20221024Comments(3)_3.pdf

From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:00:12 AM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Michael Probst
Submission Time: Oct 24 2022 8:36AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 1211 North Bippy Lane
Eagle, Id 83616
Name of Utility Company: veolia
Case ID: VEO-W-22-02
Comment: "I find it unacceptable that Veolia Water is requesting yet another (massive) rate increase for a necessary utility. It is unacceptable that our water utility is neither public nor
locally owned, a company with a revenue of more than $28 billion dollars in 2021 should be using profits to maintain and support additional growth rather than asking existing users to
support these operation expenses and then passing along the profit to their stockholders. This is a company which increased its stockholder dividend by 43% in 2021 and predicts
ORGANIC GROWTH OF EBITDA BETWEEN +4% AND +6% in 2022. It is not acceptable for a utility we cannot survive without in the US to be owned by a for profit multinational
corporation, much less for us to be creating and yearly increasing profits for other nations from such a needed resource for our citizens."
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 12:00:06 PM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Mike Stagner
Submission Time: Oct 24 2022 11:11AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 4636 S Latigo Way
Boise, ID 83709
Name of Utility Company: Veolia
Case ID: VEO-W-22-02
Comment: "A rate adjustment higher than the current inflation? This is a little out of line. Asking for a return of 24.1 percent investment on the infrastructure is like paying interest on a
high-interest credit card. This need to be reviewed. Mike Stagner "
------
From:Ron Mayhew Gm
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Veolia proposed rate increase - recommend rejection
Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 3:34:40 PM
CAUTION: This email originated outside the State of Idaho network. Verify links and attachments BEFORE you
click or open, even if you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your agency service desk with any concerns.
I am opposed to Violia’s request for a 24.1% (per card just received) rate increase.
It is actually offensive for the company to hit up existing rate payers for their expansion that subsidizes other
customers and provides them with future profits on investments paid by existing customers.
I recommend that such an outrageous request be flatly rejected. In normally business ventures, we ask for funds
before spending them, I’m unsure why water should be different.
Note: The information on the mailer (QR Code) doesn’t help me understand why such an increase is necessary. It
just shows the many projects they have underway.
Best regards,
Ron Mayhew
Eagle