EDITORIAL: Citizens' utility deal is smart move

 IBJ Staff
March 13, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Editorial

Much work remains before the city’s water and sewer utilities are sold to Citizens Energy Group, but the general outline of the deal makes sense and deserves support—not political posturing—as final terms are hammered out.

The deal, announced March 10 by Mayor Greg Ballard, calls for Citizens to assume the city’s $1.5 billion in utility debt and pay $425 million in cash to gain control of the water and sewer systems.

Citizens has been a good steward of the city’s natural gas utility for more than 100 years. We see no reason the company wouldn’t be equally careful with the city’s water and sewer utilities.

Indeed, Indianapolis has a unique opportunity to place these vital assets in friendly hands. Citizens’ status as a public charitable trust means ownership is essentially public, but without the political ramifications and bureaucracy usually associated with government ownership.

The biggest advantage to the deal, of course, is the $425 million in sale proceeds that will flow to the city for infrastructure repairs and upgrades. Securing that money would be huge for a government that has blocks of crumbling sidewalks and miles of bumpy roads to contend with.

The infrastructure cash wouldn’t matter if the deal were a loser in other respects, but it’s a major benefit that can’t be overlooked. Where else would the money come from to fix these festering problems? Taxing our way out of trouble isn’t realistic, politically or economically.

Early opposition to the deal has focused on the perceived lack of public control over rate increases if the utilities aren’t government-owned. Rate increases are a legitimate concern, but hand-wringing about the city’s political class’ relinquishing control isn’t justified.

The water utility has only been owned by the city since it was purchased from Merrillville-based NiSource Inc. in 2002 for $515 million. The city’s ownership of the sewer utility predates that, but ownership shouldn’t be confused with control. Federal mandates mean costly upgrades regardless of who owns the sewer system.

The state’s Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission will continue to vet requests for rate increases, as it does with all utilities. Under city control, the local water utility has shown up on the IURC’s docket frequently in recent years.

The commission is weighing a request for a 35-percent rate increase for capital improvements and approved an emergency 11-percent hike last year.

Rates will go up under Citizens, but by 2025 the amount consumers pay is projected to be 25 percent less under Citizens’ watch than under other scenarios.

Supporting the deal doesn’t mean hard questions shouldn’t be asked. Citizens will have to quell fears that taking on extra debt won’t impair its bond ratings, which would drive up the cost of borrowing and future projects.

On balance, though, it’s difficult to see a better scenario for the city’s water and sewer utilities and its deteriorated infrastructure. City and state officials should approve the deal as quickly as possible.•


To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.


  • There is no freelunch
    Where do you clowns think this money is going to come from? It will come out of the pockets of the citizens. With this deal, we are guaranteed to have $425 million more extracted from our pockets than before. Meanwhile, the Mayor and his cronies can hand out a plethora of wasteful contracts that will result in more improperly paved and constructed streets, more improperly located and constructed sidewalks, badly designed bike lanes, and other short- and long-term boondoggles.

    While I have no doubt that Citizens Gas can more efficiently bill its customers, etc., there will be no great savings to be garnered because of the massive mismanagement of this asset over the last half-dozen years or so.

    Maybe, if the Mayor and the Council would engage in real long-term thinking (but that would take a brain) and stop handing out contracts and sanctioning the theft of taxpayer money or just simply stealing it themselves, there would be adequate money to fund critical city services. Instead they use the city resources to bestow favors and build empires instead of actually delivering city services.

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.