Dive Summary:
- As Boulder, Colo., prepares to become the country's first public utility in years, other U.S. cities weigh following suit while private utilities fear a surge of public takeovers.
- Private utilities have generally repudiated such moves, contending that public takeovers leave private utilities unable to recoup funds spent to bolster the grid for the long-term; David Eves, chief executive of the Public Service Company of Colorado, Boulder's current utility, claimed that private utilities specialize in what they do and will be more efficient than a local government.
- The mainstream arguments for public utilities are that non-profit municipal utilities do not answer to shareholders, are exempt from specific taxes, pay lower salaries to executives, supply cheaper energy (click here for infographic), can supply more environmentally-friendly energy, have the ability to use more funds to upgrade infrastructure and are generally more reliable.
- While cities are watching Boulder's move closely, not many have moved in the same direction just yet; cities must weigh whether the battle to take control, with its prohibitive cost, lengthy duration and a long line of political hoops to jump through, is really worth it.
From the article:
“... 'I don’t foresee a rush by communities to do this,' said Stephen L. DiNatale, a state representative from Fitchburg, in the north central part of the state, who recently reintroduced a bill that would require utilities to sell for the going rate if a town had the money, as determined by state regulators. 'But I think having that ability to do it would help to keep some of these investor-owned utilities in line.'
Sometimes the conversion goes the other way. Colorado Springs, Colo., is studying privatizing its utility, while residents of Vero Beach, Fla., are set to vote this month on whether to sell their utility to a private company, Florida Power & Light. ..."