The Rate Hike Explained
How IID engineered a 69% rate hike — and why it didn't have to happen
In late 2024, the IID Board made a fateful decision: rather than pursue new revenue sources that could offset rising costs, it chose to abolish the Energy Cost Adjustment (ECA) surcharge and fold those costs directly into the base rate.
The result was sticker shock on an unprecedented scale. Customers who had been paying a base rate of 11.69¢ per kWh (plus a separate, variable ECA surcharge that averaged around 18.34¢) suddenly saw a single consolidated rate of 19.76¢ per kWh.
The accounting trick
IID's CFO argued the "real" systemic increase was only 8.5%, because the old ECA surcharge already covered some of those costs. But here's what the CFO won't tell you: by eliminating the ECA and burying everything into the base rate, IID eliminated the one line item that made energy cost volatility visible to ratepayers. Now, when wholesale energy prices drop, you'll never see the savings — they're hidden inside the base rate. The transparency is gone.
The rate trajectory: it gets worse
| Year | Residential Rate | Cumulative Increase |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-2025 (Base) | 11.69¢/kWh | — |
| 2025 | 19.76¢/kWh | +69% |
| 2026 (Projected) | 22.30¢/kWh | +91% |
| 2027 (Projected) | 24.38¢/kWh | +109% |
By 2027, residential ratepayers will be paying more than double what they paid before the restructuring. Mobile home residents — often the most economically vulnerable — face similar increases.
The structural deficit nobody fixed
The rate hike was the IID's answer to decades of fiscal irresponsibility:
The math
- $1.3 billion in deferred maintenance — transformers from the 1930s still in service
- $100 million per year structural operating deficit
- $81 million in emergency "summer relief" credits — a band-aid that doesn't fix the bleeding
- $0 in new revenue pursued from the $10 billion data center that could generate $30 million annually
The alternative they blocked
While ratepayers absorbed the largest rate hike in IID history, the Board was simultaneously blocking the single largest potential revenue source ever offered to the district: a data center project that would pay IID up to $30 million per year in net revenue under a cost-plus wholesale model.
Instead of negotiating, the IID General Manager demanded $4 billion in prepaid electric fees — a financial poison pill designed to kill the deal. The developer's federal lawsuit alleges this was coordinated with insiders connected to the Z-Global scandal.
“They had a choice: accept $30 million a year in new revenue, or raise your rates 69%. They chose to raise your rates.”
Your rates doubled. The Board blocked the fix. Vote them out.
Support Carlos Duran for IID Division 1 on June 2nd.
Take Action