IBJNews

Indiana OKs 26-percent Indianapolis water increase

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Regulators have approved a 26-percent rate increase for customers of the Indianapolis water system, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission announced Wednesday.

The rate is less than the 33.4-percent increase the city's waterworks department requested. In a press release, the IURC said the utility's average customer will pay about $6 more per month.

The increase is on top of a 10.8 percent emergency rate increase that the IURC approved in mid-2009.

Indianapolis officials say they need the new money for about $111 million in infrastructure projects and upgrades, and to provide more financial stability.

“More than 75 percent of this increase is attributable to capital expenditures, specifically investments that will assure the integrity of the system and the quality of the water now and for future generations,” said IURC Commissioner Larry Landis in a written statement.

Landis said one out of every four dollars being spent on the capital projects are needed for the city to comply with "environmental mandates handed down by the federal government.”

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Tapped out
    When are the citizens of Indiana going to wake up and revolt against this madness? They were already approved for an increase and now our water will have incresaed by more than a third?!?

    Duke went up as well as did Vectren. When are we going to realize then average person is one utility bill away for a shelter?
  • They Got All They Wanted
    We get hosed! The numbers story indicates that of the most recent increase, 75% is for capital expenditures and 25% of that is for Federal mandates. I want to know what the 10.8% emergency increase was for, and what the remaining 25% of the latest 26% increase is for. In addition, I hasten to remind IBJ readers that 26% on top of 10.8% is not 36.8%. It is 39.61%. This appears to be another very cozy relationship between regulators and the regulated. The IBJ and that other big newspaper in town need to do some very thorough investigative reporting.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT