Public Utilities Commission hearing: CVCA treasurer faults Cascade New Vision accounting and lease; staff urges denial of one-time rate increase and $18/month S

A Public Utilities Commission hearing on proceeding 25A-0385W focused on whether Cascade New Vision should be allowed a one-time rate increase and a proposed $18-per-customer monthly contribution to a major capital improvement fund. Chesney Borquette, volunteer treasurer of the Cascade Village Condominium Association (CVCA), testified for residents, criticizing certain lease costs and financial presentations; staff witness Dr. DePuy urged the commission to deny the one-time increase and the surcharge until the utility supplies reliable, auditable financial records.

Borquette testified that he is the CVCA volunteer treasurer and described reviewing utility documents submitted in the rate case. He told counsel he had not filed prior PUC complaints but that he had long viewed Cascade's rates as high. He summarized cost and lease information in his testimony and said the land under the wastewater treatment facility appeared to have been purchased for about $102,283 while the lease on that land was about $180,000 a year. "So on that basis—I would say, yes. That's false accounting," he said when asked about presentation inconsistencies between income statements and balance sheets. He told the commission he believes the lease figure is excessive and suggested transferring the land to the utility at cost and eliminating the rent payments to remove that recurring expense from utility rates.

Borquette also urged caution about committing homeowners to new costs for further analyses. He recommended a third-party study to evaluate connecting Cascade to the nearby Purgatory Metropolitan District system as an alternative, but said CVCA would not commit to funding such a study without knowing the likely cost. He noted that annual reports for 2023 and 2024 were not initially available during his review but that he had since seen unattested copies and that the filings had been revised or restated during the proceeding.

Staff witness Dr. DePuy told the commission that staff views Cascade New Vision as eligible for simplified regulatory treatment under the commission's small-utility rules but cautioned that eligibility should not mean automatic application of the simplified annual-adjustment mechanism to the company's current rates. He explained that staff's current recommendation is to deny the company's requested onetime rate increase and to deny the proposed system development charge and the $18/month capital surcharge because the company has not yet provided sufficiently verified financial support for those measures. "The burden of responsibility of providing justification rests with the company," DePuy said.

DePuy acknowledged that the company provided engineering cost estimates in rebuttal (a RightWater Engineers report) that list near-term project costs of roughly $520,000 for water work and $720,000 for wastewater work, but he said those estimates lack supporting documentation and a clear timetable and therefore do not yet justify an open-ended monthly surcharge. Staff flagged several concerns: frequent and large restatements of prior-year financials (including a swing from an earlier reported profit to a later reported loss), financial schedules prepared on different bases (cash versus accrual), and the absence of audited financial statements staff can rely on.

Both witnesses repeatedly emphasized the need for clearer, documented support for any charge that would be collected from ratepayers over time. Borquette stressed that homeowners are effectively the utility's customers and asked for audited verification; DePuy recommended that, if a capital-improvement surcharge were ever approved, the commission should require a defined collection period, clear reporting requirements, and audited accounting so ratepayers can verify the use and timing of funds.

Procedurally, the presiding official reviewed the exhibits admitted to the record, noted the potential late filing of an executable version of an engineer's spreadsheet (CLM-9) and an Alpine Bank loan document, and set statements of position from the parties to be due by close of business on May 5 to meet statutory deadlines. The hearing then concluded and went off the record.

The commission record for proceeding 25A-0385W will include the testimony and corrected demonstratives discussed at the hearing; staff told the commission it would rely on audited, reconciled financial statements before endorsing rate changes or ongoing surcharges.