Spokane7
68°
May 16, 2011 in City
Avista requests gas, electrical rate hikes in Washington
Avista Corp. is requesting rate increases for its electricity and natural gas customers in Washington, the company announced today. Avista is asking regulators to approve a 9.3 percent rate increase for electrical service and a 5.1 percent increase for natural gas.
Avista officials said the rate request is driven primarily by $250 million in capital improvements planned for this year. The work will replace aging equipment, such as power lines, poles and substations, and fund upgrades at the company’s hydropower dams.
The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission has 11 months to act on Avista’s request.
If approved, the rate increase would amount to a $7.13 per month increase on a typical residential customer’s electric bill, for a total of $84.14.
A typical natural gas customer would see a $3.26 monthly increase, for a total of $66.71.
Avista is also considering asking Idaho regulators to approve higher rates for its Idaho electric and natural gas customers. However, no rate increase request has been filed in Idaho.
This story is developing, check back for updates.
1992 murder trial begins against sex offender 
eagleproducer on May 16 at 1:58 p.m.
Cue Dan the Answer man from Avista…
stopthewhining on May 16 at 2:02 p.m.
Just moved back here, but wasn’t it only a few months ago there was an article posted on ALL the money Avista made??? I sure wish someone could bring this organization down. I don’t really know how anyone with morals could work for Avista.
flutieflakes on May 16 at 2:08 p.m.
But… but… depreciation!
eagleproducer on May 16 at 2:15 p.m.
I started a Facebook page that intends to help shut Avista down and turn it into a community owned energy cooperative akin to those in Douglas County, etc… Not one person joined my page :(
If Seattle can have a publicly owned utility, why can’t we?
Natural gas rates, when adjusted for inflation, are at all time lows. Please help me in packing the meeting room(s) of the Washington State Utilities Commission when they address this request. I hope to see all you “mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore” Tea Baggers there too.
reservedparking on May 16 at 2:16 p.m.
And how coincidental is it (NOT!) that there’s a nice little Avista ad banner across the top of the S-R home page talking about rates???
flutieflakes on May 16 at 2:21 p.m.
Reserved, my Adblock fortunately censored that ad, but the cost of said ad banner would have been a component of the costs leading to the rate hike request. So we are paying Avista to tell us that we need to pay more. Awesome.
Mike1950 on May 16 at 2:22 p.m.
$92.4 million profit in 2010 up from $87.1 in 2009. Yeah, I can sure see where they are going to need rate increases. How in the world do you people expect any company to make it on just $92.4 to put in the bank?
thencameme on May 16 at 2:34 p.m.
I wish I could do the same thing to my boss. “Hey boss, I am going to get a new car and I was thinking I am going to raise how much I charge you per hour I work” I would like to think if they knew they had 250 million worth of repairs they would have planned for it. I don’t care if you need to raise my rates but don’t make up some lame reason.
misjustice on May 16 at 2:38 p.m.
Ahh, here we go again folks!
I’ll write the WUTC in opposition to the rate increases but I truly don’t expect that to sway the “captured” regulatory commission.
Eagleproducer, I must have missed your post on that facebook page…what’s the link?
william1977 on May 16 at 2:41 p.m.
Get it while you can “Avista”. The day is coming when utilities are a thing of the past… And seriously…it won’t be long.
Dan_at_Avista on May 16 at 2:45 p.m.
If you’d like to learn more about the Washington UTC filing, other than what the media includes in its stories, you can check out the Avista Blog here: http://www.avistautilities.com/community/blog/archive/2011/05/16/051611-1.aspx
You can also send any questions to conversation@avistautilities.com and we will answer them directly. I can try to field questions here, but as you all know, these boards can get a little heated and I’d prefer to avoid the personal attacks.
We’ve also created a website all about this recent filing, check it out here: http://www.avistainfo.com/Home/RatesInAction.aspx
hawken on May 16 at 2:52 p.m.
eagleproducer
You would be more effective in opposing your hyper-left, Democrat colleagues in their staunch, unwavering support of “public monopolies,”,,,, than post a $5 web site.
Let me contrast. I am very fortunate to get my power from “Inland Power.” It’s a co-op. My utility bills are significantly less than what I paid when I lived in under the monopolistic oppression of AVISTA. Monopolies do that you know.
Moreover, for the second year in a row, Inland Power just sent to me over $150 worth of incandescent light bulbs. You know, they kind of look like the “Aussie Onion Fries” you get at the Outback Steakhouse.
I now have enough long term, low energy light bulbs to last for several years. There are various kinds and and watts, including 3-way.
The only problem, as I understand it, is that if I drop one on the floor and it breaks, I have to call the EPA for cleanup. Therefore, I am very careful not to drop them.
“Viva la liberal supported public monopolies!”
You really should press for FREE Enterprise, competition and co-ops. Otherwise, you argue against yourself.
Post your web site address. I’m sure that it will be both very interesting and contradictory with your prolific, liberal, world view.
As usual, virtually everything leads back to one’s political world view. Virtually everything. You’re only one of the many victims of your own, progressive, world view.
MrNatural on May 16 at 2:57 p.m.
Oh for heavens sake…
Byrdie714 on May 16 at 3:01 p.m.
Dan_at_Avista writes: conversation@avistautilities.com and we will answer them directly. I can try to field questions here, but as you all know, these boards can get a little heated and I’d prefer to avoid the personal attacks.
Well Dan……I do hate to say this but Avista isn’t a popular company in this town.
Afterall, we know that Avista had a profitable 2010 at 92.4 million and 87.1 million in 2009 and now you want to increase rates again?? I don’t think so.
Someone needs to be accountable at Avista in terms of tracking the money.
I think it’s time to get Tim Eyman over to Spokane to help us reign in the monstrosity of Avista!
nslopeofw on May 16 at 3:09 p.m.
Dan,
I have Avista, and my power goes out at least 4 or 5 times a year. ALL if the utilities in my neighborhood are buried. I went to the site, (the one that wasnt down for maintenance) and saw the costs are related to upgrading an old system. Obviously my system is not old, yet power outages are normal. And, the last one (saturday) Avista’s “hotline” said “dont bother calling unless your power is out for more than 8 hours”.
Sounds like you need to get with Inland Power and figure out how to run more efficiently. Dont they lease/buy from you?
hawken on May 16 at 3:11 p.m.
Hey Dan:
I understand. You’re doing the best you can to defend a “monopoly.”
Nevertheless, AVISTA is a monopoly. A government controlled monopoly, which is the worst kind.
“Free Market Monopolies” are unlawful. Government controlled monopolies are not.
Monopolies ALWAYS lead to higher costs and less quality. ALWAYS. Competition results in lower costs and increased, product quality.
The American people suffer from what they don’t understand.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on May 16 at 3:20 p.m.
Maybe Avista can save money by stop advertising on TV, radio, online and in print then they wouldn’t have to raise rates all the time. Why does Avista feel the need to advertise? Not like we have a choice to going to another utilities company.
Another idea to lower your costs Avista, have your CEO and managers take a pay cut, I remember an article not to long ago touting Avista’s record earning and record salaries of their management. Where are these record profits that they keep touting going to? If you are making record profits why do you need to raise my rates?
Also, Dan the Avista liar, going to a website sponsored by Avista explaining why they need to raise rates would be like having someone who robbed your house investigate it.
Once again a corporation showing just how out of touch with reality it is.
toliveanddieinla on May 16 at 3:24 p.m.
you wanna pay for new stuff well times are bad and poor people should not be stuck with bill when you get big profits as donald trump would say your fired ,you need to fire some ceos way to many of them or they need pay cuts ,dan avista man works for scum and hope spokesman doesnt take this off board,sure wish someone would challenge avista like at least 2 more companies to keep cost down sounds like monoply i hope the ceos like being greedy and i dont wanna hear we need to keep the stock high i could care less we need to live and not be gouged from greedy companies like avista tyvm have a nice day go zags next year and gl courtney with new pro team
hawken on May 16 at 3:24 p.m.
nslopeofw
I can’t remember the last time I had a power outage. I’m sure Inland Power has had short term power outages due to storms. As for me, I can’t remember the last. I live on the Peone Prairie just North of Bigelow Gulch Road, East of Argonne.
I get an email each month that my Inland Power bill is due. I go to my meter, give them the meter reading, submit that and my electronic check to them on their web site.
Every year or more, they advise me they had a meter reader stop by my house to confirm my meeter reading. Which is more than reasonable.
How many “meeter readers,” I wonder, does AVISTA employ which you all pay for.
Who knows what other cost saving measures Inland Power employes.
stopthewhining on May 16 at 3:26 p.m.
right on Liberal_in…..I whole heartedly agree with everything you just said. Why are they advertising??
Dan_at_Avista on May 16 at 3:29 p.m.
Byrdie714,
Fair enough point about profits, so let’s talk about that. Is making a profit a bad thing? Is making a good profit a bad thing? Is making an ROI that is less than regulators approve a good thing or a bad thing? For the last 5 years or so we’ve earned below our allowable return. I can certainly understand not wanting an increase in your bill if the UTC OKs the increase. They have 11 months to make a ruling. But it’s shortsighted to say that because a company earns a profit that it cannot recover the costs it spends to provide service to its customers.
The profits we make are returned to investors and also re-invested in our company. Regulators - and you - can scrutinize all of our costs and I personally hope you do. The process of filing for a rate increase (or decrease) is public and transparent. We put all the cards on the table. If you – or anyone commenting here – want to become fully informed about why Avista filed an increase request – follow the process. We’ve got nothing to hide. Show up to a rate hearing, they aren’t scary. When you go, share your opinion, but also be ready to learn the reasons why Avista has made a request. If you can’t get involved, I challenge you to learn on your own by using the information we’ve provided here: http://avistainfo.com/Home/RatesInAction.aspx
Again: send me your questions: conversation@avistautilities.com
Albert on May 16 at 3:31 p.m.
PLEASE EVERYONE! take 5 minutes and write a formal complaint on this corporate theft. Don’t sit back and allow this crime to continue. Send your written protest to:
Washington Department of Utilities, 1300 S. Evergreen Park Dr. SW, Olympia, WA. 98504-7250.
Remember come election time to toss Chrisie and her band of pirates - along with every crook politician who receives a donation from Avista.
toliveanddieinla on May 16 at 3:32 p.m.
dan please leave the door and dont come back ok im sick of you allready, who agrees ?
misjustice on May 16 at 3:40 p.m.
“Remember come election time to toss Chrisie and her band of pirates - along with every crook politician who receives a donation from Avista.”
Excellent idea Albert; look at what Mr. Boner’s shadow, McMorris-Rodgers, got in the 2008 campaign cycle from AVISTA
“Top Contributor during the 2008 Election Cycle
Donor Amount (US Dollars)
Avista Corp $ 15,550”
http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Cathy_McMorris_Rodgers
toliveanddieinla on May 16 at 3:42 p.m.
is there a phone number to call to protest this and no i dont wanna talk to dumb dan and his greedy company and someone not getting paid by avista or giving money to avista get my point its called corruption in my dictionary albert i wanna call someone to let them know in a conversation tyvm albert
Byrdie714 on May 16 at 3:45 p.m.
Dan—I don’t disagree with companies making a profit afterall it’s the American way, start a business, make a profit, re-invest in the company, etc, etc.
However seeing the monumental gains that the company has earned in 2009 and 2010, I think it’s a little too soon to be asking for a rate hike. That is why I am questioning the timing as it wasn’t that long ago, Avista increased our rates.
Secondly. moving to Spokane 2 years ago, I’m not impressed with the utilities that services this town. Coming from an area that is serviced by a PUD—I was more satisfied with them than I am by a private entity.
If you want to compare the service, well, granted the longest I went without power was 5 days as we had 130 mph windstorm but outside of that, service was great with a PUD.
I’m sure that one would defend the services of Avista but witnessing the rate hike and now hearing about ANOTHER rate hike—makes me question if the company does have their customer’s best interest at heart….
Dan_at_Avista on May 16 at 3:45 p.m.
nslopeofw,
I honestly don’t know what you’re asking. Nearly all local utilities share electric transmission capacity of some sort. I’m sure Inland does too.
Power isn’t generated inside your neighborhood, so if your lines are buried, then it’s unlikely the cause of your outages were local. Our largest generating facilities are on the Clark Fork, so electricity travels and has multiple paths to get to you.
As for the phone message: I seriously doubt the accuracy of your statement.
Let’s talk advertising – mentioned by a few folks above. The fact that you’ve seen it, means it is working. Advertising isn’t always intended to get you to buy or use more of a product. We’re not asking you to use more power or gas, we’re asking you to look into our reasons for filing a rate case. You’ll also see or hear advertising about safety “Look up and live” or “Call before you dig.” You may notice mentions of energy efficiency and the wise use of energy. Our regulators review our advertising and costs. When it doesn’t meet their criteria, the costs aren’t charged to customers. That’s what regulators do.
misjustice on May 16 at 3:58 p.m.
Hmmm, I remember this from November of last year:
“Washington regulators granted part of Avista’s request for higher rates Friday, but also said the electric-and-natural-gas utility must conduct annual expense audits to make sure that ratepayers aren’t illegally saddled with costs that should be borne by shareholders.
The new rates, effective Dec. 1, could be adjusted downward if irregularities are found, according to an order signed by Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.
The action came after an audit by the state Attorney General’s office, which found that Avista had billed utility customers for $38,000 in expenses that the company’s shareholders should have paid. Those items included:
*Professional portraits and first-class travel for the board of directors;
*Employee gifts, a retirement party and employee entertainment at a sporting event;
*Dues and fees to civic organizations, such as Rotary and chambers of commerce;
*Charitable contributions, advertising to improve Avista’s corporate image and moving costs for a company executive.
Those expenses were part of Avista’s rate proposal, submitted to regulators in March. But since they were flagged by the AG’s Office of Public Counsel’s audit, they were not included in the new rates.”
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/19/regulators-grant-avista-rate-hikes/
Still stickin’ it to the rate payers, Avista?
twhalen on May 16 at 4:06 p.m.
Since they are using our river to generate electricity, perhaps we need to charge them for the use of the water.
I am wondering if Avista gets any corporate tax break along the lines of General Electric’s (GE paid $0 in taxes last year and received $4 billion in corporate welfare).
Seriously, increasing our electric rates is going to put a serious dent in the already slow economic recovery. But I suppose Avista doesn’t care about the people in this area as long as they get theirs. Thanks for being a great member of the community.
Where do we sign up to become a PUD?
Common_Sense on May 16 at 4:06 p.m.
Times are tough, Avista needs to learn to tighten their belts. No more handouts for them.
lowtechmaster on May 16 at 4:12 p.m.
Avista is NOT a public utililty. It is a PRIVATE one. Public utilities have lower rates than private ones. Both are regulated, but the regulations differ. If all utilities were privatized, consumers would pay more…PRIVATE companies need to make a profit! If all were public, consumers would pay less.Public ones need only to meet expenses, not make a profit for investors. WAKE UP! If the government did not regulate (well, sort of) private utilities, they could charge whatever they wanted to charge. Have you noticed that your cable company (e.g., Comcast) can raise its rates whenever it feels like it? That’s because government regulations were effectively gutted by Congress. Removing most federal regulations on the financial industry also was directly responsible for the recent/current deep recession. And if the FDIC (a federal agency) did not exist, anyone who had a dime in any account in WaMu would have lost all their funds when, because of its corporate greed and lack of federal oversight, it went belly up!
nslopeofw on May 16 at 4:23 p.m.
Seriously doubt my statement? Dont call again unless your power is out for 8 hours, was the statement, altho not in those words. Sorry if you dont believe me.
My question is do you and Inland get your power from the same places. Does Inland purchase any power from Avista? If they do, how can their costs be so much lower? They do not have any of their own dams, so must purchase their power. Yet, they can offer this power at a much cheaper cost than Avista, which has its own dams.
http://www.inlandpower.com/newsletter/ipl_newsletter7-07.pdf
My guess is that you get some if not a lot of your power from the same places, and have the ability to supplement with your own hydroelectric dams. You also sell your extra power to other places, rather than adding it to the “grid” to lower costs. So, why should you get to raise costs, when other utilities are able to profit, but dont need to gouge.
I am all for a business making a profit, but when MS had a monopoly, they got sued. Monopolies are not good for anyone.
lowtechmaster on May 16 at 4:23 p.m.
I have met with and talked to Dan. He is an honorable and knowledgeable person who has an impossible job to do. I asked him very hard questions, and he did not fudge on the answers. As long as Avista is a private utility, it has every right to make a profit within the bounds set by the regulatory body (which, to me, seems to grant almost everything—different issue). If Avista was public, we would all save about 10% on our bills, and be subject to less frequent rate increases. Avista, of course, has rates set in advance for about a year, whatever their costs for energy are during that year. If all gasoline stations had that restriction, we’d be paying a whole lot less for gasoline now, but would be subject to a huge increase next year. Do I like the all-to-often requests for rate increases? I certainly do not. Do I think Avista’s rates are too high? I certainly do. But it is the regulatory body that allows all of that!! Please write, email, call the WUTC and PROTEST!!!
jddavis on May 16 at 4:24 p.m.
Yeah, I’m ordering a pellet/corn/wheat stove. I LIKE INLAND POWER!
P.S. Depreciation is an expense allowed to provide incentive to replace equipment; i.e. purchase goods from other suppliers.
cdspokesreader on May 16 at 4:30 p.m.
I understand the need for a company to make a profit, but when do we cross the line because that company is a monopoly. As far as I know, I can’t get my power from any other company. It’s one thing in a free market to have companies competing for their share and profits are determined by the service they provide and is balanced out by competition. When there is no competition, how is this stopped? I undertand there is a regulatory agency that has to approve the rate hikes, but if Avista is spending money on things I don’t think are necessary and thus driving up expenses, what is my recourse?
eagleproducer on May 16 at 5:11 p.m.
hawken: Again, before you graduate from SFCC and high school next spring, take one of my reading comprehension seminars. My post included co-ops as an alternative to monopolies. You have your ideological compass more humped up than I thought if you really believe it is the “ultra left wing” that is responsible for monopolies like Avista. If you re-visit your U.S. history you’ll discover it was the “ultra left wing” that was/is responsible for most of the anti-trust legislation and litigation historically.
How can someone be more wrong about so many things? Oh wait, I’ll just wait for Dazee’s, errrrrrr, Betsy Cowles’ next post.
I’ve had power with Inland Power before. They weren’t demonstrably cheaper than Avista and I never got a shipment of anything other than a bill after I called in my meter reading. And if I forgot to read my meter they charged me an “estimation” fee.
PUDS are the way to go. That is why counties like Benton, Grant, Douglas, etc in Washington are killing places like stuck-in-the-rut Spokane. BMW isn’t going to make components here, they are going to make them in Moses Lake and their decision was dictated almost entirely upon power rates.
hawken on May 16 at 5:14 p.m.
lowtechmaster
How many angles can dance on the head of a needle?
Do you actually think that AVISTA is NOT making a profit? As a government monopoly? Please!
Avista is regulated by the Public Utilities Commissions in each of the states in which it operates.
Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission
Chandler Plaza Bldg.
1300 S Evergreen Park Dr SW
Olympia, WA 98504
(800) 562-6150
(360) 664-1120
www.wutc.wa.gov
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Consumer Assistance
PO Box 83720
(800) 432-0369 In-state only
(208) 334-0300
www.puc.state.id.us
Oregon Public Utility Commission
550 Capitol Street NE, Ste. 215
Salem, OR 97301-2551
(800) 522-2404 Consumer Affairs
(503) 378-6600
www.puc.state.or.us
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 5:16 p.m.
Greed is good! It’s the American way! Avista just has a superior capitalistic business model. Frankly, as a shareholder, I have absolutely no complaints about this increase!
eagleproducer on May 16 at 5:17 p.m.
lowtech: The savings would be much more than 10%, especially for large commercial users. My sister lives in the city of Seattle and rarely has a power bill surpass forty dollars. That’s less than what I pay for a week in Spokane and she has a larger home.
hawken on May 16 at 5:27 p.m.
Spokane_Citizen
How revealing that your world view changes from far-left liberalism to “socialist capitalism” depending upon what stocks you own?
I’ll agree with you on this point. Stockholders should expect maximum gains.
The problem here is that AVISTA is NOT a FREE Market, Capitalist Company. They are a government sanctioned, protected, monopoly that allows no competition.
You trash privately owned companies for seeking maximum profits for their shareholders, on the one hand,,,,, and then defend government run monopolies, in which you have invested on the other.
According to your hypocrisy, private profits are evil, government controlled profits are good. But, only if you own share in the government controlled monopolies.
So what is your opinion of GM (Government Motors)? Controlling interest owned by the taxpayer who had no choice as to whether or not they owned common stock in the failed company….. And which, now, the Obama Administration has or will sell the GM stocks at a huge loss to the unwilling taxpayer.
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 5:30 p.m.
Hawken…you’ve got me confused with Spokane_Liberal. I think all profits (government protected or otherewise) are good, especially when they benefit me. I’m in your corner, little brother. In reality, we’re simpatico!
hawken on May 16 at 5:36 p.m.
Spokane_Citizen
“I think all profits (government protected or otherewise) are good, especially when they benefit me. I’m in your corner, little brother.”
If what you say is true, which I will accept as you state, please accept my sincere apology and acknowledgement that the confusion is mine.
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 5:45 p.m.
I am liberal about some things and very conservative about others….as I suspect most intelligent free-thinkers find themselves.
hawken on May 16 at 5:46 p.m.
Spokane_Citizen
Let me do better with no “caveats.”
Please accept my sincere apology and acknowledgement that the confusion is mine.
westerly on May 16 at 5:51 p.m.
Spokane, Puget Sound has public utilities…cheaper electricity than Avista provides. Spokane is screwed..forever…move!
misjustice on May 16 at 5:56 p.m.
I place the Avista CEO’s, EEO’s, PTO’s, UFO’s, etc with the municipal officials of Bell, California. Eight people (the mayor, city council members, etc) in that town thought they should be paid millions & voted themselves raises. It’s a serious matter when officials breach their duty to the public and enrich themselves with enormous obscene salaries which then trigger pensions of similar magnitude.
I think a lawsuit should be filed against Avista executive for capitalizing on a monopoly. It is wrong when some in this town have to choose whether to heat their homes in the winter or buy food while the executives live a lavish lifestyle. Power & food are necessities and not a luxury……..something needs to be done & Avista needs to be investigated in how they are operated.
DeeDee_Loberg on May 16 at 6:14 p.m.
Why are the shareholders not absorbing these infrastructure upgrades? It is their house. I would never think that anyone else would be responsible for upgrading my house. I already pay you for the services you provide me. It’s up to you to make sure you can provide those services, not me.
Albert on May 16 at 6:20 p.m.
I just sent off my protest letter to UTC and requested how to set up a PUD to replace Avista.
If anyone is serious about working on this - not kidding - then send me a note: Albert, P.O. Box 28387, Spokane, WA. 99228. I will contact each of you individually and let you know what the UTC sends to me on this matter. If it is a workable solution, then we can hold a meeting of all interested parties and begin the process. This is not a joke good friends, I’m serious.
gmorton on May 16 at 6:31 p.m.
FYI:
Average residential electricity use in the US is 920 kWh per month (2008).
http://www.eia.doe.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3
Here are the current rates for 920 kWh for Avista and Seattle City Light:
Avista (private):
Base charge: $6.00
First 600 kWh: $39.76
601-920 kWh: $24.67
______________________
TOTAL: $70.43
http://www.avistautilities.com/services/energypricing/wa/elect/Documents/WA_E_shortcuts%20-%2012.01.10.pdf
Seattle City Light (city-owned):
Base charge: $3.47
First 300 kWh: $13.83
301-920 kWh: $59.27
______________________
TOTAL: $76.57
http://www.seattle.gov/light/accounts/rates/docs/2011/Jan/2011Jan_rsc.pdf
NOTE: City Light applies its rate step on a daily basis; Avista on a monthly basis. So the City light daily rates are multiplied by 30.
If this comparison is in error, perhaps Dan from Avista can correct.
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 6:57 p.m.
DeeDee….in such a case why would they have any shareholders at all? They’d be leaving in droves; their interest is in seeing a return on their investment, which can only be generated by the revenue provided by utility users.
Comparing your house to Avista’s infrastructure is not appropriate. Nobody will help pay for your housing upgrades because they have no interest in (or use of) your housing. It benefits them in no way, while your use of Avista’s energy services benefits you….which is why you will pay for the upgrades.
zelda on May 16 at 7:02 p.m.
I don’t get all the carping about profit. It’s the margin that matters and frankly I don’t know what is considered a respectable profit margin for a utility this size.
That said, people need to realize that it’s a company’s job to make a profit and, in the case of utilities, to pay regular dividends to shareholders. So by that logic, the only ones with a right to complain are the “owners” (shareholders).
And who looks out for the interests of shareholders? Mostly, it’s the board and we all know how fair and unbiased BoDs are (kidding). Then there’s the issue of regulatory capture, as @misjustice noted.
Nowadays I’m reserving most of my monopoly ire for Comcast and health insurance companies, but there is very little citizens can do about any of it. The companies contribute funds to help elect the candidates they want, then hire lobbyists to craft the legislation they want. It’s a closed system exploited to maximum advantage, realized mostly in executive pay.
It’s skewed to reward ownership, although I tend to doubt that Dan will advise you to quit whining and buy the stock.
lowtechmaster on May 16 at 7:03 p.m.
Hawken, I never said that Avista did not make a profit…exactly the opposite. The profit is at least 10%, probably more. Eagle, you are correct. Gramma, you are also correct.
DeeDee_Loberg on May 16 at 7:21 p.m.
Thanks for your comment Spokane_Citizen, but do those shareholders have no responsibility for their investment to be sustainable and profitable? My payments to Avista benefit more than just me they seem to benefit shareholders and executives also.
gmorton on May 16 at 7:26 p.m.
DeeDee wrote,
“My payments to Avista benefit more than just me they seem to benefit shareholders and executives also.”
Yes, they do. As they should, since their efforts and investments enabled you to light your house, cook your dinner, and watch your favorite soaps.
DeeDee_Loberg on May 16 at 7:32 p.m.
Lol on the soaps thing… I’m much to busy for that:)
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 7:41 p.m.
Uh…the soaps have disappeared…everybody is too busy for that.
gmorton on May 16 at 7:45 p.m.
lowtechmaster wrote,
“The profit is at least 10%, probably more.”
False.
http://ycharts.com/companies/AVA/dividend_yield
lowtechmaster on May 16 at 8:00 p.m.
gmorton, you are wrong. That figure, if accurate, is the % they pay the shareholders on THEIR investment, not the % profit Avista earns. Any such “profit” given to shareholders excludes all such things as advertising, scholarships, and the like.
westerly on May 16 at 8:04 p.m.
ummm…Verner! This means less money going into your trough to feed your pigs…
gmorton on May 16 at 8:05 p.m.
Sorry, lowtech. The profit *is* what is paid to shareholders. Advertising, etc., are business expenses.
jddavis on May 16 at 8:30 p.m.
Shareholders only realize a profit (loss) when share(s) are sold. Dividends are the result of an increase in company value where as a portion of which is paid to shareholders. Typically, dividends are not paid if the book-value of a company does not increase, although this isn’t always the case.
Most investors choose to reinvest the dividends as additional shares of stock, unless they are dependent on those dividends as income cashflow.
DickAdams on May 16 at 8:30 p.m.
Bert Caldwell the newly appointed SR OP ED, when he was the SR biz writer, covered up for the low life at Avista. Remember when the officials at WWP aka Avista tried to hang a rap on an employee who had committed suicide but forgot to look at the calendar and the poor soul had been dead for several days when the low life officials got caught trying to blame somebody else for their blunder. The SR was one of the last newspapers in the country to print the story. It was buried inside the paper instead of a banner headline above the fold on page 1.
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 8:33 p.m.
Somehow, someway….verner is responsible for this!
Spokane_Citizen on May 16 at 8:38 p.m.
Dick, I’ve never heard that story. Please elaborate with more details.
misjustice on May 16 at 9:01 p.m.
Spokane_
I think this may be the story that Dick is referring to:
“Wednesday, August 22, 2001
Spokane
Avista Energy hit with $2.1 million fine
Karen Dorn Steele - Staff writer
Avista Energy will pay a $2.1 million fine to settle civil charges that it illegally manipulated the electricity futures market for higher profits in 1998.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced the fine and a “cease and desist” order Tuesday against the Avista Corp. subsidiary, along with smaller fines to two former Avista Energy traders.
Avista Energy and traders Michael Griswold and Thomas Johns, a 1997 founder of Avista Energy, consented to the fines and orders without admitting or denying any wrongdoing.
In a 10-count complaint filed Tuesday, the commission also is taking action against three other traders who haven’t settled with the commission.
They are charged with participating in the illegal scheme to boost Avista Energy profits by manipulating prices for electricity futures contracts in the West.
The commission filed the civil charges against William H. Taylor of Houston, Avista Energy’s former vice president of trading strategies; former Avista Energy trader Robert Kristufek of Chicago; and a New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) floor broker, Anthony J. DiPlacido of Bellmore, N.Y.
The three traders face possible cease and desist orders, civil fines and trading prohibitions.
It’s the first time the trading commission has fined a utility for electricity commodities trading violations, an agency official said Tuesday.
“This is a significant fine from a historical standpoint for the commission,” said Phyllis Cela, the agency’s acting enforcement chief.
The $2.1 million penalty — to be paid within the next 10 days — will come from Avista Corp. shareholders, not its ratepayers, said Patrick Lynch, Avista director of corporate communications.
Avista chose to settle the charges to avoid litigation costs that would distract it from its core business, Lynch said.”
continues….
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/pf.asp?date=082201&ID=s1011154&cat=section.spokane
DickAdams on May 16 at 9:05 p.m.
The employee who took the short cut was a trader for Avista and screwed up some trades on gas futures himself. May have been the reason for his suicide but because his involvement in trading, subsequently Avista decided to throw the dice again and rolled craps. The low life that threw the dice again thought they could put the blame on the poor soul that killed himself but they, obviously, forgot to check the calendar and got caught blaming him because he`d been dead for several days when craps were thrown. Investigative reporter Steele wrote the story. The Wall Street Journal was the first to report the ghoul story.
DickAdams on May 16 at 9:16 p.m.
Avista also got caught along with Enron over on the coast and pleaded no contest and paid over $2. million over fixing rates breaking the law. I`ll look in my files but seems to me MsJ may have pointing out that story. Have not got time tonight to read MsJ posting but the amount of money makes me think of the /Enron deal. The casino deal on Wall Street with gas futures is where the low life blamed the poor soul that pulled the plug on his life.
zelda on May 16 at 9:22 p.m.
That was back in the days when the WSJ was publishing regional sections. It was nice while it lasted; they did a long piece on RPS.
Avista has mostly cleaned up its act since then. You have to put it in the context of the times, with Enron dominating the energy landscape. Lobbyists across the country were pushing for U.S.-wide deregulation. There were rolling brown-outs in CA. Futures trading went nuts. Avista was telling us it was because of drought, demand from computer server farms, the growth of electronic appliances, the Salmon Recovery Act and five or six other things I can’t remember.
Then Enron fell apart and we realized we’d been had.
Enron blew up when some skeptical analysts started asking tough questions on a conference call. Skilling went non-linear and the rest is history. Big question today is “Are there any skeptical stock analysts who will ask tough questions during conference calls?”
Seems like the principal clawback action in the Enron aftermath came from Snohomish County PUD.
D Statler on May 16 at 9:35 p.m.
Here we go again! I’ll bet I don’t see any of you pathetic cry babies standing in front of AVISTA picketing this mis- behavior.Just like last years go around.I will be standing down there by myself. Not one of you will help to force Rob McKenna to represent the people instead of AVISTA and the UTC. How can the Attourney Generals office represent our interests and that of the UTC and AVISTA ? CONFLICT?
Don’t set out here and cry.Get off your A####’s and do something this time.I will be standing out on Mission Ave again. Where will you be? What will you do to help our efforts to defeat this latest unjustice? Who is Rob McKennas boss?
DickAdams on May 16 at 9:47 p.m.
zelda, the problem I have is Avista got by with a crime and nobody ended up in the slammer. Its like a TV script where the crime may be resurrected and somebody will have to pay the piper years later. You also say Avista has cleaned up there act. I don`t think so with the kind of profits and continued increases to rape the users with increase and increase and increase. BTW, except for Bob Apple, each councilperson has received money from Avista.
DickAdams on May 16 at 9:48 p.m.
I`ll be posting more on tomorrows thread.
hamrsrscarry on May 16 at 10:00 p.m.
hey, guys and gals, if you get your power by hanging an illegal jumper off the Kootenai Electric line along the road to your trailer behind those scraggly Ponderosa Pines, and you know you do, why are you thundering at Avista?
zelda on May 16 at 10:04 p.m.
@DickAdams — It’s a matter of degree. They booted out the CEO from Dynergy and restored the dividend. Figuratively speaking, restoring the dividend absolves all sins if one is a major stockholder. I don’t know if or how they improved their governance beyond that, but they probably did enough to look all bright and shiny again in the next prospectus and report to regulators.
There isn’t much ratepayers or small individual investors can do except provide monetary support to the political funds of activist groups with clout such as the Sierra Club and some of the good-governance agitators. Dealing with protestors standing in front of the HQ with signs is a minor irritant to them as it is to any corporation. They pay attention, of course, but it won’t prompt any systemic changes.
“Meet the new boss/Same as the old boss.”
gmorton on May 16 at 10:07 p.m.
jddavis wrote,
“Shareholders only realize a profit (loss) when share(s) are sold.”
No. That is a capital gain. The company’s profit is what is paid to shareholders, plus any retained earnings (money it puts in the bank).
hamrsrscarry on May 16 at 10:09 p.m.
Anyway, Avista is a great corporate citizen and loves us and the Inland NW very much and knows that water is not a renewable resource, that God only put x amount of water on the planet and it has to be stewarded wisely and Avista knows how to do that with their big dams and things.
This is my free verse poem for Avista
Water, rain,
cataclysm
currents, floods
the light switch is dewy
trout leap
over my hedges
sandbagging all night
this is the dystopia
Avista free
no dams no hope
no light shines
Avista means
love and ready
kilowatts
love and cookies
baking in ovens
love transformer
set your microwave
on Avista
hamburger thawed
lewis8457 on May 17 at 6:04 a.m.
if the city we live in isn’t gouging us for higher utility costs every 3 months. Avista is right behind them sucking up the money people need to live on. Just so a select few can live in luxury.
no one in charge of a monopoly should make 3 million plus per year all that does is make people hate Avista more.
I called to make arrangements to pay my past due bill yesterday and found a whole different attitude from the billing people. last year they were nice and easy to deal with this year it is like dealing with the city pay up or we shut you off, period.
With the constant increase in tax and fees, Avista will be working along side the city to get all the hard working folks to move out of this crooked town. And take their tax money else where.
nslopeofw on May 17 at 9:26 a.m.
Ole unca Dan has not replied to me here, or in e-mail since i asked where they bought their power, and if the sold any to Inland. I’m sure Dan is a great guy, and replying on this site probably is quite annoying, but when you put yourself out there, you should expect to get asked.
My Dad worked for an electric co-op in Alaska when i was growing up, and later when i bought my first house, i used said co-op. Its name is Matanuska Electric Assoc. Seeing how it was run, and what they charged, shows me Avista is gouging. MEA bought ALL of their power, and still gave checks back to the customers at the end of some years. The CEO/administrators make BIG bucks, and the linemen are union. yet, somehow, they were able to operate in an incredibly hostile environment, and still not gouge.
D Statler on May 17 at 4:50 p.m.
Maybe sueing the attourneys general office for failure to protect and conflict of interest would make more sense.How can this be fair representation ? Maybe standing in front of Christine Gregoire’s office with picket signs would be more effective than standing in front of AVISTA headquarters. I am saddened that these public officials elected to protect us have turned cheek to avoid loosing their corporate contributions. We all know this MONOPOLY needs to be broken into smaller pieces.The only way to encourage fair market practices. Nobody seems to want to do anything about it. :^(