20180719Comments (3).pdf

'l arl
lawtl
{ s4 g4rft
Diane Holt p.4'1,
From:
Sent:
To:
[e-mail]
Wednesday, July 18, 2018 4:56 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane HolU Erik Jorgensen; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Debra EstesSubject:
Name: Debra Estes
Case Number: AVU-E-17-09
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:856 N Maple Grove Rd, Apt 201
Boise ldaho, 83704
Name of Utility Company: ldaho Power
Comment: I am in opposition passionately against the proposed sale. We must keep our water rights. We must protect
our water. Our power rates must not be increased. I am against this sale.
U niq ue ldentifier: L84.99.108.L44
1
Diane Holt
From:
Sent:
To:
Sashag rove77@ g mail.com
Wednesday, July 18,2018 9:31 PM
Beverly Barker; Diane Holt; Erik Jorgensen; Matthew Evans
Case Comment Form: Sasha GroveSubject:
Name: Sasha Grove
Case Number: AVU-E-17-09
Email: [e-mail]
Telephone: 734649LOO4
Address: ZLZW lronwood Dr #516
Coeur d Alene ldaho, 83814
Name of Utility Company: Avista through rental at RV resort
Comment: We are planning to buy land in North ldaho.
lf Avista is sold to a foreign entity we will be reconsidering ldaho completely. Oppose the sale.
U niq ue ldentifier: L7 4.2O8.23.2
1
July 16, 20L8
ldaho Public Utilities Commission
Commission Secretary
PO Box 83720
Boise, ldaho 83720-0074
RECTIVED
Zilit iUL I 9 frH B: SU
' i' ' v;Li\,I ' :' 'i: l1 i .qt.iiSSl,3ii
CASE COMMENT
CASE #AVU-E-17-09
Dear Secretary,
This letter is to state my opposition to the purchase of Avista Corporation by Hydro One. With the recent resignation of
Hydro One's board members and ouster of the Chairman this is of great concern to me in the merger process.
Much has been written about this merger and with a termination fee of StOg million by either party, this is not something to
take lightly. President Trudeau has not been making positive comments concerning United States relations, therefore, again I
want to state my opposition.
I am enclosing a copy of a recent email letter submitted to the ldaho Public Utilities Commission written by Dean Gentry. He
goes into great lengths regarding various points of interest as to the reason this merger is a bad idea.
Thank you for taking my letter. I appreciate your help in this matter.
Yours truly,
Colleen Smith
88 Garden Tracts Road
St. Maries, ldaho 83867-1766
208.245.3878
enclosure
Avista. 1tr.2018.07. 16
June 22,20L8
ldaho Public Utilities Commission
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, ldaho 837 20-007 4
CASE COMMENT
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
I strongly oppose the purchase of Avista Corp. by Hydro One or any
other foreign entity. lt is very disturbing to learn our federal
government has approved this application as well as others and as I
understand they have done so without any public hearings, comments
or other input.
First and foremost we must consider the large amount of news reports
of the vulnerable state of our national Power Grid of which the Avista
transmission assets are a part.The electric power supplied by Avista is
an essential life giving commodity not available to the masses from any
other source. How many lives are at risk within the Avista service area
for only a short term blackout (consider the extreme high and low
temperatures)? How about longer periods of blackouts? The electricity
supplied by Avista in ldaho is primary for life and must rate along with
food, water and health care and impacts all. Why would we choose to
allow foreign governments and or businesses access to ownership or
any control of our life giving necessities?
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
I
The reports of many utilities in America having been purchased by
foreign companies gives me no comfort.
The government of Canada and Toronto may be a friend to our country
today and adversary tomorrow. Currently these governments are at
odds with climate control / global warming, with trade and tariffs and
also negation of a new Columbia River Treaty. No one has a perfect
know of future relations with other countries.
Large sums of money are at stake in this proposal. As of December 31,
2Afi Avista Corp had expensed Sa mitlion, and Hydro One reported
spending $90 million. lt has been reported officers and key personnel
of Avista will receive S30 to S40 million if and when this proposal is
completed. ln addition, those same persons have or will receive about
StO per share of stock due to the announcement of this sale. As of
LZlSLlLT those persons owned 752,900 shares of avista stock totaling
Another S7,529,000. ln addition there are reportedly severance
agreements fot five executives for a combined S35.2 million. Avista
tells us this proposal is good for everyone. lt certainly appears the
closing of this proposal will be good for the senior management and
directors. I would be better convinced of that if this group were giving
all of the personal gains to charities. lt may be possible these amounts
of personal gains sponsor bias and emotions that influence decisions
that may not prove to be good for the Avista customers. I have
recently read John Wayne said "there is a little larceny in everyone".
The propose settlement agreement states that no cost related to this
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
2.
Proposed transaction will be charged to the Avista customers. lf not,
where will the money come from?
The agreement also states there will be no rate increase because of the
merger. How may the IPUC determine that when Hydro One applies for
a rate increase at a future date? How may you refuse an application for
a rate increase when the future service for reliable and safe electricity
is at risk even it is determined that risk was created by the merger?
Also, discussions of rates appear in most in not all reports of hearings
and news articles pertaining to the proposed merger. To the majority
of people in the hearings and readers I believe the word rates really
means the amount of our monthly bill. When it is stated rates will not
increase, w€ assume our monthly bill will not increase unless we use
more electricity. I have recently learned different utilities submit
different monthly bills which contain billing for items other than the
price for the electricity. Some bills may have a separate charge for
meter reading, for billing, or" as Avista has, a base rate none of which
charges for rates of electricity but are included in the total of the billed
amount due. We do not know what Hydro One bills their customer in
Toronto that may one day appear on the Avista bill as another form of
revenue for Hydro One but will not be a rate increase for the amount
of electricity used. I hope such deception will not be allowed by our
Commissioners.
Report of Hydro One support for Avista's expansion of renewable
energy is worrisome to me. I firmly believe both wind and solar energy
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment 3
should not be forced upon utility customers. I believe wind and solar
are not dependable, too costly, are subsidized by taxes, manufacture
and maintenance add to carbons. I hope ldaho does not force this upon
us or allow Avista to bill ldaho customers for renewable energy in our
rates to pay for the costs in other states.
The proposed rate credits appear to be a sales tool; somewhat like an
auction bid for approval having increased to gain agreement with the
various state commissions approval. Please convert the 515.8 million
rate credit to the amount it will reduce the KWH rate. ls it a significant
amount?
While the sizeable charitable contributions are welcome, they most
definitely are a sales tool and not a true indication of the heart and
generosity of Hydro One management. Like the rate credits, the
charitable contributions are a short term commitment and based on
the fact Hydro One contributes only St million to all of the combined
communities of Toronto where they serve 1,.3 million customers we
should not be surprised as a large part of the charitable contributions
end when the five year commitment period expires.
So I ask, why is Hydro One proposing to buy Avista?
Two writers for The Spokesman Review newspaper at Spokane wrote
"Canadian power companies have been buying American utilities for
several years, expanding their reach into the U.S., which offers lighter
regulations and potentially higher revenues." ls this a compliment or
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment 4
Challenge to our IPUC?
Two writers also state Hydro One "is heavily invested in renewable
energy, including hydro, wind and solar. lt also has nuclear energy in its
portfolio." After reading this I wrote to Nancy Clark at Hydro One and
she replied "Hydro One does not currently own generation assets".
My curious part wonders why Hydro One is acquiring Avista and their
generating power plants. Currently Hydro One is in the business of
purchasing electric power and transmitting and distributing it. lt has
been reported hydro power is not considered as renewable energy in
Toronto. Hydro One is financing one hundred percent of the Canadian
$6.7 billion dollar price of Avista as follows;
1. Assumption of existing Avista Debt Canadian 52.68,
2. Acombination of 5, 10, 30 year debt notes Canadian 52.568,
3. Conversion of Convertible Debenture to equity CS1.54B
Hydro One currently pays of a little over 4o/o dividend on their stock.
Avista reported U.S. 5115 million or near Canadian SfSg million net
lncome for their year ended LZlStltT.ln order to recou p a 4% return
on the purchase of Avista the net income must increase to about
Canadian 5265 million. That is an increase of CS112 million or about
73Yo. How might they do this? Often rnergers and acquisitions achieve
efficiencies by reducing administrative staff and this does not seem
possible in this case if the commitments for keeping Avista employees
is kept. I do not know the value of the Avista hydro power generating
assets if they were to be sold but I suspect the proceeds of such a sale
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
5
could raise a large portion of the CS6.7 B purchase price and allow
Hydro One to stick with their business of purchasing, transmission and
distribution here as they do in Toronto. Hydro One has purchased
three electric utility companies in Toronto since 20L6. All without any
generating assets. Why enter into the generation business now, a
business they have no experience in?
News reports often point out Hydro One is a very large company with
more than SZS nillion in assets with no mention tc the fact Hydro One
has more than SfS Uittion in liabilities and if the merger is completed
Hydro One will be Canadian 532.2 Billion dollar company with CS22B
ln liabilities with a large annual debt service and with a business
requiring large amounts of capital investment. The combined net
income for the year ended L2/3L|L7 of Avista and Hydro One was
about CS835 million.
It was reported that Scott Morris said: Both utilities are heavily
investing in infrastructure and technology and will benefit from
economies of scale. "We can spread out our costs over a larger
customer base," Morris said. Can anyone imagine the Hydro One
customers of Toronto (being the larger base) enjoying Avista costs
spread to them?
As I have stated earlier Avista and Hydro One are spending many, many
millions of dollars to achieve this proposed merger/acquisition. Those
millions of dollars are going to Wall Street lawyers, accountants and
merger and acquisition specialists who often are reported as making
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
6
millions of dollars and hundreds of millions of dollars in one year. They
are paid to make this proposal happen. This is a very heavy burden
placed upon the staff of our IPUC who we know are not paid that well
and do not deal with mergers and acquisitions on a daily basis or have
unlimited budget for outside expertise.
Many questions have been raised since the merger agreement was
announced on July 19, 20L7 along with many negative reports of the
the quality of service provided by Hydro One to their Toronto
customers. I hope our IPUC had searched for the facts and truths
of Hydro Ones performance. Hopefully you have access to reliable
sources similar to our Better Busines Bureau, Dunn and Bradstreet,
Standard and Pours or others to help you arrive at the facts you need.
lf this proposal is approved I assume there is no turning back and no
method of enforcement of commitments by Hydro One or penalties
upon Hydro One. Thus any failures and inconsistencies resulting from
a merger will fall upon the customers of Avista.
The commitments agreed to have life of five years and it is doubtful
that any of the current management and directors will be with Avista
at the end of those five years.
I thank our ldaho Public Utilities Commission and staff for this
opportunity to submit my comments of opposition to the approval
of the proposed merger.
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
7
Sincerely,
Dean Gentry
P. O. Box 321
St.Maries, ldaho 83861
Case No. AVU-E-17-09
Dean Gentry
Case Comment
ffi