20201021Comments(6).pdf

From:J. Goss <[e-mail]>
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:SUZ-W-20-02
Date:Tuesday, October 20, 2020 10:31:55 PM
Dear Idaho PUC,
I am strongly opposed to Suez’s request for a 22% increase in customer bills. This increase far outstrips any
inflation or raise I will see. As evidenced by Suez’s detailed report, most of the improvements are going to Eagle,
Meridian, and West Boise, all areas of expansion, where new infrastructure is needed. Why is the entire customer
base being penalized for improvements and expansion that doesn’t represent them? I am a resident of the Bench and
have personally seen the pipes here continue to degrade as they try to explain away the “yellow water” problem, yet,
there has been no actual action or improvements besides water flushing. This is a classic example of taxation
without representation. In addition, their math is mis-leading, I’m not sure which average customer base they are
using, but my family’s average winter bill is around $40-50 and roughly doubles in the summer to water the yard
(and I don’t keep it super green either). I remain OPPOSED to the rate increase.
Regards,
Jackson Goss
From:PUC Consumer Comments
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Wednesday, October 21, 2020 7:00:04 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Andrew Harold
Submission Time: Oct 20 2020 9:03PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 807 N 21 Street
Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Suez
Case ID: SUZ-W-20-02
Comment: "Idaho Public Utilities Commission, The request for a 22.3% in Suez residentialwater bill is not fair or right for a home owner that has lived in the same home since 1973. If I
can not afford to water my residential lot and trees, the City of Trees could soon be called theCity of Dust. Please do not price us out of our home. "
------
[Open in the PUC Intranet application]
From:D F
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Public Comment - Idaho PUC Case No. SUZ-W-20-02
Date:Wednesday, October 21, 2020 9:14:17 AMThe following comments are being submitted in response to Suez’ proposed general rateincrease (Idaho PUC Case No. SUZ-W-20-02). Suez recently advised customers of a proposed $115 million investment plan to improvewater system infrastructure serving 230,000 Treasure Valley residents. Under thisproposal, customers’ water bills would increase 22.3% a month while Suez revenueswould grow by $10.2 million per year. While Suez’ 5-year $115 million infrastructure investment plan may be a reasonablemeans of keeping pace with growth in the Treasure Valley, introducing a staggering22.3% increase to residential and commercial monthly water bills is simply NOTreasonable. I respectfully request the Commission deny Suez’ proposed 22.3% rate increase, andinstead approve a significantly lower rate increase. A lower rate increase would stillallow Suez to realize a return on its investment, albeit over a longer period of time, and itwould do so without unfairly subjecting 230,000 Treasure Valley families, seniorcitizens, and businesses to an otherwise overly aggressive rate increase at a time whenmany are struggling financially. Thank you for your consideration. Daniel Fowler18808 N Summer Place,Boise, ID 83714
Name: Logan Barclay
Submission Time: Oct 21 2020 9:39AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 3000 W. Stewart Ave. Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Suez Case ID: SUZ-W-20-02
Comment: "I think it is absurd to ask for a 22.3% rate increase during this pandemic and economic
recession while many are already struggling to pay their bills. The entire country is cutting back
budgets, Suez needs to do the same. I suggest Suez utilize their profits to make improvements, not
take the money from their customers. Maybe they can divert some of the executive bonuses?"
----
Name: Fred Genton
Submission Time: Oct 21 2020 9:47AM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 2014 N Hillway Boise, ID 83702
Name of Utility Company: Suez Case ID: SUZ-W-20-02
Comment: "Concerned about Suez asking for a 22.3 percent increase and $10.2 million per year.
Paychecks and pension checks are not increasing even close to that amount. Idaho PUC mission is to
serve and protect Idahoans from unfair and unreasonable increases on basic necessities. Please be
our advocate and disallow this very high increase to something more moderate."
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Guido Giuntini <[e-mail]>
Jan Noriyuki
Suez Investment Plan: fee Increase
Wednesday, October 21, 2020 4:40:37 PM
To Whom It May Concern:
It is obvious that infrastructure needs upgrade. Nonetheless, the postcard sent by Suez states
that, "Company revenues would increase by $10.2 million per year." The piece of informationmissing is how much of that increased revenue is increase in profit. In a competitive market,
firms' profit margins are extremely low due to competition. Water distribution, being a naturalmonopoly, it is not a competitive market. Water is a necessity for life; hence, government
intervention (the Idaho Public Utility Commission) is necessary to maintain affordability andlimit indiscriminate price increases.
Will the entire increase revenues be used to improve the existing infrastructure, or will some
go to increase profits? Unless the entire rate increase is used to improve the currentinfrastructure system or to cover for increased verifiable cost of production, the Public Utility
Commission should ask Suez modify the proposal.
Thank you very much,
Guido Giuntini1422 S Gourley St.
Boise ID 83705