20250825Comments_5.pdf

The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name:Trever Snyder
Submission Time: Aug 23 2025 9:32PM
Email: snydertrever(@icloud.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 1013 S Chestnut St
Nampa, ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I do not agree with the increase in service price to become more equitable
among customers. It does the opposite for lower income households. I also do not agree
with the proposed increases in our usage charges. Some people already struggle to pay
monthlt bills and increasing the power bill(a necessity to live)just adds to the burden. This
is not looking out for the people of Idaho and their best interests:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Laurie Kuntz
Submission Time: Aug 25 2025 12:OOPM
Email: Laurie_kuntz - hotmail.com
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 516 N McCoy Bridge Rd
Mountain Home, ID 83647
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I urge the PUC to reject Idaho Power's application for a rate increase. A 13.09
percent increase would burden Idahoans with even higher costs of living in an already
difficult time of inflation. But even aside from caring about family budgets, Idaho Power is
NOT doing everything it can to reduce their own costs, and are in fact actively campaigning
against systems that would reduce costs and increase energy production. I'm talking about
tapping into residential solar arrays.
Idaho Power claims to need increased rates to "fund energy production and storage
resources, grid investments, wildfire resilience, labor and other investments:' However,
they have fought against solar power, which is cheaper to produce because consumers pay
for the equipment and get reimbursed at a far lower rate than the power is sold for, if the
customer is reimbursed for excess power at all. With customer-installed solar, energy is
produced during peak periods during the day, which is when power is most needed, and it's
cheaper to transmit because it can easily be used by close neighbors. Solar arrays would
1

be spread out throughout the city to be used in neighborhoods where they are most
needed. Net metering only benefits Idaho Power now with the change in regulations, so
why aren't they leveraging this value resource of power generation that already exists and
will become more over time?
It's clear that investments in solar are the clear winner when it comes to wildfire resilience
and peak energy production, so why do they need increased funding when they already
have this valuable resource at their fingertips?
I implore you to reject this wasteful ideology and reject Idaho Power's application to
increase energy rates:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Michael Jagodzinski
Submission Time: Aug 25 2025 12:08PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 525 Riverview Drive
Boise, ID 83712
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power Company
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "Dear Commissioners,
I strongly oppose Idaho Power's proposal to increase the residential fixed service charge
from $15 to $25 per month. This 67% increase in unavoidable charges undermines
fundamental principles of fairness, conservation, and affordability.
Usage-based pricing is inherently more equitable because it reflects actual cost causation.
Customers who use more electricity place greater demands on the grid infrastructure,
require more generation capacity, and drive the need for system upgrades. They should
therefore pay proportionally more. A$25 fixed charge forces low-usage customers—often
seniors on fixed incomes, small apartment dwellers, and conservation-minded
households—to subsidize the infrastructure needs driven by high-consumption users.
High fixed charges eliminate customer control over their bills. When $25 of every monthly
bill is predetermined regardless of consumption, customers lose the ability to meaningfully
reduce costs through conservation.This particularly harms economicallyvulnerable
populations who rely on reducing usage during financial hardship. It also directly
contradicts Idaho's energy efficiency goals by reducing the financial incentive to conserve.
Idaho Power's "equity" argument is backwards. True equity means those who drive costs
pay for them. A customer using 300 kWh shouldn't pay the same fixed infrastructure charge
as one using 2,000 kWh. The latter requires more generation capacity, more transmission
2

investment, and more distribution infrastructure to serve. Volume-based rates already
spread fixed costs fairly based on each customer's actual system impact.
This change disproportionately benefits high-usage customers at the expense of efficient
users. Under higher fixed charges, those with large homes, pools, and high consumption
see their per-kWh effective rate decrease, while efficient customers pay more per unit of
actual energy used. This regressive rate design punishes conservation and rewards waste.
The Commission should reject this fixed charge increase and instead direct Idaho Power to
recover costs through usage-based rates that maintain proper price signals, reward
efficiency, and ensure those who drive system costs bear responsibilityforthem.
Sincerely,
Michael Jagodzinski
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Jeremy Roesch
Submission Time: Aug 25 2025 2:02PM
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 4488 W WAVERTON LN
MERIDIAN, ID 83646
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power Company
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I can not afford an increase of this magnitude. This is greater than California's
increases. I will not pay for this increase. This needs to be brought to the voters so we can
vote NO on this ridiculous increase:'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Nancy Landon
Submission Time: Aug 25 2025 2:10PM
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Address: 12930 W Engelmann Drive
Boise, ID 83713
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Powerr
Case ID: IPC-E-25-16
Comment: "I am opposed to the requested rate increase from Idaho Power. If they want to
continue to allow and support the massive data centers and other growth in their service
3

area, then the developers should payto increase their infrastructure needs. The average
consumer cannot be expected to cover the costs for corporations to develop in our State.
The power company needs to charge these large data centers more for the energy they are
demanding. The rate increases are more than any retired or working person can manage."
Thanks Nancy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4