariff Unit, Water Division, 3rd floor
Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco CA 94102
Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
This email refers to the acronyms SJWC, and SCVWD
SJWC = San Jose Water Company
SCVWD= Santa Clara Valley Water District, the water agency
SUBJECT: Deny SJWC's Letter 509, Application A.17.04-001, Letter 508(A)(B)
Dear PUC President Picker and Commissioners,
First, I thank the CPUC Commissioners and the PUC Water Department!
You have done the right thing by denying San Jose Water Company’s (San Jose) Advice
Letter (AL) No. 501, filed on January 9, 2017. We are a choiceless consumer but not
voiceless consumer. Please stand by us and reject the appeal by SJWC against the denial
of their letter 501 rate increase. If SJWC want to save their operation cost, like all of
their consumer are trying to save water, they should not waste the money hiring an
expensive law firm to represent them.
This letter goes through specific reasons why I am requesting CPUC to deny:
 SJWC Advice Letter 509
 SJWC's rate increase Application A.17.04-001
 SJWC surcharge reinstatement via Advice Letter 508, 508A, 508B
I am appalled that SJWC still seeks to increase our rates, add surcharge given the
financial windfall for SJWC in 2016 on the backs of a severe drought, and the
people of our community who went through a lot of personal stress due to super
high water bills.
We respectfully request that the PUC deny San Jose Water Company's request for a rate
increase and for a reinstatement of the surcharge for the following reasons:
Protest ground No 5: The relief requested in the advice letter requires consideration in
a formal hearing, or is otherwise inappropriate for the advice letter process
Protest ground No. 6 : The relief requested in the advice letter is unjust, unreasonable,
or discriminatory.
NOTE: As you read through this email, please make a mental note that some San Jose
Water customers have seen their 2016 water bill to be in the $2,500 to $4,000 range, in
spite of reducing their water consumption by ~50%. Simply stated, San Jose Water
Company has been blatantly gouging their customers in the name of drought and
increased their profits. Here is a petition that you should take a look
 Petition asking Santa Clara County to take action, condemn San Jose Water
Company http://tinyurl.com/CondemnedSJWC
Advice Letter 509: Request authorization to implement surcharges to offset increases in
purchased potable water, ground water production and purchased recycled water
charges from SCVWD and SBWR effective July 1, 2017. The requested offset surcharges
will result in a total increase of 3.46% in metered revenue,
Advice Letter 508/508A/508B, SJWC seeks to reinstate both of the surcharges; $0.08
per 100 cubic feet surcharge to recover the remaining $996,023 balance from the 2014
MCRAMA and $0.1441 per 100 cubic feet surcharge to recover the remaining
$2,232,698 balance from the 2015 WCMA.
LETTER 509: implement surcharges to offset increases in purchased potable water,
ground water production and purchased recycled water charges from SCVWD and SBWR
effective July 1, 2017
MY RESPONSE:
Why has it been directed by the Commission’s Water Division that the requested
offset rate change be added as separate surcharges and not in the base quantity rate.
Further, we request CPUC to consider capping annual rate increases with NOT to
EXCEED percentages. We are dismayed at this constant barrage of rate increases
that has become 2nd hand nature to San Jose Water company, given their huge
bounty last year in the name of drought. The relief requested in the advice letter
requires consideration in a formal hearing, and is inappropriate for the advice letter
process. We would like San Jose Water company to conduct a public hearing of these rate
increases and allow us the chance for discussion.
LETTER 508/508A/508B Regarding the reinstatement of surcharge. SJWC states this
with their filing“Upon the surcharge termination there was a remaining under collected
balance of $996,023 (Attachment C). This under-collection is due primarily to the fact
that actual sales are substantially lower than the Commission authorized sales estimate
used to calculate the surcharge amount.”
MY RESPONSE: There is a shortfall of $996,023? That is ridiculous!!! Per the annual
statement of SJWC, SJWC increased their profits 40% from 2015 to 2016. Their Q3 2016
income was $19M in comparison to Q3 2015 of $9.5M. The numbers tell us that there is
no shortfall, but a huge cash surplus. This is the reason why SJWC was reluctant to
remove the drought surcharge. (See the reference to Great Oaks and SJWC below in this
letter)
Why should we consumers be penalized yet again - this time for doing what we were
asked to do in saving on our water consumption? Why should we pay more because we
use less than SJW, in their incompetency, happened to forecast? Anyone could have
predicted that in a drought water consumption is going to drop. So my water
consumption dropped, I paid huge surcharge in penalties to SJWC all of 2016 and now
they want to raise the rates because I did not consume enough. This gets bizarre – hope
you see the convoluted logic in this. In Silicon Valley hi-tech, sales and planning
departments would be fired if they could not bring their manufacturing and sales
forecasts closer together than the 20% discrepancy described by SJW. Of course, in
industry, their customers would then turn to buy from competitors if that reason was
given for a price increase…. but we can’t while we live in the monopoly enjoyed by
SJWC. To me, this is a situation where SJW is trying to penalize customers for their own
incompetency in planning and executing their own water supply business.
Besides our water cost increase 74% since five years ago, our water price is even more
expensive than Las Vegas, the city in a middle of the desert, they have to pump water
thousand of miles from Utah.
Application A.17.04-001 SJWC is requesting an increase in authorized Cost of Capital
from the Jan 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020. This would be an effective rate increase of
2.1% in 2018
Scroll down below for the graph and use case of how much our water rates have gone
up. How many rate increases will we continue to see?
1 – SJWC believes Application A.17.04-001 is necessary for it to attract capital to fund
water system investments that allow the company to meet its obligations to safety and
reliably serve its customers
MY RESPONSE: The annual increases in San Jose Water Company rates from 2013 to
2016 averaged 20%, and San Jose Water Company customers cannot sustain such high
rate increases year after year. The year-to-year income growth from 2015 to 2016 was
40% - on the backs of a severe California drought and over-charging their customers in
the name of the drought. Why do they need more money now? Haven’t they done well
financially already? Where is the financial windfall being put to use? Not in capital
improvement projects? I am surprised! I am angry too!
Please refer to section below in this letter CASE STUDY: 350% increase since 2010
You have just approved a1.5% rate increase (Letter 506). I think that should be enough
for the year
2 – SJWC’s proposal Application A.17.04-001 will assist it in maintaining an investmentgrade rating thereby reducing the overall financing costs and contribute to SJWC’s
ability to provide safe, high quality, and reliable water service at reasonable rates
MY RESPONSE: SJWC’s 2015-Q3 to 2016-Q3 income went up from $9.5M to $19M. This
has caused lots of angst within our community. Isn’t SJWC planning to use this extra
cash for maintaining and investment?
The graph below demonstrates how a home owner reduced consumption by 30-50%
over the past 7 years HOWEVER SJWC rate has increased 350% in the same time period.
This is not justified, nor fair and I ask CPUC to step up and stop this blatant gouging of
the consumer
Lastly but not least, the payment of a $3,000,000 bonus to the CEO of San Jose Water is
an insult to the users and payers of San Jose water who were compelled to pay huge
increases in their water bills and at the same time reduce their water consumption. It is
just not fair. We the citizens served water by SJWC, are unfairly footing the bill for the
excesses.
I respectfully request that the PUC rejects both of San Jose Water Company's request
Sincerely,
- Your name
- Address
ADDENDUM Please also review addendum information below
SCVWD Jan 24th 2017 SCVWD board meeting
At the Jan 24th SCVWD Board meeting Tim Guster, Great Oaks Water General Counsel
(video link of this meeting: http://tinyurl.com/SCVWD2017 At 1:48:00) recommended
the Board to immediately rescind resolution calling for 20% water use reduction and
proposed a new resolution that declares conservation as a way of life. Tim also said that
based upon removal of the 20% mandate, Great Oaks would immediately request CPUC
to allow them to drop surcharges. They would file an advice letter that there is no
longer a 20% call and modify tariffs accordingly to immediately stop surcharge.
We did not hear a similar categorical statement from San Jose Water company. To
quote John Tang "CPUC would probably allow us to eliminate the surcharge if it was
voluntary, if we filed for it.” You can watch it here http://tinyurl.com/SCVWD2017 Time
01:18:32
SANJOSE WATER v/s GREAT OAKS
From Amalarasan, San Jose resident. we are an household of 3 and our
bimonthly water consumption is a mere 9 CCF, but our bill is $141.
A friend of mine, 6-7 miles away from home and is in City of San Jose, his
house is serviced by Great Oaks water company, For the same 9CCF, the Great
Oaks bill is $70
San Jose Water Company charges: $141
Great Oaks: $70
CASE STUDY: 350% increase since 2010
Here is sample data from Naresh Makhijani – who has emailed you separately
My family has done our part and have decreased our water usage 30-50% over the past
7 years HOWEVER, our rate has increased 350% in the same time period.
Scroll down for graph.