SUBHEAD: Charging users of standard meters extra for readings they never had to pay for before.
By Larry Arruda on 1 December 2013 in the Garden Island -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-for-sunday-dec/article_4bf2e58e-5a4a-11e3-953c-0019bb2963f4.html)
Image above: Truly an ugly business. From (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Utility_pole_transformers.jpg).
KIUC wants to impose a fee on those 3,000 members that chose to opt out of the smart meter program. The board claims that it costs the membership $340,000 per year to now read the meters of those 3,000 members. They are calling it an “extra cost.”
That is a very deceitful term being used by the board, and by the writers for The Garden Island newspaper.
The cost to read the meters has always been included in the price we pay for our electricity. Therefore, the cost to read fewer meters is not an extra cost. Now that they have found a way to allegedly save some of that cost, it is arrogant and deceptive to try to make 3,000 co-op members pay for reading their meters again.
We already pay for it in our outrageous electrical rates. I don’t believe anyone has seen a decrease in their rates after the installation of the 27,000 smart meters. In fact, I would suggest, rather than make the 3,000 members pay “extra” for reading their old style meters, why not give a “discount” to those that allowed KIUC to install the “smart” meters on their homes and businesses.
Now that would be fair.
$63,000 to have an election to let 30,000 members vote on whether or not the $340,000 annual cost is to be shared equally amongst all 30,000 members or to be paid for entirely by just the 3,000 members. Now, doesn’t that seem a little unfair? Is that not a “vote by the majority to impose a burden on the minority?” Unconstitutional?
By the way, why didn’t we have an election to decide on whether we should spend $11 million on a “smart meter” program to begin with?
Perhaps a good business plan would have been to first explain and demonstrate the advantages of the smart meter and then offering the membership the option of accepting the installation of a smart meter, in return for a discount on their electric rates, rather than offering the option to decline.
In closing, I must once again ask, what happened to the $3.4 million per year that it was costing KIUC to read the old meters ?
SUBHEAD: This is a letter I am preparing for KIUC regarding charges for reading the meter on my house.
By Juan Wilson on 1 December 2013 in Island Breath -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-for-sunday-dec/article_4bf2e58e-5a4a-11e3-953c-0019bb2963f4.html)
Aloha KIUC Customer Service;
I have been told my next KIUC bill will include a charge of $10.27 for a "Non-Standard Meter Monthly Charge". You stated to the Hawaii PUC that the cost of a non-standard meter reading. I urged KIUC not to move to Smart Meters and chose not to have a Smart Meter installed on my house. I will not pay that portion of my future KIUC bills.
One reasonable alternative might be that I read the meter myself every month and send you the information (on a form of your choosing - like HECO has done). You can come once a year to verify the meter reading and charge me $10.27.
There is another alternative.
A little research indicates that it cost on average about $350 to buy and install one Smart Meter. As I understand it, without a vote by your co-op members, you spent $11million (with 30,000 meters that would be $366 per installed meter). To me that indicates KIUC is $366 ahead on costs generated by my not having a Smart Meter.
My alternative to reading the meter myself is this:
When I get a bill with a $10.27 "Non-Standard Meter Monthly Charge" I will do the following.
I will deduct the $10.27 charge from the approximately $366 KIUC saved by not providing me with a meter and not having to install it. I intend to deduct that charge from my bill until $366 "credit" exhausted. That will approximately 36 months from now.
When that $366 balance is exhausted I request that KIUC shut off power to my residence.
When the power is shut off I insist that KIUC remove its meter from my home as well as the transmission cable attached to the house.
Mahalo for your time and attention to this matter.
See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: KIUC Special Public Meeting 12/2/13
.
By Larry Arruda on 1 December 2013 in the Garden Island -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-for-sunday-dec/article_4bf2e58e-5a4a-11e3-953c-0019bb2963f4.html)
Image above: Truly an ugly business. From (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Utility_pole_transformers.jpg).
KIUC wants to impose a fee on those 3,000 members that chose to opt out of the smart meter program. The board claims that it costs the membership $340,000 per year to now read the meters of those 3,000 members. They are calling it an “extra cost.”
That is a very deceitful term being used by the board, and by the writers for The Garden Island newspaper.
The cost to read the meters has always been included in the price we pay for our electricity. Therefore, the cost to read fewer meters is not an extra cost. Now that they have found a way to allegedly save some of that cost, it is arrogant and deceptive to try to make 3,000 co-op members pay for reading their meters again.
We already pay for it in our outrageous electrical rates. I don’t believe anyone has seen a decrease in their rates after the installation of the 27,000 smart meters. In fact, I would suggest, rather than make the 3,000 members pay “extra” for reading their old style meters, why not give a “discount” to those that allowed KIUC to install the “smart” meters on their homes and businesses.
Now that would be fair.
$63,000 to have an election to let 30,000 members vote on whether or not the $340,000 annual cost is to be shared equally amongst all 30,000 members or to be paid for entirely by just the 3,000 members. Now, doesn’t that seem a little unfair? Is that not a “vote by the majority to impose a burden on the minority?” Unconstitutional?
By the way, why didn’t we have an election to decide on whether we should spend $11 million on a “smart meter” program to begin with?
Perhaps a good business plan would have been to first explain and demonstrate the advantages of the smart meter and then offering the membership the option of accepting the installation of a smart meter, in return for a discount on their electric rates, rather than offering the option to decline.
In closing, I must once again ask, what happened to the $3.4 million per year that it was costing KIUC to read the old meters ?
SUBHEAD: This is a letter I am preparing for KIUC regarding charges for reading the meter on my house.
By Juan Wilson on 1 December 2013 in Island Breath -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-for-sunday-dec/article_4bf2e58e-5a4a-11e3-953c-0019bb2963f4.html)
Aloha KIUC Customer Service;
I have been told my next KIUC bill will include a charge of $10.27 for a "Non-Standard Meter Monthly Charge". You stated to the Hawaii PUC that the cost of a non-standard meter reading. I urged KIUC not to move to Smart Meters and chose not to have a Smart Meter installed on my house. I will not pay that portion of my future KIUC bills.
One reasonable alternative might be that I read the meter myself every month and send you the information (on a form of your choosing - like HECO has done). You can come once a year to verify the meter reading and charge me $10.27.
There is another alternative.
A little research indicates that it cost on average about $350 to buy and install one Smart Meter. As I understand it, without a vote by your co-op members, you spent $11million (with 30,000 meters that would be $366 per installed meter). To me that indicates KIUC is $366 ahead on costs generated by my not having a Smart Meter.
My alternative to reading the meter myself is this:
When I get a bill with a $10.27 "Non-Standard Meter Monthly Charge" I will do the following.
I will deduct the $10.27 charge from the approximately $366 KIUC saved by not providing me with a meter and not having to install it. I intend to deduct that charge from my bill until $366 "credit" exhausted. That will approximately 36 months from now.
When that $366 balance is exhausted I request that KIUC shut off power to my residence.
When the power is shut off I insist that KIUC remove its meter from my home as well as the transmission cable attached to the house.
Mahalo for your time and attention to this matter.
See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: KIUC Special Public Meeting 12/2/13
.
No comments :
Post a Comment