20210414Comments.pdf

;;: -; i- i ti *'li
.iir :,"iii lt+ PS 3r te8
', --l:i.-'; -:; ,.-,ir,;, : ,- -.r;;1;;;:;f.l:. ' .. i;.. .rilL,ulvlr
BEFORE T}IE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF SUEZ WATER
IDAHO INC.'S APPLICATION FOR
AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES
ANID CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE
IN IDAHO
CASE NO. SUZ-W-20-02
PUBLIC COMMENT OF
INTERMOUNTAIN FAIR HOUS ING
COUNCIL, NC.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
COMES NOW the lntermountain Fair Housing Council, Inc. (hereinafter "IFHC") and
hereby provides public comment to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (hereinafter "IPUC")
in the above-entitled proceeding.
I. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
As a preliminary matter, IFHC notes that it was granted leave to intervene as a party to
this proceeding by the IPUC by Order No. 34861 entered on the 4h day of December, 2020. The
purpose of IFHC participation, as stated in its Petition for Leave to Intervene, was to "provide
further input on the possible violations of the FHA and other laws and regulations which prohibit
housing discrimination that will result in the event that the proposed rate increase is approved."
Pet. at 3. As a party, IFHC participated in this proceeding and conducted discovery on Suez
Idaho Water, Inc. (hereinafter ooSuez") and on the IPUC. IFHC also previously filed with the
IPUC its Testimony of ZoeAnn Olson dated the 176 day of March, 2021 which provided input
on the matters described above. Finally, IFHC filed with the IPUC its Motion for Leave to
PI.]BLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOI-INTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COI]NCIL, INC.
Withdraw as Party dated the 18ft day of March, 2021 for the reason that it had provided such
input to the IPUC and it felt that its participation in this proceeding was no longer necessary.
IFHC has not yet been granted leave to withdraw as a party to this proceeding by the
IPUC. It now submits this public comment in an abundance of caution to be certain that its input
is received and considered by the IPUC. This public comment does not materially differ from
the Testimony of Zoe Ann Olson previously filed with the IPUC.
TI. PUBLIC COMMENT
A. Mission of IFHC
IFHC is a private, nonprofit orgarization organized under the laws of the State of Idaho
with its principal place of business at 4696 West Overland Road, Suite 140, Boise, Idaho 83705.
Its mission is to ensure open and inclusive housing for all people, and to advance equal access to
housing for all persons without regard to race, color, sex, religion, national origin, familial status,
sexual orientation, gender identity, source of income, or disability (the term "handicap", as that
tenn is used and defined in the federal Fair Housing Act,42 U.S.C. $3601 et seq., is used herein
interchangeably with the term "disability"). IFHC attempts to eradicate discrimination through,
among other things, education on the fair housing laws, housing information and referrals,
housing counseling, and assistance with mediating and or filing complaints. IFHC also provides
education and outreach on fair housing laws and practices to housing con$,rmers, providers, and
others.
B. Lack of Proper Notice
The notice that Suez gave notice to the public regarding the matters at issue in this
proceeding did not comply with federal fair housing laws because it was given only in English.
A significant percentage of Suez's customers do not speak English as their first language or are
PUBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOUNTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL, INC.
2
not proficient in English. Such housing consumers are therefore not put on proper and effective
notice as to the matters at issue in this proceeding, cannot be expected to be fully aware of the
matters at issue in this proceeding, and have therefore been denied the full opportunity to give
effective input into this proceeding.
As recipients of federal funding, both Suez and IPUC are required to comply with the
Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act) in regard to land use decisions as they relate
to housing. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination against people who are of a different
national origin, which includes many people who are not proficient in English. Providers of
federally-assisted housing, housing transactors, and programs must also comply with Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act. Title VI requires additional language assistance measures. The Fair
Housing Act is meant to ensure equal treatment of people who are limited English proficient.
Title VI is meant to result in an equal outcome for those who are limited English proficient
because of the additional language assistance measures. Limited English proficiency is not listed
among the protected classes in either title of the Civil Rights Act. However, case law and a
HUD Office of General Counsel guidance document https://iftrcidaho.ors/wp-
content/uploads/2019/0712-2016-HUD-General-Counsel-Guidance.pdf equate limited English
proficiency to race and national origin which are both protected classes. https://ifhcidaho.org/wp-
content/uploads/20 I 9/07/3 -HUD-guidancilan0T.pdf
C. Impact on Housins Affordabilitv
Furthermore, the evidence in the record indicates that Suez unilaterally proceeded to
complete approximately $115,000,000.00 in modifications to its water delivery system at issue in
this proceeding prior to seeking or obtaining approval from IPUC for a rate increase. The
pupose of those modifications are to increase Suez's long-term profitability and Suez predicts
PUBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOUNTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL, INC.
J
that they will increase its revenues by $10,200,000.00 per year. It does not appear from the
record that Suez completed such modifications in order to resolve all of its water quality issues,
such as its delivery of brown water to its customers in the Boise Bench area. Such matters
should have been given priority when Suez made its modifications.
There is also nothing in the record that indicates that Suez considered affordability issues
when it completed its modifications. Instead, Suez unilaterally incurred significant expense in
making modifications of its choosins and now seeks a rate increase from IPUC to cover the costs
of such modifications. Such actions by Suez tums logic on its head. Had Suez first sought a rate
increase from IPUC to cover the costs of making modifications to its water delivery system,
IPUC could have required Suez to prioritize affordability and water quality issues based on input
from the public as a condition to obtainingarate increase.
Unless IPUC now places such conditions on Suez, any input from the public on such
matters as affordability and water quality are irrelevant to this proceeding. By comparison, when
an ldaho municipality wishes to complete significant and costly modifications of its public
works, it first conducts public hearings and, if it determines that it wishes to proceed, submits the
matter to a public referendum by seeking a bond levy. In so doing, the public can have effective
input and the municipality can receive and consider that input before it decides whether to
proceed. In contrast, in this proceeding, the issue before IPUC is not whether to grant the
increase but how much to grant. Therefore, the rate increase that Suez is seeking is a foregone
conclusion and as a result of that rate increase, housing affordability will certainly be impacted.
D. Disparate Impact on Housinq Consumers in Violation of FHA
Finally, the evidence in the record indicates that Suez wholly failed to conduct any
studies or inquiries into the impact that the rate increase it is seeking will have on housing
PTJBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOUNTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL, INC.
4
consumers on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, familial stafus, and disability,
which are protected statuses under the federal Fair Housing Act,42 U.S.C. $3601 et seq.
(hereinafter "FHA"). There is no dispute that any increase in rates will impact housing
affordability. However, IFHC has reviewed the increase that Suez is seeking and is concemed
that the increase will constitute a disparate impact specifically on housing consumers who are
members of the above-listed protected statuses.
The FHA prohibits policies or practices which have a discriminatory effect on any of the
protected statuses, even if the specific practice was not motivated by discriminatory intent. ,See,
24 C.F.R. $100.500. Thus, although there is no evidence at this time that Suez intends to engage
in discriminatory conduct on any of the protected statuses, the granting of the rate increase that
Suez would nevertheless constitute a violation of the FHA. /d. Fair housing regulations provide
that when such a claim is brought, the defending party must "produc[e] evidence showing that
the challenged policy or practice advances a valid interest (or interests) and is therefore not
arbitrary, artificial, and unnecessary." 1d. at $100.500(c). However, Suez would be unable to
make such a showing in light of the facts in the record discussed above, including:
1) Suez's failure to provide proper or effective notice as to the matters at issue in
this proceeding to customers who do not speak English as their first language or are not
proficient in English, thereby denying them the full opportunity to give effective input
into this proceeding, which shows its interest in obtaining a rate increase is artitrary.
Suez has arbitrarily chosen to provide a meaningful opportunity for participation in this
proceeding only for English-speaking customers.
2) Suez's actions in unilaterally deciding to proceed to complete modifications to
its water delivery system at issue prior to seeking or obtaining approval from IPUC for a
PUBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOI.]NTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COT]NCIL, INC.
5
rate increase, which shows its interest in obtaining a rate increase is artificial and
unnecessary. Suez has artificially and unnecessarily attempted to create a need for a rate
increase without considering aftbrdability and water quality issues, and instead placing its
profits over such other concems.
E. Requested Relicf
While IFHC recognizes that the IPUC is not rhe proper tbrurn to make a determination
that the FHA has been violatc'd by Suez. it rvishes to bring these considerations to the attention of
the IPUC and urges the IPUC to require Suez to acldress water quality issues and affordability
prior to approving a rate increase. If the rate increase that Suez has requested is granted without
these issues being properly addressed, each and every customerolsuez who is impacted by the
discrinrinatory effect of Suez's actions would be an injured party under the FHA and has the
right to initiate tbrmal legal action.
In order to remedy this situation. the IPUC should require Suez to flrst conduct a
comprehensive study or inquiry into how the proposed rate increase will inrpact housing
affordability in the relevant service area. Once this is accornplished. in the event that Suez
wishes to proceed with its rate increase, it should be required by the IPUC to contply with fair
housing requirements to give notice of such a request in all languages comnronly spoken in the
relevant service area. Until such steps trre accomplished. the IPUC cannot proceed with this
matter without contributing to the discriminatory eflbct o1'Suez's actions.
DAIED rhis -l 3h^, ",2021
ZOE ANN OI,SON
Executive Director
lnternrountain Fair Housing Council, lnc
PUBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOUNTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL, INC.
6
STATE OF IDAHO
County of Nu
Commission Secretary
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
Michael C. Creamer
Preston N. Carter
Givens Pursley LLP
601 W. Bannock St.
Boise, ID 83702
David Njuguna
Suez Water Management & Services
461 From Rd., Suite 400
Paramus, N.J.07052
PUBLIC COMMENT OF INTERMOLTNTAIN
FAIR HOUSING COI.INCIL, INC.
t*oayor
Ix] By Email to: secretarv@.puc.idaho.eov
[x ] By Ernail to: [e-mail]
prestoncarter(@ g i venspurs I ey. com
[x] By Enrail to : David.ni
)
)
)
ss
S BSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this
,2021
(sEAL)
Notary Public and for t State of ldaho,
Residing at
My commlsslon explres.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certiff that on the l3thday of April ,2021, I caused to be
served a tull. true, and accurate copy of the fbregoing by the method/s indicated below, and
addressed to the fbllowing:
.com
Ken Nagy Digitally ligned by Ken N.gy
DN: cn=Keh Nag, o=AttornGyat Law, ou.
emall=knagy€,lewirton,com. cUS
Date: 2021.M.13 l9:07:59 {7'00'
Ken Nagy
1
ERIN GRAVETT
Notary Publlc - State of ldaho
Commi3sion Number 68706
l{y Commisslon Explres Oct 24, 2022