Who’s the politico that allowed the for profit middleman to start with?

The fundamental reason for rate increase is that Suez investors are not happy with 4.1% return rate on their investment. They want 7.5% as stated in the paperwork filed by Suez. I think this is ludicrous. How about cutting water rates and lowering their ROI to a reasonable 3% ? I think it would be quite generous in the age of negative interest rates on many central bank bonds.

Suez’s stock was as low as 8 euros a share in 2020, it is now 16 euros. I would say the doubling of stock value within one year indicates investors are pleased with the recent financial performance of Suez.

https://www.suez.com/en/finance/financial-information/suez-shares

ROI is a function of risk, when the company has a public utility monopoly in one of the fastest growing areas, I think that is a pretty safe investment with little to no revenue risk and they should only need increases for more infrastructure and inflation, not increased yields; better yields will come organically with their expanding customer base and increased volumes.

CPI for all urban customers for utilities is about 1.5% this year, give Suez 3%, 1.5% for inflation and 1.5% to fund investments in the system for growth.

The City of Boise should own the water rights, not Suez Water.

Verbatim from a 2017 Suez brochure:

Ownership and operations of water treatment and distribution systems. Facilities include 82 wells, two surface water treatment plants, 37 reservoirs, three green sand iron and manganese removal plants, two granular activated carbon treatment plants, seven major pressure zones, 97 total pressure zones, 104 booster stations, and 1,256 miles of water mains.

So private or city owned water?

Do you want your essential services controlled by private owners driven by profits and ROI, or owned by the community with common goals of lower costs, safety, and efficiency?

hint- before making a choice consider, irrigation canals, Lucky Peak Dam, Arrowrock Dam.
Isn’t ‘city owned’ just ‘municipal socialism’?

http://efc.web.unc.edu/2016/10/19/public-vs-private-a-national-overview-of-water-systems/

EDITOR NOTE–This is an age old debate. Who should own: Prisons, school buses, trash service, electric generators, water rights, minerals on public land, oil below public land, buses and trains, ferry boats.

Easterner,
Don’t ignore my question on who you are. My guess is you are either a female reporter or a losing politician.
Why do you hide your name? Are you ashamed of what people will think of you and your chicken chit?

Eastie, we never agree but I support your continued participation — and anonymity.

Anonymity is necessary due to the large number of bullies which our laws can’t quit reach to make them behave civilly. Worse, some of these bullies are in powerful government occupations.

Do be careful not to be a bully yourself however. The political left, which you seem to be aligned with, fully supports people losing their careers over simple support of a candidate or active participation in a political process. That kind of anti-American nastiness is the hallmark of the French Terror and the Bolshevik takeover of the Russian revolution. Do check yourself, but do continue to participate. It is fun to show the holes in your logic. And sometimes I learn stuff I didn’t know.

western guy – you are missing the point of this article and the concerns of the citizens by focusing on mispellings or misuse of words.

And I appreciate Mr. Editor allowing the ability to remain anonymous as it allows those who work in the public sector the ability to share what goes on behind closed doors if they wish to reveal such info.

I do subscribe to the theory of do what you do best and outsource the rest. Not sure we need an ever expanding government to provide every service we think is essential. There is a wide range of public opinion as to what is actually essential.

I do think citizens are best served via the private sector, the issue is to get the benefit of the private sector there needs to be competition since it is that competition that drives innovation and efficiencies. Competition eliminates those who fail to constantly improve.

A private utility that has a monopoly to provide a specific service does not create the competition element. The better model might be the City owning the water infrastructure but outsourcing the operations and maintenance of that system to a firm who specializes in doing just that. Every 10 years or so the City will re-bid that service to see if there are more innovative or efficient ways of serving the public.

Thanks for the vote Anonymity.

And employment is not the only reason people want privacy.

btw, I am not ‘aligned’ with the left. I am aligned with fairness, equality and justice- just like that lady standing in New York Harbor. Another gift from France. What’s her name? 🙂

Not only are existing residents to subsidize growth while also making sure the investors feel their rate of return is fair, which they get to determine(?), we also get the responsibility of paying for the Rate Case Expenses.

These expenses cover legal counsel and consultants, as well as other costs for this application to impose higher rates on us. These expenses are included in the Operation & Maintenance costs – $209,738 is the total, to be amortized over 3 years.

This is shown in the testimony document for Cary. See Exhibit 10, Schedule 1 (page 25) and Line No. 25 in Exhibit 10, Summary Schedule 1-3 (page 1).

Thanks Paul J. for your earlier post. This is a really big issue and the postcard said nothing about this aspect.