The committee on Environmental Protection and energy will
now come to order today, we have 1, agenda item before. The
committee is subject, matter hearing regarding the
Illinois, Commerce commission's, ruling on people's gas
System modernization Program. Uh, we're going to begin with
the roll, call to establish quorum to begin. Uh chairwoman
Haden is present.
Uh, Vice chair Ken.
Alder laspada.
Hey.
Alder Ramirez.
Alder Lopez.
Thank you. Uh, Alder Tavares.
Alderic. Joe Lopez.
All your Crews.
Alto Rodriguez, Sanchez.
Alder, Conway, Alder, Reilly
Alder Lawson.
Alder clay.
Alder, Martin Alderman, a hoppenworth
All right.
They're being 9 members present. We have a quorum. All
right, joining us virtually, we have Alders Lawson. Oh
excuse me. Sorry canson surprise. Uh and
Yeah. And and Alderman Moore.
And anybody else? All right, cool. Pearl. 59 could have a
motion to approve, Alders, canoes and more as remote
participation. All right. Aldo Rodriguez Sanchez so moves
all those in favor. Say I
all those opposed say nay and the opinion of the chairs,
have it and Alders, canoes and more will be marked as
present for today's meeting. Um, can you guys verify?
You're there? Alder kutson.
President. Thanks chair. Thank you Alderman, Moore.
I'm here, I'm not on committee, but I just want to attend
hear the information. It's fantastic. Thank you for being
here. All right, I don't think we have any other
non-members present at this time, we would begin public
comment. Um, but none of you guys wanted to talk
What's happening even today? All right, there being no
public commenters that have signed up in a timely manner.
The public comment period has concluded.
Um, I would like to note that the committee did receive 1
written, public comment, and it's been sent out to you all
via email. Our first order of business, is the rule 45
report from April, which was sent out to the committee.
Could I have a motion to approve, the rule, 45 report,
All right Alderman, now hoppenworth so moves all those in
favor. Say I
all those opposed say, nay
the opinion of the chair of the eyes have it. Our only
agenda item before the committee today is a subject matter.
Hearing on the Illinois. Commerce commission's ruling on
the people's gas System modernization project which is now
being referred to as the pipe replacement project or PRP.
on February 20th, the Illinois Commerce Commission issued a
a ruling on people's gas, SMP after having positive for
than a year. As part of people's gas rate hike case the ICC
issued a ruling in November 2023, that paused the program
and disallowed the entire proposed 2024, pipe replacement
program.
The pause allowed the ICC to investigate and evaluate, uh,
the program which had come under increased scrutiny. After
concerns about mismanagement surface and cost ballooned.
the city which was a party to the rate increased case and
the system modernization program evaluation as the ICC to
reevaluate the pipe replacement project and to disallow
pipe replacement. Projects that people's gas was not able
to sufficiently justify
in its February order, the ICC permitted people's gas to
resume work within a limited scope and set of replacing its
entire Natural Gas Pipe system. The ICC ruled that people's
gas is only to retire at risk, gas pipes that present an
acute safety risk by 2035,
To ensure compliance with the order. The ICC will also
appoint, a safety monitor, until the project is complete
helping to create additional oversight and accountability.
People's guests will also be required to provide a greater
data on emissions to the city which will help realize our
climate action plan.
Climate change is real and it's already creating
catastrophic disasters around the world. And here at home,
From raging wildfires to record-breaking hurricanes the
harsh realities that a warming Planet brings with the
devastating consequences. This ruling takes that into
consideration by disallowing people's gas to combine at
risk. Pipe replacement with a broad broader system
conversion as it had previously been doing.
It's incumbent upon this body other lawmakers and Regulators
to weigh the consequences of investing in systems of
centuries, past that contribute to the destruction of our
planet.
The ruling strikes, the balance of acknowledging, the
reality of needing to retire at risk pipes, while also
making room for cleaner, innovative solutions in the
future.
Currently, the ICC is conducting a future of gas
proceeding, which will develop an action plan for Illinois,
Gas, Utilities future infrastructure Investments.
In July, the IC will launch a pilot program that will use
the existing natural gas infrastructure.
We're here today to engage in a robust discussion about the
ICC ruling, what it means for the city of Chicago, labor
and rate payers, moving forward. And with that, I'd like to
introduce our guests who will be providing testimony and
have made themselves available for questions and answers
today.
Um we've aimed to keep a balanced panel with representative
from people's gas labor. Unions environmental Advocates and
environmental Advocates and consumer Advocates, all present
to discuss the ruling. Um, before I do the intro, I'll
recognize alderwoman Taylor, um, as being present, um, as a
non-member, thank you for being here.
so,
Here.
Oh, hey me, Mr. Blakemore
There you go. Sorry. Uh, would you like to give public
comment?
All right, you guys, we're going to allow Mr. Blakemore to
give public comment since he was here. Can we get 3 minutes
on the clock? Okay, thank. Thank you very much. Uh, I see
that this meeting is about Environmental Protection and
energy now. Uh,
maybe it's what I want to speak on is not specific dealing
with uh, the gas system. However
The big issue now.
Is these are all uh, buildings on the sale.
and uh,
This committee has uh a responsibility to to make sure they
are safe.
and when I heard on the radio that, uh, uh, uh, the
ventilation
Now, wait a minute. Now, Mr. Blakemore, you not talking
about people's gas. I'm talking about the pollution.
How are you going to change these buildings over? And I
heard that you don't even have to read says that the city
will have to change the ventilation and that's a toxic
environment.
So it's gonna it's gonna be very difficult.
But you all uh uh to make these empty uh uh buildings live
above.
because but you, you gonna have to change your ventilation
and that's why should you
and I'm gonna watch this Saga unfold.
I know we're talking about the gas.
However, I'm connecting the dots when I heard that that
those buildings, you would have to change your envir, uh,
your ventilation laws. Why would you do that?
Because it's gonna come up too. Why? Because you put these
people at risk, it is a health hazard and you're doing it
for money.
Where these empty building on let's say, or whoever owns
them will be occupied. You're not thinking about the the
environment in Impact that it would help on the citizen
that will uh, live in the building. The elevator.
I know people who deals with you, it's almost impossible
But you to convert these buildings into uh, housing
Without you changing ventilation.
so, that's why it's very, very important of for me to come
up
And to speak up. They say the city gonna have to change
their ventilation and I'm a watch. This struggle un unfold.
I'mma watch it unfold and it you. It's impossible. Why
would you load your standards?
Why would you even consider changing the ventilation laws
in this city?
so, come
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore
All right to our guests. Um thank you for joining us today.
Um so with us today for the committee, we have Maria
boccanera. The new president of people's gas if you guys
want to give a nod or a symbol because I know you're not
exactly in the order that I'm going to introduce you. All
right. We've got, uh, Sean garrage with Local 18, 007,
we've got Mark pulos with local 150. We've got Abraham
scar, our state director and energy, uh, in utilities
program director from the Illinois, public, interest
research group,
We've got Sarah moscowitz, our executive director of
citizens Utility Board.
Jared picho, I always mess with your name Jared. I'm so
sorry Jared Politico. Uh, Deputy Commissioner of the
Department of environment and Jay kale, our Deputy
Commissioner for the Department of Transportation, uh, so
Jared and Jay aren't presenting today, but as
representatives from relevant City departments, they're
here to answer questions. Maybe during the Q&A period, that
might come up from committee members.
um,
With that. I'm just going to turn it over to uh president
bokra from people's gas.
Good morning. Can you hear me okay? Yes, good.
Okay, good morning, chair Haden members of the committee
and fellow stakeholders. My name is Maria Bo kgr for the
record that is spelled m, a r. I a b o c. A n e g, r a and
I'm proud to serve as the president of people's gas which
provides natural gas service to over 870,000 homes and
businesses across our city.
joining me today are several members of my team in the
event that there are, um, technical or other questions that
may need assistance in being asked,
thank you for the opportunity to appear today at people's
gas. We are committed to the future of Chicago. Its safety
resilience and environmental progress.
I am born and raised in Illinois and I am the proud daughter
of an immigrant father and a mother who was a migrant Farm
worker. As the first in my family to attend college. I'm an
attorney by training and I have spent most of my career in
public service, including appointments from Governor's
Quinn and rounder to the Illinois, workers compensation
commission as an arbitrator and most recently, by Governor
by Governor pritzker, as a commissioner to the Illinois,
Commerce Commission where I oversaw, uh, utility
regulation.
I very much bring those values of service integrity and
kandare into the role that I have today.
As you know, Chicago's natural gas system is 1 of the
oldest in the country, some pipe State, back to the 1800s.
these aging pipes, pose safety, risks and release methane a
potent greenhouse gas. That's why people's gas has embarked
on 1 of the nation's largest infrastructure. Modernization
efforts, replacing outdated cast iron and bare steel pipes
with modern materials,
Since 2011, We have replaced over 1,400 miles of pipe about
38% of our goal. Resulting in fewer leaks, significant
carbon reductions and increased efficiency.
This work is fundamentally about 2 things.
Safety and reliability. We along with our labor Partners,
whom you will hear from later today. Work every day to
ensure the safety and reliability of our system and has
done. So for over 175 years
Our system supports the heat, hot water, and Industrial
activity that sustains, Chicago's residents and its vibrant
economy.
People's gas is regulated by the Illinois, Commerce
Commission, or the ICC. The ICC ordered an independent
engineering study, and found that more than 80% of the iron
pipes in our Energy Delivery system are at the end of their
useful life.
The study determined that these pipes have less than 15
years of life left today.
That number is less than 10 years.
In 2023, the ICC, paused our pipe replacement program for a
comprehensive review.
We disagreed with the pause believing alongside independent
Engineers that the most at risk. Type needed urgent
replacement.
The icc's new February, 2025 order allows us to restart,
That work, directing us to replace approximately 1100 miles
of diameter pipe, 36 inch or less by 2035, a safety monitor
will now oversee, this work.
We applaud and welcome the icc's clarity and clear
directives.
So, what is next?
In response to the icc's new direction, we have re-examined
our approach to replacing risky pipe under this new pipe
replacement program or PRP approximately 1100 miles of
older pipe 36 in, in diameter or smaller will be need to be
replaced by 2035.
Restarting. This program is no small task. We are
rebuilding more rebuilding momentum after a 2-year
slowdown, rehiring workers coordinating with the city and
nearly 30 underground, utility stakeholders and preparing
for a significant ramp up.
Performing this volume of construction. Under the
accelerated, new timeline will require constant close,
collaboration, and coordinating.
We have already had several productive discussions with C
Dot and with the city's water department on how we can
further collaborate, including incorporating, some of the
Lessons Learned of the past to allow both us and the city
to be more productive efficient and least disruptive.
Achieving the 2035 and Target will require us now to
prioritize speed Above All Else.
We will need to significantly ramped up the miles of pipe.
We replaced each year each year and we may need to rethink
some other aspects of the program that deliver safety and
reliability benefits.
Internally. We are currently looking at both a short-term
immediate plan which focuses on 2025 and 2026 and our
longer term plan from 2027 and years Beyond.
We continue to evaluate all aspects of excuse me, all
aspects, and impacts of the icc's order on our ability to
meet the accelerated timeline, including the longer term
impact on our operations and our Capital planning.
For the remainder of this year, a lot of our near-term work
will focus on resuming, pause projects, or pre-approved
projects that have already gone through the OUC project Pro
process.
But I have to say that modernizing our system isn't just
about safety. It's really about also preparing for a low
carbon future. Since joining, the epa's methane ChalleNGe
Program in 2017, we have avoided over 1500 tons of methane
emissions. The equivalent of 107 million, miles driven by
gas, powered passenger vehicles.
We are also investing in Innovation at our training facility
in Little Village. We recently, completed successful
testing of hydrogen blending which emits no carbon when
carbon when burned hydrogen will be a key. Part of
Illinois's clean energy economy, and we are preparing our
infrastructure for that future.
And in partnership with green era, we have begun,
delivering renewable natural gas or RNG from a Southside
facility. That was once a Brownfield. Uh, that now
transformed food waste into clean energy enough to heat,
2100 homes annually, and the potential to double
So in closing, I want to reaffirm our values, safety
reliability, sustainability, and partnership.
We believe decarbonization and energy, reliability are not
competing priorities. They must go hand in hand at people's
gas. We are committed to thoughtful people, centered
progress. And so I think you and I welcome your questions
and comments at the conclusion of the hearing, thank you
for your time.
Thank you very much Maria.
All right, um, we are moving on to Shang garage from 18
007.
Chair Haden, distinguished members of the city council.
Good morning.
My name is Sean Gorge. I'm the business manager of utility
Workers, Union of America, gas Workers, Local 18, 007,
A representative 1,000 hourly employees of people's gas.
Who are responsible for safely, delivering natural gas and
Staffing. The customer care center.
Our membership is almost 80% diverse.
30% of which are veterans more than half live in the city
of Chicago and are also customers of people's gas and 95%
live in the Chicagoland area.
We reflected the diversity of pgl's, customer base and we
are on the job 24/7. And every 1 of the 234 square miles of
City Chicago.
I have been a crew leader in the distribution Department
with more than 30 years of experience.
Throughout my career, I have seen firsthand the poor
condition of our underground pipes.
I can confirm for you that what the engineering experts
have said for years about the underground pipe reaching the
end of its useful life. That is absolutely true.
Many of the pipes are 100 years old.
Reaching.
I'm sorry, 100 years old for over a decade people's gas.
Through the work of my membership have been replacing that
pipe and an accelerated pace.
However, as you know, that work was paused by the ICC for
the past year.
I'm here to talk to you about the impact of that pause.
Working in the national natural gas industry. The first
thing you learn about a safety
Natural gas is a safe clean environmentally friendly
low-cost energy source. When it's controlled.
however, when the system that it's delivering, the product
is compromised old, and nearing the end of its useful life,
gases dangerous,
It is dangerous for my members to have to work on the pipe
that is leaking decaying and crumbling.
It is dangerous for our customers when leaks occur
underground and migrate to their infrastructure.
the pause in the company's accelerated pipe replacement
program caused my members to have to work on more leaking
pipe because the program lost the year,
It is actually more than a year because people's gas is
still not restarted, the accelerated program and even when
they do will take more than a year to get production back
up to the PACE, it was working under.
This will cause my members to have to work on dangerous
leaks. They otherwise would not have had to because they're
leaking. Pipe would have been replaced.
Customers will be exposed to the dangers of more leaks as
well.
Let's pray. We don't have an explosion that could have been
prevented.
My member safety is of the utmost importance to me, but
equally important is the safety of our customers.
There are several other impacts as well. Let me list them
for you.
With the pause, the company has drastically reduced. The
number of gas worker Union hires because there's less work.
They have also had to pull back an internal promotion for
seasonal, employees, moving into regular positions.
Remember when I opened that 80% of my membership is
diverse.
30% of our veterans and the majority live in the city of
Chicago.
Having less jobs. No, careers is not good for the local
economy.
The accelerator program required, many more hours of work
from my members. It was grueling physically demanding work,
but my members were happy to do it.
We had a mission replaced bad pipe and protect our fellow
members and the residents of the city of Chicago.
The reward for it was additional pay for the overtime
required.
The pause drastically reduced earning potential for my
membership.
Some members close to retirement chose to retire.
due to learning to the lower earning potential causing a
loss of experience,
Morale.
The pause also caused a drop in morale for people's gas
Workforce.
Suddenly, suddenly the project that members had put their
Blood Sweat and Tears into a stopped, We Believe without a
valid reason.
Why would somebody want to? Why would somebody want to
leave leaking pipe in the ground longer?
Our mission was abandoned hours were reduced paychecks were
drastically reduced. Members viewed the pause as an attack
on our industry. Our livelihoods are careers.
It's not easy to be a gas utility employee.
Long hours, physical demands working in all kinds of heat,
cold rain snow exposed to traffic hazards crime, in the
city.
The hazards of working with natural gas being called out of
bed to address emergencies and the impacts that our family
lives.
Gas isn't going anywhere.
It is going to be needed for decades or more.
arguments made for minimizing investment in the system,
whether pipes or people
Because of electric electrification are not realistic.
electrification is decades away, even if it happens to any
sort of significant sale scale,
However, replacing the pipes cannot wait.
Shifting entirely to electricity result in skyrocketing
energy costs for the city's most vulnerable residents.
Natural gas is more affordable and reliable option for
heating for Chicago's fluctuating climate.
Thank you for the opportunity to express the views of my
1000 member long, long strong logo.
Thank you very much. Um before we move on to Mark just a
reminder to remember's we're not actually here in a hearing
about building electrification. Um and I appreciate the the
appreciate the the testimony, but we are talking about the
case and the impact on people's gas and consumers, and
various stakeholders. Um, uh, so now we're going to hear
from Mark pulos from local 150
Good afternoon, Madam chairwoman members of the committee.
My name is Mark pus executive director of the Indiana,
Illinois, and Iowa foundation. For fair Contracting, the
Labor Management Group of the operating engineers. Local
150 representing nearly 23,000 hard-working men and women
throughout the city of Chicago and Northern Illinois. I
come before you today to voice our full support for the
icc's. February decision to lift the pause on the people's
gas pipe replacement program and to encourage continued to
investment in this critical infrastructure program, the
decision to reinstate and refocus the pipeline replacement.
Work makes a critical step forward for infrastructure,
safety.
Jobs the creation of long-term economic interests for its
Chicago residents. Let me begin.
By talking about jobs.
the reinstatement of the program creates substantial
employment opportunities for members of the international
Union of operating engineers, local 150 and numerous other
Building Trades organiza organizations across Chicago with
renewed focus and accelerated timeline. This infrastructure
program were more than double the annual pipeline
replacement rate from a proximately 50 m to 110 m per year,
This acceleration, translate directly into thousands of
good paying family, supporting union jobs, the pipeline
replacement work requires specialized, heavy equipment
operators, welders laborers and many other skilled trades.
Representing a significant long-term employment opportunity
for our Workforce for local 150 specifically. This program
provides consistent stable employment for our members who
operate heavy machinery essential for excavation pipe
installation and site restoration throughout the Project's.
Duration, local 150 members are trained at our hundred
million dollar facility.
in Wilmington Illinois where they received specialized
instruction in Gas Distribution, safety excavation and
utility coordination. That training combined with union
experience leads to higher productivity fewer, safety
incidents and greater project success.
Moreover, this program is governed by a project, labor
agreement, ensuring it, it is completed by locally trained.
Union trades, people at prevailing wages and benefits that
not only promotes quality and efficiency, but guarantees
that this investment circulates back into the local economy
supporting Working Families and small businesses throughout
the city of Chicago.
Beyond direct employment. The PRP program creates
significant economic multiplier effects throughout
Chicago's economy material, suppliers equipment,
manufacturers, Transportation companies, and local
businesses all benefit from The increased economic
activity. Generated by this infrastructure program,
every dollar spent on infrastructure Improvement, generates
additional economic value through these Supply chains and
increase consumer spending by employing workers,
As for the safety and reliability, the primary purpose of
the PRP is addressing critical public. Safety, concerns.
Chicago's aging gas distribution system includes pipes that
have been in service since the 19th century. Well beyond
their intended lifespan, these outdated cast iron and
ductile iron pipes are prone to the leaks which both
significant safety risks to neighborhoods throughout the
city. The
CC investigation confirmed that these aging pipes represent
a genuine safety hazard and must be addressed. The February
decision refocuses efforts specifically on the highest risk
infrastructure components, ensuring that safety priorities
derive, the program, rather than broader modernization
goals, the establishment of a 2035 deadline.
Aligns with the recommendation from the engineering as
experts and federal safety directive from the US pipeline
hazards material, safety administration.
In terms of consumer costs, the ICC balanced decision.
The the icc's balanced decision to reflects careful
consideration of both safety requirements and consumer,
affordability concerns by refocusing the program
specifically on high-risk pipes and the icc's decision,
reduces the scope and cost of the program. The revised
approach eliminated, the replacement of 49. M of large cast
iron pipe with longer remaining useful life. Saving
approximately 330 million in terms of the economy from a
broader economic perspective investing in modernized
infrastructure. Now, yields substantial long-term benefits.
Modern pipeline systems are more energy, efficient and
significantly reduce methane leakage.
Which represents both environmental harm and wasted
resources that customers ultimately pay for the improved
system. Will require less ongoing maintenance reducing
long-term operational costs that would otherwise be passed
on to customers.
The icc's decision to reinstate and refocus the program
represents a carefully balanced approach that prioritizes
Public, Safety creates good paying union jobs and
implements responsible controls to protect consumers. The
decision serves the best interest of Chicago's workers
residents and long-term. Infrastructure needs, Local 150
and FFC commends. The icc's decision to lift the ban and
urges this committee to support the icc's decision and work
collaboratively, with labor organizations, utility
providers and Regulators to ensure the successful
implementation of this critical infrastructure program. I
thank you for your time and available for questions.
Thank you Mark. Um, before we move on I just want to
recognize uh alter 6 to Lopez and Riley for purposes of
Quorum. Thank you for attending.
All right, um we're now going to hear from apesar with the
Illinois public interest research group.
Good morning.
Uh chairperson had and vice chairperson kuden, honorable
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today. Uh, my name is Abe scar, I'm the director of
Illinois per. And for over 8 years, we've watched dog
people's gas and its troubled pipe retirement program. Uh,
we were an active party in the ICC investigation. That's
the subject of today's hearing.
I'd like to thank, uh, chair Haden, and committee staff,
for organizing today's hearing and engaging Council more
proactively with people's gas, this proactive and ongoing
engagement will be critical to address the challenges,
facing our city and gas utility, as we transition to safer
cleaner energy to heat our homes.
I also want to thank and welcome Miss spoken egg as
people's gas new president. Uh I appreciate her comments
about working with stakeholders and interest in innovation.
Thanks to the ICC investigation and its mandate for reform,
the people's gas pipe retirement program is at an
inflection point. This is an important opportunity to build
a better program for the people of Chicago.
Uh, I remain highly critical of how the program has been
run to date. I want to focus my testimony on what I see as
2 opportunity to positively transform this program. Going
forward, uh, first a better focus on mitigating safety
risks via a new approach to risk ranking and second using
many more tools, Beyond full pipe replacement uh, to
cost-effectively mitigate risk.
So first, a better focus on mitigating safety risks.
This is important for 2 primary reasons, Effectiveness and
cost Effectiveness. That is achieving the greatest possible
reduction in safety risk and doing so, for the least amount
of money, which means less severe rate hikes for
Chicagoans.
For all of its safety rhetoric. Like what you've heard
today? People's gas has failed to properly. Prioritize
safety, in its pipe, retirement efforts to date, both a
2015 audit and the 2020 engineering study, which has been
referenced multiple times today. Found that indicators of
risk were not declining in any proportion to the billions
of dollars people's gas was spending on pipe retirement.
and in the investigation, uh, perg experts, demonstrated
with unrebutted testimony, that people's gas method for
measuring risk and risk ranking neighborhoods for
retirement is fundamentally broken.
Not only uh, were the methods not probabilistic, that's the
industry, best practice. Uh, the methods suffered from
Fatal flaws that rendered its risk rankings inaccurate
Again and to be clear people's guys had multiple
opportunities in the investigation to rebut these
conclusions by our experts. It did not
Uh so now people's guess is contracted with a janitor
Corporation to develop a new risk ranking methodology and
this methodology is purportedly, probabilistic again, a
industry. Best practice, this is good. We applaud that.
uh however we still have reason to worry that the
methodology that people's gas is developing will not
perform as well as it could or should uh during the
investigation people's gas and Jana refused to share
details, such that our experts could verify the veracity of
the new methodology. Um, and I don't think it's uh uh uh,
uh, people's gases, embracing transparency. Now, uh, 1 of
the, uh, things that the final order did was encourage
people's gas to hold risk, ranking workshops with
stakeholders and so far as it has scheduled a single 1 hour
Workshop, which we believe is insufficient,
Uh, but again, this is an opportunity to adopt a rigorous
transparent risk methodology doing. So would better achieve
the safety outcomes. We all want minimize rate hikes and
critically help rebuild public trust in a program. That's
been dogged by years of mismanagement and cost overruns. I
sincerely hope that utility management will seize the
opportunity to get better results and become more
collaborative partner with the city and other stakeholders.
Um so the second opportunity is to use many more tools to
cost effectively mitigate safety risks.
Um, notably the ICC order did not order people's gas to
replace all of its at risk. Iron pipes by 2035 instead it
ordered it to retire them. I think that's really critical.
We've heard a lot today about how the order is to replace
all the pipes by 2035 that's not the order. Its retirement
Um, this distinction is important. As it does not
presuppose a single strategy replacement, uh, that is
replacing old pipes with new pipes made of modern material.
And instead leaves open multiple strategies, uh, such as
advanced repair pipe relining and other non-profits.
These strategies have many uh, potential benefits,
including the potential to be much less expensive.
Uh, and as such these strategies could achieve desired
safety outcomes, while costing less and facilitating rather
than frustrating, the transition to clean energy homes.
Um, to take just 1 example of these Alternatives, uh, cured
in place lining, uh, has been used successfully in parts of
the United States, Europe and Japan for more than 30 years.
Uh, there's 1 commercial.
and in fact, in 2013, uh, people's gas used Star Line,
excuse me, I think that's 2023. Have my notes wrong, uh,
people's guys, use Starline cured in place lining on a 200,
uh, foot 24 inch cast iron pipe initially installed in
1909. Uh, that's a main feeder of gas for downtown.
So this technology is not going to be appropriate to retire
all of the remaining at risk pipe and the people's gas
system, but it along with other alternatives to full on
replacement must be considered.
Uh, the ICC investigation also created a workshop process
to consider such non-profits uh embracing a suite of
retirement options, rather than defaulting to a
replacement. Uh, is the second opportunity that people's
guess has, to use this inflection point, to positively
transform, its pipe, retirement efforts,
Uh again, thank you to the committee for the opportunity to
speak today and I welcome your questions and look forward
to the discussion.
Thank you, Abe. We will lastly hear from Sarah moscowitz of
the citizens Utility Board.
Good morning, everybody. Excuse me.
Allergies.
Um,
thank you, chair Haden. Thank you to committee staff and
thanks, you all for the opportunity to testify here today.
I appreciate the committee for conducting this hearing at a
critical moment in the discourse over our cities gas
system.
I was invited here today to talk mostly about the
affordability impacts for people's gas, customers of their
past. Um practices with pipe replacement, I'm not going to
repeat what others have said. I agree with all of a lot of
it, not all of it. Um, but I do want to just highlight that
those who have said, who have congratulated the ICC on its
recent order. Um, refocusing the program and allowing us to
move forward in a more prudent way. I think this is overall
a good thing and as Abe pointed out, we have some
opportunities, but there is still great need to be
And we are looking, we we're hopeful that there will be a
will be a more collaborative process going forward that
takes into account. Um, the the Prudence of Investments and
the kinds of impacts on rate, payers of um, unchecked
spending on the utilities part.
So only a few weeks ago, people's gas announced the largest
profits in its history.
224 million earned last year.
I'm here to remind everybody that while the utility is
breaking records for Prosperity, the story of its more than
800,000 customers here in Chicago, sounds a bit like a
broken record too.
As the winter season wraps up people's gas, customers are
still struggling in a heating affordability crisis that
you've already heard about from me.
It's a problem that unfortunately shows no sign of abating.
With gas commodity prices jumping back up and the Spectre
of yet another people's gas rate. Hike looming. We don't
know when that's coming but we're pretty sure it's coming.
and now apparently it seems that Federal Li Heap program is
on The Chopping Block outside of this jurisdiction, but
also on my mind very much
according to the utilities most recent collections filing
with the commission, nearly 1 in 5 of its customers was
more than 30 days behind on payments to the company as of
the end of March.
And more than 1 in 4, customers had incurred late fees on
their heating bills.
All told people's gas customers were a collective, 94
million dollars in debt to the utility.
The cost of staying warm in the winter is forcing, large
parts of the city to the financial Brink and as widespread
as a suffering has been, it has been most glaring in
Chicago's black and brown neighborhoods where as many as
half of all people's gas customers faced chronic debts. The
utility has to submit zip code, level data on its
collection activities, each month, I encourage, um, members
of the city council to look up their local zip codes. It's
uh,
Shocking.
Last January, people's ushered in the largest rate, hike
for a gas utility in Illinois, history at the time, the
company reassured. Everybody that it's increased gas
delivery charges would be offset by lower costs for the gas
itself on the commodity Market. Unfortunately, a guest
wrong. Gas prices are rising again, which means people's
gas. Customers are getting squeezed now on both ends of
their heating bills paying more for people's to both
acquire and deliver fuel to their homes. As a Tribune
recently reported the gas prices that people's customers
paid last month. Where the second highest that the utility
has charged during any April. In the last decade last
month, the price per therm was 52.79 cents this month in
May it's 59 cents per therm even higher
Meanwhile the utilities record-breaking profit in 2024
represents the 6-time in 7 years. It is shattered, its own
high water, mark for earnings.
the utility is entitled to collect a profit as we all know,
from its customers for the money, it spends replacing
pipes, which creates an incentive for it to rip up
everything
Before the icc's decisions. At the end of 2023, people's
gas for more than a decade had, been replacing gas Mains
without any judicious analysis of the need and then
enjoying massive profits as a result.
Fortunately, as mentioned earlier today, State Regulators at
the ICC have put a stop to the utilities indiscriminate
approach to pipe replacement ruled this year to play some
checks on people spending more hopeful like I said that
this new level of accountability. Well, at least slow the
pace at which heating bills increase for people's
customers.
Pi pipe replacement work. I'll note isn't the only reason
the Earth is Shifting under the feet of energy consumers.
Right now, our city and state both have said, ambitious,
clean energy, and carbon reduction goals. And as more
customers explore and make the jump to electric heat, it
leaves a dwindling. Number of people's customers to Bear
the ongoing costs of replacing gas pipes.
We need to devise a plan to avoid the gas death. Spiral
whereby the Hefty costs of maintaining. The city's Legacy.
Gas pipes is foisted dist, disproportionately on lower
income, customers who are left to stranded on the system,
Last year, the Illinois Commerce Commission, began a
process. A future of gas investigation, to explore ways to
navigate this Challenge, and plans to publish findings from
this review next year.
The review is not happening in secret, quite the contrary.
It's taking the form of a series of public workshops and
working groups with multiple opportunities for parties to
weigh in in real time and Via written comment. Actually, I
believe uh, just about everybody on this morning's panel.
Uh, plus many other stakeholders are involved in the future
of gas process. And uh, doing what they can to shape its
outputs.
We'll see how that goes. I think a lot of us involved in
utility policy at both. The state and city level will be
closely watching in the meantime. However, Chicagoans will
have to muddle through more winters of high gas bills to
pay for a fossil fuel system, that bucks the city's climate
goals. Um, so there are a lot of good reasons for this
committee to continue, keeping an eye, on the utilities
activities and I look forward to us working together.
Moving forward.
Thank you, Sarah.
Um, before we open up for uh questions. Um, I will say that
um you know, we've had I think multiple engagements with
all parties uh who have joined us today um throughout uh
the last year during the freeze. Um and I anticipate
through our committee will have multiple engagements, um,
with this group going forward through the future of gas.
But also want to mention that um uh president booner and
her team. Um have uh, are in talks with us as well about uh
figuring out a regular yearly kind of hearing um uh the way
we bring ComEd um, before for summer preparedness so we're
So we're in some talks of shaking out the details, um,
outside of rate case and things of that sort, uh, sorts,
uh, to talk about even maybe like winter preparedness. And,
um, so we look forward to working with your team. Um,
President bokeh on figuring out a more regular Cadence for
people's gas to come. And be able to uh share what they're
doing and working on before Council.
All right. Um, on stack I've got uh, Alder Martin and then
Alder Conway.
Thanks very much chair. Um, good morning everybody. Um,
Most of my questions I think are best for people's uh, but
if anyone else needs to chime in, uh let me know. Uh, first
more of a request through the chair is people's able to
send us a map or some other information that specifies
where the uh 1100 miles of piping to replace Rhett retires
located.
Yeah, Alderman, thank you for the question. And we are able
to uh, provide you with a visual map where you can see um,
uh, where that plastic pipe lays, uh, where that cidi pipe
lives, and you can have that, um, on a map. We're happy to
get that to you terrific. Um, and then kind of from a
timing perspective. I think I heard you Sharon your remarks
that for the next several years, maybe leading up to 2027
that you're looking to ramp up and then you're going to be
in a different phase of replacement uh starting around 2027
um in terms of the oversight and accountability that we're
going to be providing as a body in the coming years point
in time. Are you expecting that you will essentially hit
your Peak capacity in terms of replacement in approximately
approximately 2027 and then stay steady? Uh, in terms of
the average number
Of miles that are replaced annually, right? Um, well, so you
are correct Alderman. That uh, there's really 2 sort of
phases that we're looking at this, um, from from that
angle. Um, and this is really sort of a, the engineering
approach, if you will that we are still evaluating, um, the
the low-hanging fruit, as we're calling like, it's the ramp
up period that 2025 through 2026. Um, that is based around
idea that we have designs, um, and things that were
approved, like I mentioned ready to go. Those are things
that we could do today. Um, as we continue to evaluate, you
know, what does this order say, uh, we should be
prioritizing. Obviously, it's very clear that it's the CI
36 inch or less by a date certain. That's very clear
there's other components within that 200 Page Plus order,
um, that we still need to evaluate from an engineering
perspective. Is what can we do? What should we do? And Is
it feasible, um, from an engineering perspective and then
there's just
the actual figuring out what are the external constraints
that may limit or inhibit that run rate that you're asking
about. And so I can't give you, um, the exact mileage that
we anticipate. And then, of course, you know, as um, as our
stakeholders here have pointed out, you know, all of this
still is subject to regulatory scrutiny, uh,
understandably. So, um, and so to the extent that, uh, this
will be scrutinized by the safety monitor, um, or, you
know, the ICC that will largely helped, uh, dictate. You
know what? That run rate looks like
like 2027 and Beyond but that is the anticipated sort of
longer term approach starting in 2027 understood, that's
helpful. When it comes to, some of the external factors
that you mentioned, I was wondering how you are wrapping
your heads around the tariffs that have been imposed that
have been threatened and how that could impact, um, uh, the
cost of this ongoing work. Yeah, that that's a great
question. Uh, let me start by saying that, um, you know,
like many other Industries we are not immune to, um, you
know, Global pressures from from these types of tariffs.
Uh, what I can say is number 1. We do not anticipate any
tariff impacts to our safety and reliability which is
Paramount above everything else. Uh second what I will also
also add is that we are evaluating what the Tariff impacts
are to our particular business. As it relates to people's
gas, um, 2 things on that front. Um, we are fortunate
enough that most of our natural gas is sourced
domestically. Uh, so we are not seeing a tariff impact on
that front.
Simultaneously on the material side. Um, I have been in
contact with our supply chain and procurement. Uh there is
um that too most of our uh materials are also sourced
domestically as it relates to pgl. Um and lastly, what I
would say is we continue to monitor those things with safe
um with our supply chain and our procurement offices, they
are working with our legal teams in terms of what is that
potential tariff impact due to existing vendor contracts?
Um, supplier agreements Etc. And then the
Last thing I would add Alderman is that we internally at pgl
are asking ourselves. How do we embed any potential tariff
impacts? Should they come and be able to recalibrate how we
are planning and forecasting? Uh, any impacts on that spend
noted? Are there understanding that? I think you mentioned
most of the materials currently are sourced domestically,
are there any materials that jump to mind that point in
time are not sourced domestically?
That's a great question. I don't, I don't have the exact
details on what that might be but I could definitely take a
a look and see, you know, where if there's anything coming
that are not sourced domestically, that may be impacted,
but right now, I don't have that. Okay. And I think through
the chair, if you can, just note areas specific, um, types
of materials that at least, you'll be focused on
understanding that. Um, there could be a lot of play in the
joints. I think it's important for us as many people are
asking us what's the on the ground impacts of some of these
proposed tariffs actual tariffs that we be able to speak to
that? And I think that infrastructure work maybe isn't
always something that comes to mind. Sure, for residents,
but it would be good to know if there is potentially a
tariff impact that we can uplift that. Absolutely.
with regard to the, uh, 1100 miles of piping at a high
level, when and understanding that, uh,
What the ICC has directed there in terms of the next
approximately, 10 years. Where, when would you be looking
at a pipe as a candidate for lining as opposed to
replacement? That's a great question. I appreciate that. I
think that kind of, um, is a nice tie-in to, you know, some
of, um, AES remarks about those npas. Um, you know, uh, 1
of the things that the icc's order did, uh, direct us to
do, and we do intend on doing, is it is asking us to look
at non-pipelined in the remarks by Perth? Um we are still
in the process of developing, what that coordination, and
those workshops could look like. Um, so I think that that
would be the appropriate form to to talk about those
things, um, in terms of which pipes, um, I'm not an
engineer. I don't know if that is something that is
feasibly, you know? We could we embed that in that Jana
model that that Abe spoke of. Um, we are hosting, um,
You know, that workshop and and possibly more, but I think
that those are 2 forms that are coming to my mind where
that would be the appropriate, uh, way to lay that out in
in collaboration, with our stakeholders.
um,
My second to last question is actually around stakeholder
engagement. I know that that's something where both in your
remarks and in Mr. Scar's remarks. Um, there was an
emphasis on breathing new life into that external, um,
engagement stakeholders including but not limited to the
community. Um, can you share a little bit more about what's
planned or at least contemplated in the next year or so
yeah, sure. I let me start by saying that, you know, I
think you you heard in my remarks that, you know, most of
my career has been in public service. And so I'm, I'm
acutely aware of some of the, um, challenges that, uh,
public servants, like, yourselves face in in sort of
wanting to make sure that, uh, there is that stakeholder
engagement, and that that same desire carries a lot into my
role now. So, so number 1. I am committed to, uh, making
sure that we are reevaluating the ways that we have been
engaging in the ways that we want to engage going forward.
I think that the icc's order, um, has ushered in that new
opportunity that we've been talking about. Um, I've
mentioned the workshops, I think, you know,
Part of sort of my first 100 days, um, with the help of our
regulatory teams, and my operations teams. Um, we really
been hitting the ground running to sort of try to hit that
reset button and getting out into um meeting with folks
that perhaps we haven't met with in a long time. Um, so I
think to answer your question it's it's both you know
there's opportunities within the pipe replacement program
itself but as an organization too um it still is a priority
for us and so like chair hat and said, you know we we have
met with her office and um I am
Committed to, you know, talking to other offices as needed.
But I think there's a lot of opportunity there. And I also
want to commend um, whack Energy Group for sort of bringing
in someone from the outside to take a fresh look at, you
know, how have we been doing that? Stakeholder engagement,
and how can we do that differently? And so, I hope that
answers your question. Yeah, yeah. And I think some of it
can be follow-up. Both through the chair as well as with
our own offices, working with your government, relations
team. Um, uh wanted to quickly commend you, for noting, uh,
uh, the ongoing coordination and collaboration with green
era. Uh, many of us have toured that facility in recent
years, both current term and prior term. Um, I know that
there was a ribbon cutting recently, the governor pritzker
among others has had attended and it's a wonderful
organization. I'm glad to uh, hear that uplifted in your
remarks. My last question is for the city, um, I was
wondering if you could speak at a high level at C do, um
how you um in the department are working to incorporate?
The icc's ruling when it comes to C. Dot's planned and
recommended resurfacing including but not limited to our
aldermanic menu program.
We start, uh, meeting with the stakeholders people's gas
water department and uh, Cedar's menu programs to see
incorporate and see that, how does it affect? So we waiting
for people's gases plants. So as in our coordination
process through, you see we will coordinate those. Okay? I
I would just encourage you and your colleagues, in advance
of enduring, our annual menu meetings, um to uplift uh any
of the critical um pipeline replacement work, that needs to
happen. That was part of why it asked people's at the
outset for that map. I think it's important for us to make
it's important for us to make sure that we're working with
you all to prioritize what's needed. And uh, that part of
that, probably involves looking at, of course, boy, uh, dwm
is doing with water main replacement, but also what
people's is doing, um, with their pipeline replacement so
that we're minimizing the frequency of opening up our
roads. So thanks in advance for that. And thank you chair.
Thank you. All right up next I've got Alder Conway, followed
followed by Alder the spa, followed by Alderman Moore,
followed by Alder, siko Lopez, and then, Alder Lopez. So
uh, Alder Conway. Wonderful. Oh, did you have a quick
question?
oh, I I was doing by order of hands raised but I uh I think
think Alderaan Moore is the only 1 not on the committee,
I can, I can I can scooch you up ahead. Uh, if you got,
the, the open Lopez, is so place to be, you're what?
Alderman Conway. Uh, thank you. Um,
And also certainly want to want to appreciate the testimony
of all of you. Uh uh
President boccanera. Uh, Mr. Pulos and Mr. George as well
as Mr Scar and Miss Moscow. It's, I've always learned a lot
in these hearings. I too am not an engineer, so, so always
appreciate it. Uh, and I also do, uh, uh, misspoke in Agra
want to thank you for replacing that pipe at 8th and
Wabash, knowing it was 160 year old and, and on the edge of
the 34th Ward.
um, but and then the same breath, I do really want to
commend the, the ICC for for taking a look at the at the
regulatory structure here uh, based on um,
You know, their lengthy report documenting the, uh, failure
to prioritize high-risk pipe significant cost overruns. The
crippling debt that that that many Chicagoans have to
people's gas.
Um so I I I really and I'm glad you're all happy with the
report but when I read it it was 200. Whatever pages long
and it actually didn't seem like it gave you all that
specific of guidance here in that. So I'm glad you were
able to sort of see guidance in there, but I thought it was
a little difficult.
my my first set of questions as as was largely asked by
Alderman Martin. But, uh, I would note that the report
indicated that in the in recent history, people's gas has
only replaced about 49 miles per year of pipe and set in
the future. The report said between 74 and 222 miles per
year. Uh, you and your, um, spoken Agra you and your report
said, uh, you anticipated 110 miles a year. Um, I know,
Alderman, Martin, um,
Uh asked some questions on this. But if there's anything
else you want to say about the ability to, to, to pull that
off and perhaps you can, if there's anything more to say
about the possibility of reigning in that as well and the
other options. That Mr. Scar said, I want to give you that
opportunity.
Yeah, thank. Thank you for the, uh, remarks. And, and for
the question Alderman, um, I think what I would add is, um,
you know, it's it's not lost on us that that perhaps might
be the big elephant in the room is, is how how do you get
it done. And, and um, you know, as I mentioned earlier,
that's certainly something that we're looking at, um, when
we think about feasibility, um, outside of the engineering
component of that, um,
I think that 1 of the larger constraints will be the ability
to coordinate, um, with our partners at at COD, um, you
know, that is a significant potential run rate, um, if, if
that is the path, and if that is the, uh, run rate at
which, um, we are allowed to go either through the safety
through, um, through the icc's blessing, so to speak, um,
that is now without um, significant challenges. Um, this is
no doubt a very complex, um, type of construction project 1
of the larger ones in the United States. Uh we are in a
very dense Urban environment. We have nearly 30
stakeholders, 30 different permits, we have to get through.
Uh, we are looking at, um, uh, to to piggy back off a
Deputy, Commissioner khalil's comments, you know, we have
begun discussions with the city about, you know, how do we
know, how do we think about gaining efficiencies together,
whether it's, uh, reforming, uh, design duration design
process? Whether it's looking at, can we reform? Uh,
Permitting processes permitting duration. Um, does that
come at a cost and if so, what is that cost? Those are all
things that we're looking at. Um, and so I I don't have an
answer to you for you today as to what what the magic miles
is per year. It will largely depend on some of the things
that we've started talking about. Um, and then I will just
say, on on the NPA side. Like I said, you know, the plan is
for us to um get stakeholders together and figure out
together. Where would it make the most sense? Um, is there?
Anything that the probabilistic model can help inform that
process that planning process. Uh, where is at least
disruptive to the citizens of Chicago? What does that cost
relative to, um, an alternative like a CI replacement and
so, all those things still need to get worked out.
Um,
Okay. It seems like it seems like a Herculean task, so I so
I appreciate. And to the extent that the city can safely
cut regulatory, red tape here while allowing us to can hope
that's not what's going to hold. Uh hold it up. Um the the
report was also pretty scathing about.
Cost overruns in the past to, to quote something on page
185, it says pgl's inability produced 2 to produce a cost
estimate is a problem of their own making indicative of
people's gas, ongoing. Failure to cost effectively manage a
multi-decade multi-billion dollar, infrastructure program,
um, noting that we're trying to look forward and not
backward, um,
how does people's gas plan to effectively manage costs
going forward in a, in a better way that then they have uh
in the past.
Yeah, I I appreciate the the remarks. Um it it certainly is
not lost on us, you know, having having read that report as
well. Um a couple things I'll say to that um to get to the
point. Yes, we are definitely looking at, you know, what
were our project controls um and what can we do
differently? Um, whether it's better. Cost estimating, uh,
Tools uh Lessons Learned. Um I think that we will also be um
um looking to the safety monitor to make sure that um if
there is any input uh from from that um,
From that safety monitor, in terms of, are we meeting the
metrics? What are the metrics? And at, what point do we
recalibrate as necessary? Uh, just to give you an example,
Alderman. You know, 1 of the things that we've done
internally already is, you know, we've, uh, sort of done a
SMP, uh, former, you know, project sort of dissection, you
know. Let's take a look at how did, how did this particular
project run? Um, 1 of the current controls and, you know,
uh are there anything that we can be or should be doing
differently? And so that's an ongoing process, I think
that's part of that ramp up period that you know, I've been
describing over the next 2 years, is how do we Implement
those controls? Um,
But yeah, I mean, there's there's still, there's still a
lot of work to do. And I I feel like I you may have asked a
second part of that question. I apologize. I was focused on
the project controls. Well, that, that no. I mean, the
question was how how do you plan to manage cost overruns
better in the future? So which I
Thank you via answered at least some of the some of the
abilities you may have. Yeah, I mean, yeah, yeah, yeah. So
it's, it's an ongoing process. Um, we are cognizant of it.
Um, I do appreciate, you know, like I said, the icc's, um,
calling attention to that. Um, it's certainly not lost on
us, and, and we'll continue to work toward that.
Now.
I mean, the reason the cost overruns are
such a big issue is, of course that they're they tend to
come with a rate hike in, in the future and, and Miss
moscowitz talked to, some of the, some of the ways that,
um, our constituents are being, uh, crippled, by the debt
they already have, do. What can you tell us about? Uh,
potential future rate? Hike, uh, requests. Uh, and under
what circumstances you would you would ask for an
additional rate.
Yeah. So um if you recall, you know, I mentioned right now
we are evaluating the impact of that order as it relates to
relates to our, um, Capital planning. And what does that do
some of our operational budget, whether it's, you know,
back office, uh, needs so to speak. Um, what additional
labor costs? Um, that that would um that would require. Um
Um, I do think that, um, as we continue to evaluate that
inevitably, the question will be, you know, do we need to,
um, are we receiving enough Revenue to be able to execute
at whatever level um, and those amount of miles, that, that
that may be necessary. So, I, I don't want to Discount the
possibility of us having to go into the ICC, um, for their
review and, um,
their opinion on, you know what, exactly, um, a rate
increase might look like
Wasn't a lot of specificity in that answer but I think I, I
will I will simply Let It Go on. I can understand why
perhaps you you don't want to fully answer that question
but I'm sure I won't be the last 1 to ask about rate hike.
So I I'll go ahead and yield from there.
Thank you, thank you Alderman Conway. Got uh, Alto the
spot. I followed by Alderman Moore.
Thank you so much chair. Uh, I really appreciate all of the
presentations. This is
something that like all of us benefit from learning about
because at the end of the day, like our our constituents
are both the workers and the rate payers who make this
project happen. So I really appreciate the insights on both
sides on this.
I did want to ask about the balancing of priorities because
Miss Boker, 1 thing that you spoke of both in.
Writing in your words was the uh, about safety and
reliability as the core components of your work. But then
you also said that we need to prioritize speed Above All
Else.
Which feel like priorities at loggerheads with each other.
And so I was wondering if you could speak more about how
you balance those interests and also like, what are the the
key roles and responsibilities of the safety monitor as
part of all of this?
Yeah, thank you for the question. Um, you are correct, uh,
safety and reliability is Paramount um, above everything
else. Um the the trick will be to balance that against that
that deadline that's pretty specific in that order. Um what
Um, what we are currently looking at, is that Jana model,
um, and how it will help us sort of risk rank, uh, where
the, the leakiest or most at risk pipe is uh, but then the
question becomes is, you know, can we do that in in the
time frame, with which we're being asked to do that? Um,
that is still to be determined. Um, we unfortunately do not
have an answer as to um how many miles that that will look
like. Um, it is clear to us. I mean, the our takeaway is
that speed seems to be the priority above all else. Um, you
know, we had even evaluated, you know, what sort of
construction would look like in 2025, um, if there is
anything, we we could do at all, you know?
and so um we chose to take Shelf ready uh projects that had
been previously approved like I said before the pause that
may look what look like what we can call is that um old SMP
or do nothing at all. Um and so that's sort of the right
now the short run balancing act that we have to ask
ourselves but um, speed is, um, a consideration but against
that we still have to balance safety and reliability. And
that is really where the engineering piece and the uh Jana
model uh, will will come into play. We think is that Jan as
in Nancy or M as in Monster. N as in Nancy j a n, a j a n.
Ah thank you so much because you've been talking about it
now I didn't want to ask more about that. What do we know?
What are some of the criteria that are built into that
model? That determine the, the pipes that are most at risk,
right? Um, I don't have the exact details of that. I do
know that, um,
when we right now, we are onboarding the the Jana model uh
we will be holding hosting um 1 Workshop but we we are open
to more um with our stakeholders but that will walk through
on a more engineering technical level what that model does
model does and doesn't do, I can share with you that
internally. We are evaluating, you know, is there a way to
sort of reprogram that so to speak? Um, that if we wanted
to input something like an NPA, um, or if we wanted to, um,
you know,
Target a particular area or neighborhood first. Um, after
that risk ranking, uh, prioritization, you know, what would
that model look? Like I can tell you in some of the um uh
during the preceding a lot of that modeling had included
that old SMP stuff. When we you know thought about you
moving meters outside and that neighborhood approach and
also you know looking at going from low to medium pressure.
Well, under the new icc's directive, we've kind of got to
of got to reprogram that to conform to the icc's directives
but also if there are other inputs like we mentioned, you
npa's, um, is that possible? And if so, what what does that
sort of new risk ranking look like
Can you give example of some of the criteria that might be
built into that risk ranking? I'm just trying to wrap my
head around. Yeah, I I have to get you that. I don't have a
specific again. It's a more technical engineering thing. I
I don't have that today, but I'm happy to to to work with
you guys. That's okay. Just curious. Um,
I had 2 other quick questions. I was curious.
Maybe this is a 3, the terror question, but is there a cost
differential between the whole like pipe replacement and
during doing the kind of cured in place that was being
discussed?
I, I don't have any information with me today about that
cost, differential. I, I'm sure that we can get that for
you, but I would need to talk to an engineering team and
figure out that sort of design comparison. And what that
might look like. I think, uh, Alderman, I think, uh, a scar
might have some info on that response.
Yes. And again, nothing is 100% all the time. It'll depend
on the pipe. Uh, but I do think this is an opportunity for
cost savings and I've just got a write up of the project
that people's gases are already done. And it found that the
uh, lining reduced the overall project, but it budget by
30%, shorten the timeline and minus minimize the disruption
to traffic in the area.
That that's helpful. I could you provide that to the chair
Yes. Okay and I I say this because this is probably going
to be a refrain in the room. I too am not an engineer. Um
but like the the information that that's shared if that's
valid. And if that is, those are scalable results across
the city as we try to keep within this 2035.
Timeline as we try to keep within cost parameters, it it
feels like it could be a value and barring that. I will
also say the last major people's gas project in my ward was
along Milwaukee Avenue were you all actually did that
trenchless model? Where they opened up pits at various
locations and particularly for a corridor that is very
Transit dense. That was very calm.
Commercially dense. That is a model that was very much
appreciated. By all of our constituents and businesses.
Particularly as it was able to keep traffic flowing, keep
both lines Lanes of traffic open and helped all of our
businesses stay in business over that time period. So I, I
really do appreciate a lot of the thoughtfulness and
consideration. Oh I did have 1 other question that hydrogen
hydrogen and that blending model that you were talking
about? Yes, the idea that that could be a future model for
zero carbon low emission heating, particularly in our
kitchens is like the great concern for those of us with
little ones
The kind of pipe that we are currently installing or the
cured and pipe.
Do we know if that is compatible with this future concept
of either Blended gas or Soul hydrogen? Yes, it's it's my
understanding that it is. Um I I can say right now, you
know, we're still going through that pilot. Um, I think
that in the next 10 years or so, that, that is a technology
that, um, may be viable in a larger distribution system
setting, but we actually did, uh, test, um, a kitchen stove
with, um, Blended hydrogen, um, and natural gas at our
training facility and we're successful in, in testing that
out. But, yes, they are compatible.
Thank you. Thank you chair.
Thank you. All right, Alderman Moore. Are you ready?
Yes, I am. Thank you so much. Um, chairman and I want to
um, before I before I get started, I just want to, since
this is my first committee meeting, I have no idea. I have
no doubt, this would probably come up in Council, but I
just want to highlight and recognize the fact, um, that,
uh, we lost a
Um wonderful public servant um over the weekend and Lori
Healey um I know my heart is broken, it almost made me want
want to cry, even talk about it. Um, and uh, she was just a
asset um, to this city. Um, a person who um,
A person who represented this city well and uh for all
communities, I can say that personally. Um, whenever you
wanted to call, um, somebody in government, uh, whatever
Administration she worked there, she was there to help you
and I'm definitely going to miss her leadership um, in this
city. So um my prayers are going out to her and her family
family as well as the um, um, Mayors and especially the
family who worked closely um, with her. Um, with that said,
said, um, I just want to, um, again thank um, Everybody.
Um, are coming um, as as president uh,
Booking booking has come before us. I I want to thank um,
her team, um, of Georgia's and Senate Wiki for bringing her
uh, allowing me to meet with her and and get some
conversation and get some understanding and I appreciate
that, and I appreciate the work that you all do proactively
to make, um, sure that we are staying up to date on a lot
of things that's happening, uh, with people gas. Um, I was
taking some notes and, uh, as we were talking and so for
me, uh, I'm going to go a little bit out of order and back
and forth, because I, I, I numbered them, as I was, um,
talking to them, local, um, uh, 007, um, has spoken in it.
Um, and I understand, um, they have, um, workers on this
job and they said, it's and they are 80%, um, diverse 30%.
Um, veterans. Could someone from their tell me? Um, how
uh, how
of those, where those workers, how many of those workers
are African-American, that they have
Alderman, Sean, Gorge guest. Uh business manager, guest
workers out of the 80% diverse roughly uh, 40% are
African-American.
Okay. Uh make sure you provide that um, breakdown to me
please um through the chair. Okay.
Yes, sir, and and whole numbers and not just, uh,
percentages as well. I know you wouldn't have the total,
um, number. But, uh, please provide that, um, as well. Um,
Also, are you all doing Outreach to high schools? This is
going to be a long, um, process and are we are we doing
Outreach to um, high schools that like Simeon, who got, um,
trades, um, worker trade, um, classes there to make sure
that this work force that we're still reaching young people
and that they know about these jobs, um, coming down, um,
The Pike
Yeah, Alderman. Um, we are not a hiring Hall. We are an
in-house Union, but people's guests, uh, has a fantastic
program where they reach out to the Chicago, public school,
students. They actually bring them in multiple times a
year.
And there's different phases of their training. And
Saturdays are usually trained by 1 of our couple of our
retirees that are 30 plus year, veterans in the industry.
And they, uh, the companies does a great job in recruiting,
Thank you so much. I I appreciate uh, um, your response to
that, and I think you were prepared. Thank you for being
prepared to answer that question, which states that you are
um, doing the work. So I definitely appreciate that. Um, my
third question comes around um, the report and when we
we talking about safety and risk and and and I'm not going
to sit up here and lie and say I read this whole report,
um, and and I think, Conway stated something that I was
going to say that, I I think you all probably got the
lawyers and things like that to go through this because I
wasn't totally clear on, um, everything with acceptance.
The things that stood out with me, um, whether the cost
overruns and I get to that later, but help me understand
when we talking about the uh, the safety risk. Uh, we
talking about to the workers or are we talking about to um,
the way we, uh, the pipe that we lay help me understand
that in layman terms and what the uh the the impact.
of that is, um, both from a financial standpoint and a, um,
whether it's a, the labor workforce or um, the operation
standpoint because I'm not fully understanding the safety
part.
Is.
That I assume that's a alderman Morris. Had a question for
me? Yes. Yes. Because, uh, poopa gas or whoever can answer
it.
No, thank thank you for the question. I just want to make
sure I wasn't, uh, speaking out of turn. Um, you know, to,
to answer your question on safety. Um, you know, we're
really talking about um, both Alderman Moore. It's it's
ensuring the safety of our workers. Um, as they are working
on the pipe replacement program and and certainly it's it's
the safety of our residents and our businesses um, that um,
that would fall under the purview of that. Some of that
pipe replacement program,
Okay and so what seems to be the issue around safety that
the ICC was pointing out because I'm, it was such a big
report. I'm trying to get to the the major concerns uh,
within the ICC for um shutting this down because at first I
had concerns about them, shutting us down and stopping this
work because it impacted the work being done in our
community and impacted workers. And so um,
What did they come out with in terms was the safe, they
just said it needs to be approved. What was the what what
was coming out of that report around it?
um, if I'm understanding the question correctly, I, you may
be asking about the safety monitor, uh, which is 1 of the
things that came out of the icc's order on February 20th
and, and what that, um, that directive, um, the ICC will be
selecting a safety monitor, uh, that will help, um, oversee
the program. We're not entirely familiar yet with what
their RFP looks like or, you know, um, if they put that out
to to bid, so to speak and and who have been invited to it,
I do know that the IC directs, the staff to select the
safety monitor by July 1st of this year. Um, so I don't
want to speculate but it, it may obviously speak to the
safety components of what? What I just mentioned among
other things.
But the report didn't, so you saying the monitor will the
report didn't speak to that for them to say that they need
this monitor.
Could you repeat that question, Alderman, Moore. So the
report didn't speak to
why the safety monitor was, um,
It is coming out. Is it, is it something that they saw? I'm
I'm like I say it's confusing to me, that's why I'm asking.
Um, I I think I
Question, I unfortunately, I can't speak to why the ICC may
have believed or not believed that um, you know, a safety
monitor was necessary coming out of the report that you're
you're you're talking about. Um, I I don't have any
sort of what that thought process was, but like I said, you
know, it's it's in place now and um, you know, they they
are to be selected by July 1st and and there may be some
more information there.
And that's why I was asking based on versus the labor and
the operations because if we have Labor I think our labor
unions. Um, Local 150, 007 are people who are concerned
about safety. So are they have? Let let me let me start
from the labor side. Are they saying they're having any
issues?
I mean, I'll defer to our labor Partners here. But yummy.
Yes, we, we are concerned. As is our labor partners?
Yeah, agreed. All the been marked all this local 150. Um,
you know, we're we're concerned about the current status of
the system. We believe there shouldn't have been a pause.
Mainly because of safety, reliability and cost. Um, and and
and and I'll I guess I'll I was going to chime in at some
on this. But I I would just say that while we applaud the
applaud the icc's current decision to reimplement, this PRP
program, we disagree that the ever should have been a pause
in the first place. And there's a lot of discussion about,
is there going to be a rate hike in the future? I mean,
just remember there was a long period of time where
people's gas did not go in for rate hikes, they operated
under the qip system through the ICC commission and
recovered costs for a number of years. Other gas companies
made the choice to continue to go in in incremental rate
hikes. So this is only more recent where the um qip has
expired, um and the sunset was not extended in Springfield.
So therefore the only way to recoup cost is through the
normal, uh, rate making process but
I hope because I, I'm hearing a line of questions about or
I think there's probably going to be more about whether
there's going to be a rate hike, and there's going to be
increased cost to customers.
Make no mistake about it. That the cost of this program
continues to go up for things like inflation.
Wages benefits fuel costs, right? A number of factors that
play into whether or not it's going to be more expensive.
We spent an entire year at lower costs, not doing a program
that should have been done for safety and liability. We're
now going through a second year with a um a a a question in
the era of what is the federal government going to do a
tariffs and a number of other things and where are we
heading as an economy in general? So I would suggest you
that the cost increase is due to a number of factors, um,
that are out of the control of people's gas. In addition to
that, there is a major component of what the cost of gas is
going to be going into the future and 1 of those things,
I'll just mention is things like data centers. I mean,
there's a massive proliferation of data centers, not just
in the state of Illinois, but in this country that are
sucking up a large source of energy from an electrical
perspective, it's 1 gig from a gas perspective, it is 1.68
million therms per
day that a large data center will actually, um, uh, that'll
actually take uh to fuel some of these larger data centers.
So it's a supply and demand type of a situation. So again,
So again, you know, I I I hope that everybody doesn't
continue to point the finger at a utility and you look at
things like the Attorney General's office who asked for the
pause. Well, I shouldn't say ask for the
Pause, um, provided a detailed, uh, brief. Um, that would
suggest that a pause was in order the ICC commission others
that, um, uh, pushed um, for a pause to actually happen. So
again, I just think it's misplaced to put the onent on
people's gas that. Oh, there might be a rate increase when
we should have all known that a pause for nearly 2 years is
going to have an increased cost to the overall project.
Uh,
thank you. Uh,
so much I appreciate that because that's why I was also
going to go with this. And, and, and I'm that's why I'm
to reach out in terms of the report because I was not in
support of the pause. I know this pause is going to based
on everything that you say it's only through even repeated
that um it's going to be a higher cost due to um increase
costs and and other factors. So I'm trying that was my
question part out of this report and and maybe I'm not
answering it right? Was there something that came out of
this this report that said there was safety problems. It
seems like that's a no was there was there something that
came out of this uh report? Um, other than the cost
which could be and it an issue that I want somebody also to
speak to was it that um the cost overruns was it that um
dramatic that it's going to be more than
But don't cost overruns more than what we are going to see
from this, pause.
Does that question, make sense?
Oh yes, um Alderman. If I um I'll try to answer that
question. I
I believe that the appropriate, um, let me reframe that, I
When we talk about cost overruns, um, I think you're
speaking probably more to the um, the allegation that there
has been uh, past mismanagement. Um,
I believe that that is separate from the question of of are
there going to be increased costs due to some of the things
that Mr. Pulos has talked about some of the things I
already know. I'm sorry, I don't mean to cut you off. I
know the answer to that. There's going to be increased
costs but I'm talking about. So the cost overruns wasn't
proven that was a statement. That's what I'm saying I
couldn't. That's why I'm trying to really get into the and
understand this report in layman's terms. So I as I'm
talking to my constituents, I can explain this. So it's
back to my questions. I know that's going to be an
increase, and you may not have that number to what that
increase going to be in the impact is going to be for us,
waiting 2 years, but I did the report talk about what the
impact of those costs overruns were from a dollar
standpoint. Oh Alderman Moore, I this is this is chairwoman
chairwoman Manhattan um 1. I I do want to get we've got
several other committee members who have questions and I
want to be cognizant of time but I I think I think they
have all answered.
Questions about this. I do want to point that um while this
program was paused, um there was work that was allowed to
happen for emergency repairs. There was I think 28.5
million authorized for people's gas to do work. So it's not
like nothing happened. Um, and I will say that as you talk
about some of the safety pieces of folks, want to dig into
dig into the report. Um, uh, I don't the ICC did not make
this decision lightly. Um, you know,
Mark's points are are well taken to things are getting more
expensive period.
They're getting more expensive and and I think that the
people's gas is also kind of making a note here of there
are costs may go up. There are costs, that will be um,
Uh, there are costs of this program as they move forward,
and we the rate payers are going to pay for it.
Right. And I think that's why we've got the panel that we
have here and this is a you know we've got the utility that
that is trying to do better and and meet their goals of
safe delivery of gas. We've got the the labor Partners who,
um, I think always make safety Paramount in their work as
well. And we've got, um,
Our consumer Advocates and uh also thinking about that rate
payer piece. So I don't know that there's more, they can
say to that, uh, they can't predict the price is going
forward. And what we do know that we're going to see as
some people have brought up um impacts on this work going
forward 1 way or the other. Um so if you could I don't know
know if you've got another question I do and I'm going to
wrap up but I could have gone. Last, I would have waited
I'm not a committee but I was called upon. And so my thing
is I'm I'm not asking about as much as the rate increase in
a way that other people are. I want to be able to explain
to my constituents that when they do come I need to know
need to know that the impact from whether the pause and
about that pause which I wasn't in support of and I don't
don't believe that total part should happen. I understand
everything that you say it. And and then I and maybe I can
talk offline with, uh, people's gas on it. But sometimes
this stuff's got to be on record and understanding.
That, that pause could have have a greater impact than what
allegedly those overruns are. And if those overruns are
real, I want to know what those are as well. So I can, you
know, be able to, um, speak to that. And that's what I was
asking about. That's a different question. I got, I got
you. And talking about just rates and rate Heights. That's
a different question under understood Alderman, Moore. I
think you should really dive into the report and that might
be an offline question because it's going to come down to
opinion, right? So, I see decided that
It was most important for the Safety and Security of the
program to pause. Because as you can read in the report,
they found a lot of mismanagement that were leading to um
ultimately higher costs for the rate payers, right? But
you've got people of differing opinions here so I don't
think you're going to get a, a pure answer, you've heard
the opinions. Um, I'd encourage you maybe to reach out to
each of our guests, if you want to talk more about that
offline,
Okay, and and thank you for that chairman. I appreciate
that. And my last question would be, because, as we talking
about increases and this may be a long, those lines too.
Chairman is my last question and uh, oh my last 2
questions. Um, the, the it when we talk about the right to
sort of like, when we talk about property tax appeals,
right? When we have, when we have
Um, businesses commercial businesses closed. We absorb the
all the the the property owners, absorb more of a property
tax increase because we lost business is, is that also
what's happening as we're being pushed and, and and places,
I've been pushed more to electricity be a buildings or a
household, are then more people absorbing that cost um, of
gas because we still got the piping and we still got the
the same pipe and the delivery system that has to go.
Through. So it is is that part of that increase as well?
Um I I appreciate the question. Um I I think what we're
getting at is, you know, is it possible that there is an
increased cost to uh those um, rate payers still left on
the gas system? If if they transition away and and the
answer is yes. We we believe that there is, um, a financial
impact, um, to, uh, those rate payers to their detriment.
Um, I, I hope that answers the question.
It does. And then that's why I just want us to be cognizant
and get this conversation out because it's important. And
then my last 1 is to, uh, people gas. And maybe you can
provide this, um, through the chair. If it was given to me
before, just resend it. Uh again a lot of money going on
here. We talked about jobs. Um how many I want to know how
many? Um,
African-American contractors, we're using on this job. If
you could provide that these jobs, I if you could project
that through the chair
We, we can get that through, uh, through the chair
alderman.
All right. Thank you so much and thank you. Um, chairman
for allowing me to, uh, chime in absolutely. Thank you
Alderman, Moore. All right, we've got all our sick. Joe
Lopez folder by Alder Lopez.
Folder by Alderman. Reilly. So we'll move on to um,
Alderman Lopez and we'll come back to Alderman sigil Lopez.
The original. Thank you. Chairman and that'll be the last
time I ever let David Moore. Go ahead of me.
But good morning. Um, yep. Good morning. Uh, committee and
good morning to our guests. I just have a couple. Um,
Pages of questions and things to talk about. Um and thank
you to all our colleagues for some good points but I just
want to bring up a couple points if I met chairman
We need to learn from history.
Here in this room. And in this building,
um, because as we look at the pause, that happened with
people's gas, thanks to the state, uh, Illinois's the
state's Illinois, Commerce Commission,
I I I have flashbacks of the
Uh, lead line replacement.
That we had going on. That was for
a few years, a very robust program and then came to a
screeching halt.
In our communities.
And over something very simple in negotiable.
Whether or not to go around a tree.
And as I'm looking through this 293 page document, which
I'm glad to see my colleague from the 34th W read. Um,
I see a lot of finger pointing but at the end when you
finally get to page 236
2 years worth of of of bickering posturing, and
politicizing. And we came back to the same conclusion.
Get back to work.
But now we have to do it.
10 times faster. Excuse me, 100 times faster. Excuse me,
because it went from is it says on
Page 6.
It went from.
Roughly, excuse me. I lost it.
4. I think it was 47 miles per day or something along those
lines.
49, thank you to now 110. And that's assuming that we are
at 100% Optimum capacity on day 1. Which as we heard today
is not going to happen which means the more more likely
going to have to be closer to 135 miles. Once this 2 year
Hiatus kicks off
And while we're talking about the rates and everything else
before we get to people's gas, the city and ourselves. I I
just have to go on again with, with regards to the ICC.
and as they are talking about,
Rate increases, and they're talking about the impact on on
consumers.
They didn't bad an eye in 2024, adding a 624 increase on
businesses.
uh, without any kind of impact study, or to see what that's
going to do, to the mom and pop businesses throughout the
entire city of Chicago, a new search charge, which my
residents have told me that this equates to $22 a month for
struggling businesses throughout all our neighborhoods.
Now, I understand where the money is going, it's going to
help the low-income the low-income fund otherwise known as
CEDA.
But as we're talking about the impact, it's not just what
icc's doing in terms of allowing people's gas to charge
more for much needed repairs but it's also what they're
doing on top of that to our struggling businesses. And I
think that's something also worthy of a conversation in
this room.
I do thank people's gas for being here and, and assembling
this team that's been at our beck and call. Um, but I think
it's really unfair.
Uh chairman and members of the committee. Um 1, I look at
time and time again, the city's position, always seems to
revolve around insufficient data, wrong cost, estimates
this, that and the other, and I've been trying to like 1 of
our other colleagues. Look at this Janna, uh program. Um,
I'm not going to go into it because I think it's, it's
still a work in progress based on its, uh, what I've been
reading. But I think we can put parameters in place that
help reduce and, and streamline how we do things. But the
interesting thing for me, ladies and gentlemen, is that the
same thing that we're asking of people's gas to do, we
don't even ask our own departments to do.
The same thing that as we have seed Dot, and forgive me, a
Deputy Commissioner, but I'm going to point right at you in
a minute. Um, I've seen where we've tried to coordinate
departments to work with utilities, to try to help our
communities.
And when we look at,
Time After Time After Time, where it's listed the
cost estimates.
are not, uh,
actual, or
Consistent.
We could very well be talking about C Dot.
Our own departments.
because I've seen where on blocks in the 15th Ward, where
we used to have
people's gas doing work, we try to coordinate with C Dot
and people's gas to do some of that sidewalk replacement to
augment some of those menu dollars and when I propose that
we do
full-scale Replacements alongside our peers or even our
use menu to pay what they were going to pay for their
restoration. I was told I couldn't because our costs were
nearly double what their costs were for a sidewalk.
If its 40050 that they are paying, we're paying 900 for the
same tile.
Our costs.
Are just as inefficient and and estimates are as
undefinable as what we're accusing.
People's gas.
There's plenty of work that we should be doing.
but I think that for as someone who grew up on the
southwest side of Chicago, I can remember the dangers of
having
work happen or not happen.
We've seen how I've seen houses explode. I've seen a block
explode in front of a church blew out all the windows in a
church on the southwest side and what is now the 23rd Ward.
We need to.
Focus on getting this done.
We need to as a city, look towards things that we can do
and I appreciate
some of the Advocates and other folks who come up with
suggestions and and things and concerns that we're worried
about.
But I think all of those can be mitigated because when we
look back to page 236 there's actually I take that back
when we look back to page 238 what is ordered by the
commission
There are definite calls to come back to the table to work
together to put workshops together and I know people's
gases offered to do those with our advocates.
But at the same time, we've got a job to do. Ladies and
gentlemen, they've got a job to do.
And when I think about all of the need that's out there in
our communities, when I hear that, we're trying to find
ways to put people to work, who wouldn't want a 10-year
jobs program in effect, that's hiring from our communities.
That's overwhelmingly. Inclusive of of those that we always
say that we want to see represented in these
opportunities.
I don't want us to get bogged down.
Madam chairman in.
Trying to demonize a utility as we're trying to find ways
to evolve that utility. We're not going to beat Evanston
who now has a an all gas retro uh gasless retrofit
ordinance you know that's just going to be
Evanston Chicago is Chicago.
We can be Swift and we can be Speedy while being safe,
while being safe.
They are not incompatible.
and I think that I have full faith in our friends and labor
to get the job done quickly, uh, as required by the law,
which by the way, if I'm not mistaken, there's no relief
from Springfield either on this matter, correct?
No.
so, for all of the grandstanding that we get from
Springfield on on,
Why this was necessary? There's zero support to get it done
so it will fall on our taxpayers.
But we have to invest in our neighborhoods in our city and
if it's every hundred years we are ourselves are doing that
right now. Ladies and gentlemen
We've taken out billions for infrastructure Replacements,
to fix the bridges, to fix the roads, to do things like
that. We're shutting down Bridges right now. Because as
commissioner Carney said, it's over a hundred years old.
And after 100 years, you have to replace things
That's exactly what we're trying to do.
And I believe,
if I may be so bold.
That this isn't going to be the end.
That this isn't going to be the last time that we're doing
things like this, but I think that there are plenty of
opportunities to, for us to move forward, Madam chairman,
uh, as you've already alluded to that, we're going to have
yearly.
Meetings with uh people's gas and I know they have been
coming here. Um,
For years, even bringing us a few years back that corroded
2 inch thick pipe. If you recall
They've always been willing to show us what the problem is.
We need to show them what the solution is on our end.
And what I would actually challenge this committee.
Chairman
Is to.
Address 1 of the issues that we've seen when it comes to
this work and the scope and maybe allow us to do better
coordination uh, between the utilities and our departments.
Is that on average we have roughly 25,000 give or take um
permitted events by people's gas in addition to all that
make up not only what are the emergencies? But also that
I'm sure we'll be inclusive of the 110 miles that we're
going to see.
I think a good faith measure by city council.
Would be a simplified permitting process. Once we know what
the scope of the year's work is going to be
for example, if we know that in 2026, that they're going to
have 110 miles worth of locations that are going to require
permitting for the
whether it's the
Full replacement or some other thing.
Why don't we have a single permit?
For that year so that they don't have to sit here and waste
time with C Dot and all the other departments going after
these individual permits.
Time After Time.
There's no Expediting of these permits. There's no rushing
of these permits. And if you really concerned about
bringing down the costs, then a unified permitting Pro, an
annual unified permitting process is what, uh, I think is
an order for our utilities and I would make it open to both
utilities as a matter of fact, but I think in this case
it's more pertinent to what people's gas is doing. And so
with that I would ask um people's gas
um,
how much time?
On a particular.
Project.
Is spent navigating a permitting processes.
Thank you for the question. Um,
In reviewing some of our historical practices that I had
mentioned earlier in the remarks. Um, we've sort of taken a
sampling of, you know what that process might look like.
Um, the
That can be anywhere from um, from design to permitting. Um,
let me give you a flavor for the design process. Um, it's
it's my understanding under rule, it should take
days. Um, sometimes again we have the coordinate with a lot
of different folks uh that can uh take as long as uh 6 or
take as long as uh 6 or even 8 months. Um, after that that
design is only good for 1 year under the current rules, uh,
to move on to permitting, um, depending upon the size and
upon the size and scope of a particular project that we are
working on. We will then have to pull a series of permits,
uh, that also have expiration dates, um, and I'm still
familiarizing myself with, uh, sort of that 1-time renewal
option or whether it expires. Uh, but, uh, we would then
have to go back in depending upon the expiration of those
permits, um, to be able to come back and, you know,
continue on and roughly speaking. How many times has
people's gas either not gotten off the ground in time or
had to either seen a permit expire and then reapply
or have to get an extension on that permit. Um, those
numbers do exist, it has happened. Um, I can get that for
you but it, but it, but it's, it happens. It's an event.
So, and if you could provide that through the chair, I
would appreciate that. Um, and then the other question with
that as well, is the subsequent costs of missing. Those
marks is also
Something that is not something necessarily planned for,
but it is a cost that has to be borne by you, and
ultimately by consumers. Correct.
Yes, that is correct. So I think that is 1 instance,
chairman where
if we're looking at Common Sense ways to help,
Do the work while also ensuring that we are.
Being respectful of the money that ultimately will be asked
of our our residents and their customers. You know, those
are the types of things that I think that we also can have
a direct impact on and I would be happy to work with you
and whomever whether it's in this committee or it should be
I think should be in this committee or jointly with Finance
to see what we can do to try to alleviate these.
Pressure points. These choke points. If you will in getting
the work done, if something is permitted.
On my block.
43rd in artisian and they missed the Mark, it's going to
cost them thousands to try to redo it simply because
Something may have happened the fact that it takes 6 to 8
months for us to get some fee finality, for them can
literally say that if they applied today, they might not
make it by the end of this year because of what this city
hall, departments are doing. That's unacceptable. So, I
think that if we could find a way to address that concern,
that's just 1 point. But if that is an area that it's
replicated, even if it's a thousand times, a thousand
times, for thousand dollar permits, there's a million
dollars.
Um, so I'm wondering just along that line of questioning too
if uh, seed out would like to weigh in, um, just in kind of
of same question that older Lopez had asked, but if you
could speak a bit to permitting process and, and I will
say, um, Alderman Lopez to your point, um,
Obviously it is an issue, right? I I would agree. It's an
issue for them because we see reflected in the report that
sometimes C dot would be actually 1 of the problems was
people's gas, uh, inappropriately using the ability to have
emergency work and kind of circumvent permitting processes
to get work done. And I would argue and I think this is the
city's position. We try to work towards compliance if
somebody is gaming the system or inappropriately using a
system, typically it's because they're trying to solve a
problem. And so either way,
There's a problem. What can we, what could we do to improve
upon it? But from the C dot piece, if you could speak a
little bit to, um, working with people's gas on permitting.
And, um, whether uh, something like a unified permitting
system is something we, uh, the department would consider.
Yeah, this is Jal with sad.
So this is something that may never came up before as a
unified year-long permit for a blanket permit. That is
something is blocked by block, you know, we see that will
lose control of that. So some something that we could look
at it, but
the coordination piece so there are
Uh, utilities underground. Our right away is full of
utilities. So that's what we do, coordinate with all the
utilities. So, the coordination process and somebody else
comes in in between, so that's why we have a yearly limit
on that time frames on it. But, if, when is a resub middle,
you looked it up and it is a much quicker process.
Do you have a follow-up? Sure, thank you. Um,
A couple things first off this was proposed. Um,
In the last Administration by yours truly. So, I know it
has come up before.
Does the util do the utilities uh contribute to the OU?
Yes, they do. How much do they contribute to the OU which
is the under the office of underground construction.
So, utilities pay with the uh City of Chicago is only 1
entity within the oec so OC's office management is run by
the board. So City of Chicago is 1 and in addition people's
gas support. When they have major project, we have a
coordination supporting agreement with people's gas, and
they pay for
Additional can you provide through the chair? How much both
utilities have provided annually for the last 3 years to
the OUC? Sure. Could do that. Um, but I think chair, uh
chair, that explains even still.
It doesn't change the fact that we need to find ways to
make this.
Move faster. And if the OUC is is
lagging for a lack of better expression, then we need to
find ways to make this move forward, their plans. Nothing
is changing Underground.
A pipe is a pipe. It's not, it's not moving, it's not going
anywhere. And if they say today that we need to replace
this pipe odds, and they don't replace it in 8 months, it's
still going to be there.
We shouldn't hold them.
Hostage or liable because the city doesn't move. And I
think that's you know if we want to truly have a
conversation about how we as you said are addressing the
things in this 2389 339 page report. That's what we need to
be focusing on. So again, I look forward to working with
you in the Departments to make that happen. I think that uh
if we want better estimates and we have to if we want to
bring costs down through better estimating then we have to
do our part 2 and that's 1 clear way that we can do that.
Thank you, thank you and uh recognize Alderman, O'Shea. Um
said non-competing member, thanks for being here. And I've
got a quick question before we move to Alder sik, chol,
Lopez and Alderman, Reilly, and, and just along that line
of thinking. And I know, um,
When will people's guests have a plan?
so, thinking about a,
A Time certain. So you guys are, you guys are working on
this. You're working on the short-term piece. I know some
of the questions solder and Martins uh, uh, response to
solman. Martin's questions were a little broad, but I
imagine at this point, you do at least have some project
management goals of like, when you will have a plan, um, so
to Alderman, Lopez's point, if the city wanted to
coordinate, right of like, hey, there's a 10 year time
frame. You really, you know, 9 years we have shared goals
of wanting to make sure that right like the the
Most at need work gets completed, you know, that's about
1100 miles. You know what that pace is have to be, there
are a lot of known variables, um, that people's gas and
your partners have. And so, you know, I think it's fair for
people's gas to ask the city of Chicago for assistance and
saying, hey, what could the city of Chicago do to help make
sure that we can complete this work based on this time
frame. But I think 1 of the things that we would need to
know. Is, when are you going to have a plan of like, hey,
what is what's your goal for 2025? What's your goal for
2026 and then what is that 2027 through 2035 plan look
like, so can you tell us when you think you're going to
have the details of that information?
Uh thank you for the question. Um, I will say right now we
are still working through that. Um I would say earliest
estimates it possibly look at quarter 1 of 2026. Um again
we still need to sort of recalibrate that Jana model. Uh we
do want to offer our stakeholders an opportunity to weigh
weigh in on anything else that they believe we should be
prioritizing. Um, obviously I think if we do some very
easy, you know, back of the envelope math, you can easily
see sort of what that mileage might look like in light of
the time frame. Um, we have already begun discussions, like
I said, with C dot about what that?
Potential run rate, looks like no plan, but just, just even
that number. Um, in order to sort of get a temperature
check is, is there anything we can do with the current
Frameworks that that we both have today on C Dots part? And
And with with pgl, um, are there things that we can do?
That might help expedite that we've had 3-way conversations
with, uh, water and sewer about us following them them
following us. Is there an appetite for things like a pilot
program where we could test out some of what Alderman Lopez
had talked about? Those are all in the works, but to answer
your question that plan we're hoping is starting to take
form early 2026, so that we can begin that design process
that, I sort of described. Okay. Um, so it sounds like and
Alderman Lopez not to not to call you, so it sounds like
they're having some conversations. Um, I think it would be
helpful.
And maybe you know through um the committee we can follow
up with the water department and with C dot. Um but
Ultimately, I think coming from the council piece of us not
being the experts and I'll chime in on the, not an engineer
piece. Sure, why not? Um, we're not the engineers, we're
not the experts on this piece. You guys in our departments
are going to be and what's possible. Um, Alderman Lopez, I
think what I'd be looking for is a proposal
Right. Like what's, what's the pitch? And so if there is
something that, you know, people's gas wants to ask the
city departments to do or a slate of options, um, I think
it would be worthwhile through the committee for us to work
on that and discuss it and would just, you know, we get
busy, we get sidetracked. So that's where on the time frame
of what makes sense for your time frame within the city's
time frame. That's where I look for more of a Time, certain
of, like, hey, when should we follow up with you about
that?
Understood and I would definitely want to work with um Mara
here in Michael about getting um that timeline to them and
then working through those appropriate Channels with you
guys. Okay, almond Lopez.
Thank you, chairman for giving me. Um perhaps it's something
something that we could work on together, maybe even if
it's a call for hearings, just to see who all is impacted
by the OUC and and the permitting because I think it that
will do a lot to save, not just people's gas. But many of
even what we do even our own menus, often times we hit
snags on this, so happy to work with you and your team to
figure out what we can do because I think that will answer
a lot of questions here in the committee. Thank you. Thank
you. All right Alderman sigil Lopez folder by Alder Reilly
Thank you, chairwoman. And I appreciate the the, um,
the timely matter for this hearing is, especially with the
um,
public security and these specific um,
effort by people's gas.
Um, I just want to talk about the the cost associated with
this.
Um, I am I'm personally concerned about the the the budget
associated with this and the, the many changes that the
budget has reflected.
Is my understanding. Is it correct that? Um, is there a 7.2
billion dollars left to complete these? Um um uh this uh
infrastructure. Uh, renewal project for people's guys? Is
that correct?
um,
Alderman, sichel Lopez. Thank you for the question. Um, I
think what you might be referring to is, um, in in the
preceding during the 13-month review, uh, people's gas had
provided a range of estimates under the old program. Um,
obviously, you know, under the new accelerated timeline, we
had proposed a different timeline for completing the
project as originally proposed. Um, under the new icc's
directive, you know, we're looking at a 20 to 35 deadlines
very different than what we proposed. Um, obviously we've
spent a lot of time talking about some of the potential
resource constraints and so, um, I would anticipate that
there would be a significant cost increase um under that
sort of constrained timeline. Um, and I think Alderman
Lopez kind of highlighted too, and that, that's assuming,
you know, it's running on all Pistons perfectly, uh, no
cost overruns, no permitting delays and we're really
meeting that deadline and we're getting to actually retire,
um, every mile of of that 1100, mile mile, uh, milestone.
in terms of,
so, there was a Blog called article report that
Show that in people's gas uh, in the last 14 years, they
only replace about 40 38% of the of, of the pipelines. Um,
that's what the, the the costs that I am referring to. Um,
so because we, you know, more or less, um, spend 3.3
billion dollars, uh, in work that has already been
completed. So is the work pending and I think that the
concern that I have is
Because this increases go and are paid by the consumer.
Ultimately, are the customers that are paying for this my
own, um, looking at different, a different. Um, um,
Sources for this, but it's about like a 6 dollar increase.
Um, pay, um, per bill for Conns consumers, is this accurate
and also
In terms of, I think you're making a case on a reduction of
the time frame, but that's 1 of what the recommendations of
the the ICC to resume this. So if you could, if you can
explain why like how
How is a fair for consumers, uh, to pay for continued to
pay for future work? Um, just given the history and the
track record of of, of the delay in the work and the
recommendations of the IC itself.
Yeah, thank you. Um, as far as the 6 dollar increase,
whether that's accurate, I I don't have any information
that could speak to that. I would want to go back and try
to figure out kind of, uh, what, what you're referencing
there, and I'm happy to try to answer that for you, um,
through the chair. Um, on the fairness question, I I would
just ask for the opportunity to reframe that. Um, I think
that, you know, when we think about the pipe replacement
program, this is really not a fairness question for us. It
really is about safety and reliability and that's something
that we don't have the luxury of foregoing. Um, we have to
replace the pipe. Uh we also have to follow the compliance
of the icc's direct.
Effective now, will that change over time, uh, from the ICC
as it continues to monitor us? Will the safety monitor
weigh in that? That's possible. But unfortunately, we don't
have the benefit factor of foregoing these necessary
upgrades and improvements that are required to keep every
Chicago in safe.
so let me, let me refer them to these, um, another another
figure I think as of last year, maybe more recent, again,
from a block club, uh, article because uh, customers
already saw a bump of about 10% per bill, which is a record
high, a total increase over hundred million dollars total.
This was a an a study from last year, but the same
disparity mentions, you know how, uh, especially seniors
and low-income families, the struggle they've been
neighborhoods where, uh, reportedly as many as 16% of the
total population in that neighborhood. Uh, has seen now a,
a a risk of not of of seeing their uh, their line or their,
their service being suspended, you know, and these are
families that rely on this. So again with all of their is
being asked from the consumer. Um I think at 1 point you
know, what is the the the company doing to rectify to show?
It seems like in some cases they are
Our programs available for low-income and seniors. It seems
like it's a, a, a awful, a lot of them and this is a huge.
this is a huge infrastructure bill is about 10 billion
dollars total write independently, how, and the customer
change. But I think this is a front by the customers.
That's my main concern. So there's not a concerted effort,
I think like you said, it was a ten dollar just as last
year and this increases continue, even though the service
and I tell you from a family from more neighborhood, that
had a car in their service that talk about people who rely
on this service during winter time and it took us a long
time to get getting the service back, right? So, I am
really want to see how as a company, right in the terms of
like this is a very profitable Enterprise is doing to help
those Chicagoans again. I'm talking about 16% in some
neighborhoods that may not be able to pay. But yet we talk
about billions of dollars associated with these
infrastructure that they would pay on front.
Yeah, thank you for that. Um, first of all, I I do want to
set the record straight that we do care about every single
1 of our customers. It's not lost on us that um our
customers are your constituents and we we understand that
um over the last several years, people's gas has
contributed over 15 million dollars through its own
shareholder dollars towards um, a program that we call
share the warmth. Um, we also um, uh, have the light Heat
we share the same concerns as um, citizens Utility Board.
We are very cognizant and we are following, uh, the fact
that this new Administration may be um, cancelling and
wiping out Li Heap and
in fact, just last month, our credit and collections team,
uh, went hand in hand, um, in Washington DC, uh, with some
of our consumer Advocate groups in order to, uh, Lobby for
the retention of of Li Heap. Uh, the other thing, too is I
will say that uh we are 1 of the few utilities that did not
appeal the low-income discount writer uh to the state of
of Illinois. When that was implemented by the ICC. Um, we
came up with multiple tiers that help some of our most
vulnerable communities in which we serve. And the last
thing I would say is, um, just last month. Uh, I myself and
my regulatory team. We did meet with the ICC and we
proactively aldermen are flagging. Um areas of concern for
us on that affordability issue. Uh, we've invited the ICC
to, um, be a partner with us and help us through that
dialogue. And help us be proactive about how we flag that.
With that being said, I also want to set the record
straight that I think that it's easy to maybe look at
At some of our costs in a vacuum um, our costs as a natural
natural gas utility are some of the lowest in the United
States. There's a couple studies out there again, happy to
share them with you. Uh, 1 for example, um, the city of
Chicago and our natural gas, uh, Bill ranks number, 16 out
of 40, major cities. Um, we fare better than New York than
Washington DC, um, in another study, uh, Natural Gas,
Utilities are ranked second lowest in the in the entire
country for the state of Illinois.
Annoying uh, second only to the state of Wisconsin. And so I
I want to put that into context because I think what
sometimes gets lost. Um even though like I said we we are
very cost-conscious about what this program might look like
we are very aware. Um everything is going up the cost to
borrow to purchase your first home. Um, a carton of eggs, a
gallon of milk. Um, electricity prices are on the rise. Uh,
we're very aware of that, um, and we're doing everything we
can, uh, we remain open to ideas on on how else we can best
support our most vulnerable communities.
Yeah, I think. And and look, I I I um, I tell you that for
many Chicagoans today, you know, the the the the the the
cost of um electricity is is um is is is um is is almost
out of hand. I mean we look at these report from block
Club. You talk about like low income families. This is in
particular a story of a senior who um basically saying that
saying that he cannot even sleep at night with that. That
thousand dollar debt that they have. Um, I think I'm, I'm,
I'm really concerned about infrastructure bills. I think
the ICC and I'm glad that this was put on hold so that we
can have uh, as serious discussion about the the whole
project. I mean, in this same article, some of the some of
the users are even talking about. They would rather move to
electricity the to Electric um um energy. So I I'm I'm
talking about the tremendous investment that is being on
front.
By by consumers, right? And the little programs especially
low-income uh, families are able to receive, they see the
project a programs and so other have not kept up with the
demand. And again, I mean, 16% of people who cannot uh,
afford the uh, the utility is a huge number. I mean, these
are people who are really now struggling and in their own
reporting, they cannot sleep at night because they don't
know how they're going to pay. So I will, um, share. I
will, you know, um, um,
Ask us, you know, continue to look into this issue and I'm
really concerned about the the the the scope. The magnitude
magnitude of this program, how consumers? I I'm fronting
payments and the Alternatives that we have. I mean I think
think to us, I think I spent I mean my office spend um
weeks trying to resolve a case. Uh, we basically we even
struggle to get some of the some of the um credit for pay
for pay for service that they did not received. I mean, I
think this is, this is I'm talking about billions of
dollars, I am talking about people, consumers customers on
fronting this. And, again, the, the Alternatives that we
have to go to clean, sustainable and affordable options. We
cannot afford to leave people without Service, uh, during
the winter time and so forth. So, and I would like to
explore again. Another, I know 1 of the panelists
mentioned, maybe not for this hearing that there's been
frustration with this program in general. And I do agree a
thing on this and we did definitely need to talk to the ICC
as a community, to discuss our options. Because
affordability reliability, as well as the
The clean uh, nature of these energy. I do think is
something that should concern us all. Thank you chairwoman.
Thank you Alderman. All right we've got Alder. Reilly and
followed by Alder Taylor.
Thank you, madam chairman and and thank you for uh, having
this hearing today.
Um, I'd love to get Commonwealth Edison in here again soon
too. Um, a lot of my questions were already asked I I I do
want to react to some of the testimony that I heard from
the box today, um, you know, while I appreciate some of the
recent studies that show, um, in context, uh, gas bills in
Chicago, are lower than they are in some other big cities
around the country. Um, I'm glad to hear that, but I think
that, that local consumers here looking at their monthly
gas bill,
Probably aren't taking a lot of solace in knowing that that
customers in other cities are paying more than they are.
Um,
to be clear, the gas rates are soaring.
And and frankly you know, it's likely another rate hike is
coming.
Um, hearing that 16 to 18% of customers are more than 30
days behind.
On their bill is is also a grave concern.
Um, and there's nearly hundred million dollars in Consumer
Debt here owned to this owed, to this utility.
Um, you know, this has a disproportionate impact obviously
on lower income, families and families of color.
Um, and now we're hearing from everyone here 1 thing. We
all agree on is that lip is grave risk. Um, and the low
income heating assistance program, uh, is a critical
circuit breaker. Um, so thank you to people and to Local
150 and to the consumer advocates in the Box for hopefully,
working together in, in concert to try and save that very,
very important program. Um, I think that would be an
absolute catastrophe, um, for consumers, here in Chicago.
um, you know
At the end of the day, look I look and I know that labor
costs are what they are.
um, and I understand that that Commodities, you know, those
prices are sensitive. We've been dealing with inflationary
inflationary costs in recent years, um, and have not gotten
relief that we'd hoped by this point in time. Um, but you
Um, but you know, that plus the threat of the, the Trump,
administration's tariff program, you know, he's he's
hell-bent on on igniting a trade War a global trade War.
Um, I worry about all those cost inputs that go into this.
Um, and I'm going to talk to seed dot here in a second.
But it's also not lost on me.
That.
People's recorded a record profit last year.
and so, while I understand,
You have to go procure, your gas at the rates that are
available and that you're not allowed to Tinker with those
as you transfer that cost to the customer.
Um, when you made your your rate case back in 2023,
You looked at the ICC dead in the eye and you said not to
worry here.
Our request for increase in delivery costs.
Will be obviated by.
Will we predict will be much lower gas rates?
Um, and that's not at all. What happened here? Um,
consumers looking at their bill this month.
And comparing to a bill last year and it's 103% higher.
Um, and we learned that people's is doing really, really
well financially, congratulations to the company, you know,
I mean, that that's great news for you. Um, and I'm not
rooting against people's profitability.
But I do worry about the impact on the end consumer here
and this is not the flavor of the month. For me, this is
something. I've, I've been very consistent on since I came
to this body in 2007. Um, I used to do some work for you,
utility companies here in the state of Illinois. So I'm
familiar.
Um, with rate cases and the ICC and how costs are
calculated and how they are reimbursed.
um, and so in light of all of this,
um,
I'd like to know on the record if people's gas plans to
petition the ICC.
For a a rate increase in 2025, are you are you going to
petition the ICC this year for yet? Another rate, increase.
This year, we do not plan on petitioning for a rating
increase. How about 2026 that is what we are looking at?
um, I don't have a definitive date Alderman but yes we are
looking at where when when do we go in and part of that is
you know obviously I think um chair hadn't spoke a little
bit already that that is part of that planning process
trying to get our arms around what what is the size and
scope of what's needed?
Okay. Um, you know, I I would just caution the company, you
know, this body members of this chamber have been
approached by a number of consumer Advocates, and an
environmental groups advocating for a, an accelerated
electrification program here. And I know that
Consumer Advocates and environmentalists around the country
are pushing this, not just, you know, States like Illinois.
But
Everywhere.
Um, and I just a note for you all.
um, you know these Perpetual rate hikes
Feed the appetite of those of those Advocates and
consumers, frankly, looking for some sort of rate relief,
competitive relief.
And I know there are all sorts of issues wrapped up with
electrification often. Sounds a lot better than it actually
is um whether the capacity exists to offset taking
customers away from
Gas companies like yours, all of that. Um, but I'd say, you
know, the way you slow down those efforts and those
campaigns.
Is to show consumers that they don't have to count on a
massive rate, increase every other year.
Um and so I think you know 224 million dollars in profits
great um for you.
Um, it seems that there's got to be, there's got to be some
float there, where, maybe perhaps the consumer can get a
bit of relief too.
Um, and that's my primary concern here. Look, I know you're
a major driver of jobs and investment in Chicago and I
thank you for that.
Um, our partners in labor here uh are important to me and
it's good to know that they're getting all of this good
important work done.
Um, but consumers need help too.
Um, I wanted to speak to the the seed dot issue because
that's 1 that bothers me as well. Um, pertaining to the OU
and also how long it takes
Companies like yours to get permits pulled for this
important work.
Um, and I didn't get a really um, clear answer from seed
dot on.
Why we have some such substantial delays, you know I'm of
the mind that we we definitely need a better process and 1
that's much much faster.
for the Utility Partners, whether that's people's or
comment or anyone else AT&T whomever,
Um, but I do know that part of that.
process for issuing, a permit involves checking in with
some of the local stakeholders, including the local
aldermen, to make sure that information is properly
disseminated when say
3 blocks of traffic are going to be shut down for an
extended period of time to allow for um, restoration work
to occur. Um,
So maybe see dot. Let's get you on the mic 1 more time
here.
Um,
Could you explain to us? What factors into these lengthy
delays? Because I remember, you know, under mayor Emanuel
which seems like a million years ago. Um, we had made some
progress and coordinating, um, getting private utilities
into our trenches. When we knew the city would be doing
significant either water.
Uh or or other type of work under the public right of way.
And I remember hearing from companies like yours at the
time that this was a welcome change and that it was making
things more efficient speedier, um, and I would suspect
probably saving a little bit of money on along the way. Um,
what happened to that program? Because I could tell you
someone who represents a big chunk of downtown.
Um, I'm seeing utilities opening up my streets over and
over and over and over again in the same calendar year.
Uh, especially in River North and in streeterville.
um so maybe C dot could explain that a bit
so the OUC process is uh, simplified and they that all 30
members that respond within, uh, 30 days
so they are very good at responding on time when a conflict
conflict get arise between utilities, that resolution is
1 at time. So what you see so happen, all members, sign off
and say that. Yep, the utility this based on this plan,
this will work. It will protect my facility.
Ities. So that conflict resolution is the ones that that is
between that designer. And the conflicting Department
comforting utility.
So how sad can I fix that issue?
So that's something that we've been working with that uh,
utilities. Once they have a resolution comes in there. We
tidied up the timeline to you need to respond. I don't
understand. Could you repeat that slowly please?
so when whenever when a conflict identified and the project
owner resolved, the conflict
then they resubmit we tighten up that timeline to 7 days
then the utility have to respond back within the 7 days. So
it is is basically the conflicts are the time delay happen.
It is, is in between the project owner, identifying that
once they identify the conflict, resolving the conflict.
Okay, that sounded very bureaucratic.
Um, not sure. I'm excited about that answer.
Uh, you know, uh Madam chair. I I I had some more editorial
comments. I was going to make today, but I think I'm going
to save those for another day. Um,
I would like to hear back from people. So, when they have a
better sense of their program, whether or not we can expect
another rate hike to be sought in 2026,
Um, 2023 delivered, a hundred million dollar rate hike and
I sure hope that's not another um, prospect on the horizon
here, um, because consumers are getting crushed and I'm not
saying it's people's fault.
um,
Every single cost people look at monthly um on their
kitchen table when they're paying their bills has gone up
significantly. And so I'm just going to say it 1 more time.
Um, the city needs to do better,
In getting you uh the permits that you need to perform the
important work.
Um, I think we need to have a better discussion a lot, I
think a more productive discussion around.
Um how to coordinate between the city and the utilities and
and our right of way with local stakeholders like
aldermanic offices. Um, but without layering in weeks and
weeks of delays. And also, um, I think Alderman Lopez Ray
Lopez brought up a very good point.
About the cost of restorations. Why is it that the city? The
The city's, uh, restoration costs are nearly double that of
people's.
Um, that doesn't square up and I have the same kind of
frustrations. Ray Lopez, does we do a lot of utility work
in the central business district? Right? That's where
Commerce is. It's where 170,000 people live.
Um, and so again I know that that's not going to slow down
anytime soon.
Um, but um we need better answers to these questions. I
want to thank the citizens Utility Board for being here.
Um and serving as our rate payer Advocate at the ICC. Um
thank you for your testimony. I Rely Upon um
Your advice on a regular basis and and then please also
chair. I think, um, we need to talk as colleagues about
what we can do.
To try and assist in the effort to preserve Li Heap.
Um, I really truly believe if we if we lose that program,
that that could have a devastating impact on many, many
tens of thousands of families in Chicago. So thank you
madam chair. I appreciate the Indulgence.
And uh almond Riley. June 13th is the uh summer preparedness
hearing with comment.
Yeah.
Um, thank you for that.
All right. Um, I think we don't have any other Alders on
stack that are currently in the room, we did start another
committee meeting um, in the other space. Um, I I just want
want to reflect back. Um, a few things that I know we're
going to take back through the committee. Um, so we'll make
sure to follow up with any questions that were made through
the chair and get those answers to all of our committee
members, um, you know, to, um,
Uh, our panelists today. Thank you each and every 1 of you,
for always making the time for being here for um having
responses to our questions. Thanks to our city departments,
um, C dot, you know, we'll follow up. Um, so we can maybe
dig into a little bit of the permitting process. Since that
seems to be a thing, multiple members have questions about
and president booner will look forward to hearing from your
team. Um, a bit, as you guys get closer to kind of nailing
down a time frame to see at what point um, you're ready to
have that conversation again, with the city. If there are
any kind of requests or proposals, um, around what the city
could do around permitting. Um, and as we look at, uh,
identifying those um, miles of pipeline, that need to be,
um, uh, retired,
Um, so I want to thank our guests today. Um, with there
being no further business before the committee, uh, I'll
take a motion to adjourn from. Alder Cruise. Thank you. Uh,
last woman standing older person crew so moves. Um,
it is 12:31 and uh hearing no objection, so ordered
Meeting on the committee Environmental Protection energy is
now adjourned.