Telephonic Pre-hearing Conference -W-02514A-25-0192 - Quail Creek Water Company, Inc. W-03861A-25-0193 - Ridgeview Utility Company W-01944A-25-0194 - Lago Del Oro Water Company W-02514A-25-0216 - et al. Tucson - Jun 09, 2026

meeting

Arizona Corporation Commission 15 min 6 agenda items transcribed 4 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: agenda · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the purpose of this telephonic pre‑hearing conference and which dockets are covered?

Unknown 0:00

Let's

Julia Motter 0:00

go on the record.

Unknown 0:05

Okay, go

Julia Motter 0:07

ahead. All right. Good morning, everyone. This is the time set for the telephonic pre-hearing conference in consolidated docket numbers W02514A-25-0192, W03861A-25-0193, W01944A-25-0194 W-02514A-25-0216 W03861A-25-0217 and W03861A-25-0217 involving the rate and financing applications of Coil Creek Water Company Inc., Ridgeview Utility Company, and Lago del Oro Water Company. My name is Julia Motter. I'm the administrative law judge assigned to preside over this matter. Let's take appearances for the record starting with the company.

Jay Shapiro 1:17

uh good morning your honor jay shapiro on behalf of the three applicants and we all hope that one of these days we have a lot less docket numbers for you

Julia Motter 1:27

all right thank you

Jay Shapiro 1:29

mr shapiro

Julia Motter 1:31

and for saddlebrook homeowners association number one

Vivian (Unknown) 1:37

good morning your honor this is axel bookwalter for saddlebrook association homeowners number one

Julia Motter 1:43

All right, and we do not have an appearance today by Saddlebrooks Homeowners Association number two. And last for staff.

Bridget Humphrey 1:52

Good morning, Your Honor. Bridget Humphrey and Ben Calleros on behalf of staff.

Julia Motter 1:58

Okay, I have a couple questions that I want to go over. I have a couple things I want to say, and then I will go around to the parties and give them an opportunity to ask any questions or raise any issues. So first, Mr. Shapiro, so the HOA1 bulk water agreement, as far as I can tell, is not part of the record that's been filed. And I know that we're not asking the Commission to approve the agreement itself, just the special contract rate that's contained in that agreement. But it seems like we would still need to be able to review that agreement to evaluate reasonableness. Plus there's some references to annual adjustments, but no specifics about that. So without having the actual agreement itself, I don't know how to look at or evaluate those annual increases.

Jay Shapiro 3:00

Absolutely, and that's not intentionally kept away. If I may ask, Mr. Buckwalter, is it fully executed? Has your client

Unknown 3:12

signed? Yes, it's fully executed,

Vivian (Unknown) 3:16

although we do have, Jay, we still have the amendment to sign.

Jay Shapiro 3:21

That's what

Vivian (Unknown) 3:21

I meant.

Jay Shapiro 3:21

Okay. Has the amendment been executed?

Vivian (Unknown) 3:24

No.

Why is the HOA‑1 bulk water agreement needed as an exhibit for rate review?

Vivian (Unknown) 3:27

You guys haven't signed it yet.

Jay Shapiro 3:29

Your Honor, we'll get that executed and filed in the next 24 hours.

Julia Motter 3:35

Okay. Thank you.

Jay Shapiro 3:37

We'll just file it as an exhibit that's not intended. Well, we can mark it. Again, you stated it correctly. We need the commission to approve the rate, but we don't believe, and I don't think the commission believes, that it approves the contract itself. But you should absolutely have a copy of it. Okay. And unless there's an objection.

Unknown 3:59

Go ahead. So, unless there's an objection.

Julia Motter 4:05

From the parties to that agreement, I think it's worthwhile. To mark it as an exhibit update the exhibit list so that we can admit it. It's officially part of the records. I can review it. The commission can review it recognizing that it's. We're not asking the commission to approve it.

Jay Shapiro 4:25

We agree 100% and we'll have it filed as an exhibit. Again, I think Ms. Burke's probably listening and making plans to get it done.

Julia Motter 4:35

Okay, great. All right, Mr. Shapiro, one more thing. So the settlement agreement doesn't speak to the financing specifically or the terms. You can't tell from the settlement agreement if the parties have agreed to the financing. Proposal or not, I don't know if we're supposed to glean from the schedules what the outcome of that is. Can you speak to that?

Jay Shapiro 5:02

You know, I think the only thing we probably put in there was the cost of debt and then the 70-30 recommended capital structure. The parties do all support the financing and we can certainly have Ms.

How does the lack of a signed amendment affect the commission’s ability to evaluate the rate?

Jay Shapiro 5:16

Schwartz clarify that when she takes the stand Monday. I think that's just an oversight on council's part between us. Nobody really caught that we probably need a specific paragraph saying the financings are supported as requested. Subject to the cost of debt, the capital structures agreed to hear it.

Julia Motter 5:39

Okay, yeah, from the cost of debt and the capital structure, 1 would certainly infer that everyone is in agreement as to the financing, but.