This past year was one in which the Town Council considered several significant and controversial issues including a challenge on behalf of citizens to new water rates approved by the Arizona Corporation Commission.
In June the ACC approved an increase of approximately 18 percent for CCWC customers, which for average residential water users means a monthly hike of around $6.75.
The ACC approval came after hearings on a request from CCWC and its parent company, EPCOR, for an increase of about 35 percent.
You must be a member to read this story.
Join our family of readers starting at $5 for your first month and support local, unbiased journalism.
Click here to see your options for becoming a subscriber.
Register to comment
Click here create a free account for posting comments.
Note that free accounts do not include access to premium content on this site.
I am anchor
Town Council 2014 in review
Posted
This past year was one in which the Town Council considered several significant and controversial issues including a challenge on behalf of citizens to new water rates approved by the Arizona Corporation Commission.
In June the ACC approved an increase of approximately 18 percent for CCWC customers, which for average residential water users means a monthly hike of around $6.75.
The ACC approval came after hearings on a request from CCWC and its parent company, EPCOR, for an increase of about 35 percent.
A number of water customers in Fountain Hills were finding what appeared to be unexplained increases in their water usage and bills that arrived after the new rates took effect on July 1.
Their complaints took over Facebook, Town Council meetings and The Times letters page.
Also, there were some things about the rate plan that the state’s Residential Utility Consumer Office (RUCO) did not like, in particular a System Infrastructure Benefit plan (SIB).
RUCO says the plan approved by the ACC has the potential to double the just approved water rates over a five-year period -- without application or hearings by the ACC for a new rate.
RUCO also expressed concerns over the ACC apparent disregard of the recommendations of RUCO, its own staff and the administrative law judge assigned to hear the case.
As a result, RUCO has challenged the ACC’s use of the SIB for CCWC as well as other recent cases. As the year draws to a close there is no court decision yet that might impact CCWC customer water rates.
In one of the last actions taken by the council this year, and also before it transitioned with its newest members, a new environmental fee was approved on a split 4-3 vote.
The new fee will cost property owners in the town $3 per month to be billed twice each year. The fee is expected to raise about $400,000 per year to pay the costs to the town of complying with federal and state water quality regulations.
Mayor Linda Kavanagh, Councilman Henry Leger and Vice Mayor Cecil Yates opposed the proposal, although both Leger and Yates agreed something was needed to raise the revenue, they were just uncomfortable with the plan.
Councilmembers Dennis Brown, Cassie Hansen, Ginny Dickey and Tait Elkie supported the fee.
The fee should be implemented sometime during 2015.
The council also heard from the medical marijuana dispensary in Fountain Hills early in the year.
Dispensary operator Mark Steinmetz asked to expand the hours of his Nature’s AZ Medicines.
He had been restricted by the town to operating between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. He asked for hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. seven days a week.
The council eventually granted extended hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Steinmetz was back again asking for an extension in October, but staff rejected his application saying he needed to wait at least a year before applying again.
In November the council spent two meetings discussing an item that never made it to its agenda.
On Nov. 6, a group of citizens used the council’s “call to the public” forum to request the council place on a future agenda and consider an ordinance or resolution specifying a town non-discrimination position with regard to lesbian, gay and transgender individuals.
At that meeting the council agreed on a 5-2 vote to bring back a resolution or statement of policy, but no ordinance, regarding the issue. Consideration for that was scheduled for the council’s Nov. 20 session.
Prior to that meeting, however, the item was removed from consideration. There was some debate as to whether even Councilwoman Ginny Dickey, who was championing the proposal, wanted it back as quickly as the next meeting. Some felt that was too quick to properly address the issue.
However, at the Nov. 20 meeting there was a large group that spoke in strong opposition to the proposal.
The controversy over the issue was “very overblown,” according to Councilman Tait Elkie. He added that he believes the issue had been co-opted for political purposes.
As of the close of 2014 there has been no formal council action on the issue.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here