|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 19, 2014 13:17:31 GMT -5
At todays BOD Meeting, the new Budget Proposal has a increase in the water/sewer bill. It may go to $60 every 3 months, or $240 a year. The current Bill is $200 per year. BOD says water cost more now.... We need to ask for the New Budget Proposal, "Now". In the past they have tried to hand out the Budget Proposal at the Budget Meeting. That does not give members time to go over the Budget, and maybe Request Records for questionable expenses.
They seem now, to be taking steps to keep the Members further uninformed. Just my 2 cents..
|
|
|
|
Post by Alaska HEMI R/T Jm Admin. on Nov 19, 2014 14:03:59 GMT -5
At todays BOD Meeting, the new Budget Proposal has a increase in the water/sewer bill. It may go to $60 every 3 months, or $240 a year. The current Bill is $200 per year. BOD says water cost more now.... We need to ask for the New Budget Proposal, "Now". In the past they have tried to hand out the Budget Proposal at the Budget Meeting. That does not give members time to go over the Budget, and maybe Request Records for questionable expenses. They seem now, to be taking steps to keep the Members further uninformed. Just my 2 cents.. They are looking for any way to fund the illegal internet, and diversion is the only way to get it done. I wonder how much the County Dept. of Health is paying KCN to park their dish on the tower in the storage lot? That ought to cover the water increase if there is to be one.
The bod says water costs more now? PROVE IT. Instead of an increase, try cutting wasteful spending, bank card misuse and by getting rid of a few unnecessary employees. Then we could see a reduction, savings and an increase in our reserves.
We could also cut expenses from a doubled amount of Administrative expenses, since Mismanagement came into SLR and created most all of the problems we see today with legal fees, poorly executed jobs by substandard contractors and the over charges on changing already decided on contract bid/s.
Good management should always first look to find cost cutting measures but we all are aware how inept this manbod is, how lazy they are and that as long as most tend to ignore what needs to be done manbod will continue to waste all of our moneys and keep demanding more w/o proof of necessity when all attempts to be conservative have failed.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Nov 19, 2014 17:38:37 GMT -5
I have a question... Is SLohA's water system a regulated utility within the jurisdiction of the Florida Public Service Commission. If so, they must file a formal request with the FPSC in order to increase water rates. Such a request must provide detailed information on the current operating costs, as well as the operating deficit that justifies the rate increase. A call to the FPSC may be in order.
I'm still stuck in Wisconsin trying to deal with the legal issues regarding the failing septic system in my mobile home park up here, which the owners have used as justification for closing the park and kicking us all out. I've hired an attorney to represent me and my neighbors. But I may have to hang around for court appearances.
...And, Dang, it's getting mighty cold up here!
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Nov 19, 2014 23:04:29 GMT -5
jimherbst said:
The answer is NO
FL Public Service Commission REGULATES:
Investor-owned water and wastewater companies
Rates and charges
Meter and billing accuracy
Certification and territory amendments
Quality of service
PSC DOES NOT REGULATE:
Municipally owned and county-owned water and wastewater utilities
Water treatment companies
Taxes on the water and wastewater bill
Damage claims
Water clarity or pressure
Bulk sales of water or wastewater treatment
Water lines beyond the point of connection
S-bag is private operator and not regulated by the FPSC. This is why it cannot charge rates based on metering (or overuse charges). To do so would subject it to the regulatory oversight of PSC.
As a private drinking water and wastewater treatment facility, SLohA is billed as a bulk entity. It passes along the drinking water/wastewater cost as a flat fee separately. It is billed with the assessment but is NOT part of the SLohA common expenses (so must be separately stated). The separate fee that owners pay is for WATER and SEWER usage-theoretically, it does not include any other costs of the operation which are common expenses of contract services, maintenance and contributions to the reserve account and paid from the "$425 part" of the fee.
Owners need to make an Official records Request for the invoices since 4/1/2014 to date to see how much has been billed to SLohA for water & sewer. Owners need to validate that the cost of the water and and wastewater treatment has increased. There will be a letter on file notifying the bulk customer (SLohA) that rates will increase "effective ___".
The Income Budget for W & S this fiscal year is $157,400 (787 parcels X $200/yr). As of 9/30/2014: The following has been spent:
Water 18,295.07
Sewer 19,371.37________37,666.44
Curiously, the Budget only projects a total expense of $28,200 for water and $27,800 for sewer, which begs the question "Why is $157,400 being collected from assessments?" The answer is unknown because owners are not permitted to know any understandable details about operating costs and financial status.
MANBOD: "What costs are expensed from the assessment collected specifically for W & S and, what line items have allocations from that collection?"
An owner has requested descriptions of the line items in the budget from the Board and this information is "due out" very soon--well before the December budget meeting. Presumably, it will answer this, and other, questions.
Owners are reasonably hypervigilant for a proposed budget which includes payment for "telecommunications services" which will not be disclosed per se. The Board President stated last December that "they do not need Owners agreement" to assess this charge. That is not true--such a charge would be against SLohA governing documents and the law. But "letting the chips fall" is the modus operandi of this group--i.e. to do what it wants, either omit information or issue BS reasons and dare the owners to do anything about it.
|
|
GTO
Addict
Life is Tough ! It's even tougher when you're stupid ! Jhn Wayne J ohn Wayne
Posts: 198
|
Post by GTO on Nov 20, 2014 0:52:50 GMT -5
So many unknowns, sure does make one wonder. Simply put, I have Lost Trust in SLohA's Leaders. Maybe one day they will prove me wrong. Our leaders track record on doing the right thing, is poor.
I also thought all of the monies spent in the last couple of years on fixing water/sewer leaks, our water usage would be less.
Plus we must have a mile or more, of irrigation pipes and sprinkler heads. How much water is being consumed to irrigate SLohA's landscape. I would say, way to much, and enough with the Beautification.
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Nov 20, 2014 6:51:39 GMT -5
gto said:
Agree. Someday, all this infrastructure to support irrigation to grass and plants will go fallow; the cost of watering will become prohibitive. Before "stupid management" sees the light, owners will experience increased assessments for water. Just one more reason to get rid of this inept and shortsighted leadership.
I witnessed "the future" in California, where I have traveled the entire state for over a decade and saw the ravages of dwindling water supply. Cost of water for entire campground where I worked was $800/mo 10 years ago--today it is over $5000/mo! This last summer, I was asked to do a detailed sweep of the sites and remove extraneous outdoor water hoses, container plants and repair leaks at faucets or RV connections. City was at near-panic water shortage monitoring and giving out $500 fines--no warnings. A once full, thriving river down rich with salmon and bass reduced to a stagnant, stinking trickle in some places.
This is the future for S-bag Lake and its aquatic inhabitants if groundwater use continues to be increased for mindless eye candy with no thought to conservation.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Nov 20, 2014 12:05:27 GMT -5
Oh well...
I guess Florida and Wisconsin laws are different in this instance. My suggestion stems from my own experience when Onalaska, Wis. sought permission from the WPSC to increase its municipal water rates in order to cover the debt service on our new reservoir.
Going back to SLohA's situation, however, I too find it difficult to understand what justifies a 20% increase in our water rates. If it is to cover increases in annual operating costs, did our Elctc bills for the pumps increase by that much? Did we increase the number of SLohA staff responsible for maintaining our water system? On the othe hand, if the proposed increase in our water rate is because we anticipate a major repair/replacement of our equipment, what specifically needs to be replaced or repaired?
$31,480/year at 4% interest on a 10 year note comes to $378,000. That's a pretty sizable repair/replacement project.
In either case, the Board needs to explain the purpose for the proposed 20% increase in our water rate. That increase may, indeed, be necessary but it should be justified with more detail on specifically where the money would be going.
Back home, people are up in arms when the local power company even proposes a 5% increase in Elctc rates. A proposal for a 20% increase deserves close scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Nov 22, 2014 9:12:55 GMT -5
Here is an excerpt I found referencing the law which permits private systems, such as SLohA, to be exempt fron FPSC regulation. I am just beginning to learn about the existence of private contracts between private and municipalities/counties regulating the provision of these services to "governmental authorities" such as SLohA.
The current concern is, of course, to validate and understand the claim of "20% increased costs" to cover this service which supports an increase in the assessment fee.
Per CHUG, the following is the regulator/oversight of SLohA water/wastewater system:
S-bag LAKE RESORT
499 S-bag LAKE ROAD
LAKE WALES, FL 33853
Public Water System ID: 6531572
County: POLK
DEP Regulatory Office: Polk County Health Dept
1290 Golfview Ave. 4th Floor
Bartow, FL 33830
863-519-8330x1153
Public Water System Type : COMMUNITY
Public Water System Source : GROUND
Primary Use: SUBDIVISION
Population Served: 300
|
|
