Springfield meets
challenge of owning utilities
By PAM ADAMS of the Journal Star SPRINGFIELD - Peoria's city fathers sold its municipal water plant for $225,000 in cash in 1889. The sons of the fathers have been trying to get it back ever since. The original buyers, private investors out of New York state, also agreed to make infrastructure improvements and assume $475,000 in debt, raising the price tag to $700,000. Down the line, subsequent leaders continually questioned whether the bailout was worth the loss of local control. The state's capitol has owned a water system since 1839, longer than
Peoria has been trying to buy one back. It's controlled the city's electric service for
almost as long. "We've always had our own water and power plant," says city
alderman Frank Kunz, "That's all I've ever known, is the city owning it." Peoria can say it controlled the city's water supply once upon a
time, but Pekin has never had a city-owned water system, which accounts for different
procedures in each city's current attempt to buy out Illinois-American Water Co.
operations in their districts. After a successful court fight over its right to buy out the company,
Peoria has begun the process of negotiating a purchase price with Illinois-American, who,
along with its predecessors, has adamantly opposed selling for as long as Peoria has tried
to buy it back. Meanwhile, Pekin is waiting for state regulators to decide if the
city can take over the water service through eminent domain rights. Both cities' forays into the municipal water world skirt the edge of
much broader, complex, increasingly controversial debates on the merits of investor-owned
companies versus not-for-profit utilities. The debate goes deeper than which type offers the best service for
the lowest rates. What's emerging is a clash of competing ideologies. One says private
enterprise always runs utilities better than governments, the other counters that
utilities like water and electricity are too basic to the public good to be treated as
profit-making commodities. Peoria and Pekin are merely dipping a big toe, so to speak, in the
waters of publicly-owned, not-for-profit utilities. Even if buy-out efforts succeed, they plan to retain control while
contracting management to private companies - a form of privatization that's not exactly
what advocates of publicly-owned utilities mean when they tout the advantages of local
control. Springfield has always had a different attitude. The official name is Office of Public Utilities, but it's known as
Springfield City, Water, Light and Power. An inscription at the entrance to the water
purification plant reads, "A Monument to the Ability of the People to Serve
Themselves and Build for Posterity." CWLP's general offices are downtown in city hall, upstairs from the
police department. Southeast of downtown, man-made, city-owned Lake Springfield is the
city's water source. It's also a city-owned recreation area and home to the city's
lakeshore power plant. Incidentally, the electric division is the water division's largest
customer, the state of Illinois is second. Not only does the water and electric utility burn Illinois coal to
save Illinois jobs, it manages city-owned residential property surrounding the lake.
Springfield public officials are so steeped in the total public-power
package, they talk confidently of taking on more. AmerenCILCO, the investor-owned utility that also serves Peoria,
provides gas to Springfield residents. CWLP's finance director, Al Monson, says he'd love
to see the city take over CILCO's service to residents, though he knows that would never
happen. With cable rates pushing higher, the city has explored the potential of getting
into the cable business. According to Monson, municipal ownership of water and electric
utilities has brought Springfield the advantages typically associated with public
utilities: low rates, tax-exempt borrowing power, and the ability to guide the city's
growth. CWLP returns a percentage of its revenues, in lieu of taxes, to the
city's corporate fund. Last year's total payment was about $3.5 million, including about
$300,000 for water. "We look at it as dividends accrued to customers," Monson
says. But Springfield faces the same kinds of challenges that made many
cash-strapped municipally-owned water utilities either sell out or turn to private
management to save money. Rates will eventually have to be increased substantially to make
needed infrastructure improvements and build another lake for an alternative supply source
during droughts. "Rates are inexpensive here, too inexpensive," says new
CWLP general manager Todd Renfrow. "People have gotten spoiled." The city also deals with the issues investor-owned utilities often
cite as the downside of municipal ownership, from political appointments to different
rates for customers outside city boundaries. CWLP does charge higher rates to the six
neighboring communities it serves. "These rates subsidize rates for our
residents," Monson says. Contrary to history in Peoria and Pekin, municipally-owned water
systems like Springfield's are the norm. Eighty-five percent of cities control their water
supply. Municipal electric utilities, like Springfield's, are a minor part of the
industry. More than 70 percent of the nation's electric customers buy from investor-owned
utilities. But both sets of statistics are changing. In the wake of Enron-esque
debacles and higher rates tied to deregulation, more and more cities are calling for local
control of investor-owned electric utilities. Faced with budget deficits and huge costs to
upgrade aging infrastructures and make other improvements, more and more municipally-owned
water systems hope to save money by hiring private companies to manage their water
systems. In Springfield, Monson is still sure cities can compete with private
businesses. "I maintain one of the biggest advantages of municipal ownership
is municipal control," he says. "You lose some of that if you contract it out,
but you still have a hammer." Over the course of a 164-year history of municipal ownership,
Springfield has gone through most of the challenges facing public utilities today. During
a money crunch in the early 1900s, the city council diverted water earnings to other uses,
resulting in a decade of poor maintenance and bad service. Though the city went through many battles before it became the sole
provider of electricity in the 1960s, one early 1900s battle literally resulted in a riot
in city hall. Similarly, Peoria's previous attempts to buy out a water company
hinted at ideological divisions shaping up today. In a 1930s attempt to lower rates by threatening to exercise the
city's take-over option, Mayor E.N. Woodruff assured citizens a city-owned water system
could be operated as a "public trust," similar to libraries. "It is my belief that every progressive City should own its
water works on account of its close relation to public health and fire protection,"
Woodruff said in a published letter. By the 1950s, Peoria leaders took a more materialistic view regarding
control of the water system. "Water is a profitable commodity," then-mayor Eugene Leiter
noted during another doomed council debate on the subject. Public trust or profitable commodity? Neither Woodruff's argument, or Leiter's, swayed crucial opinion in the first half of the last century. But they did prove the old maxim about history refusing to stay in the past. |