The top Connecticut Democratic state senators raised the temperature of the debate over electric rates on Thursday, accusing the state’s two biggest electric utilities of trying to ”silence and intimate” fellow Democrat, state Sen. Norm Needleman of Essex, who has made himself the industry’s loudest political critic.
The accusation, which the utilities deny, turns on a half dozen or so letters and opinion articles in which the utilities complain about unjust criticism and unfair, improper rate decisions by state regulators, while Needleman complains about improper utility behavior, greed and irresponsible news reporters, as well as the utilities’ “alarmist rhetoric and extensive fear mongering.”
Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney and Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff came to Needleman’s defense in a press release under a head line in which they “Condemn Utilities’ Attempt to Silence, Intimidate Officials.”
“Senator Needleman receiving these letters is unusual, to say the least, and is indicative of a continued campaign from state utilities disturbed by the prospect of tougher regulations on their business and greater demands for accountability,” Looney and Duff said. “Instead of working alongside legislators to shore up the stability and efficiency of the state’s electric grid, the utilities are universally opposing any effort that could pull funds away from their shareholders and bottom lines.
“Let’s be frank: Connecticut utilities enjoyed 20 years of a virtually free and lightly regulated market, and during that time, state power costs spiked while emergency response faltered,” they continued. “Now that the focus is turning toward the best interests of ratepayers, and not exclusively shareholders, there’s a full-court press in place against any progress. It’s disappointing, and we hope that state residents are paying attention.”
The accusation of prior lax utility regulation drew a sharp rebuttal from Arthur House, another influential Connecticut Democrat who serve as chairman of the Public Utility Regulatory Authority under former Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy.
“A review of our record would reveal as outrageously false the suggestion that our dedicated work for the State of Connecticut could produce a statement ‘Let’s be frank: Connecticut utilities enjoyed 20 years of a virtually free and lightly regulated market.’ Those words are a crass insult, as blatantly incorrect as deeply offensive,” House said.
As PURA chair from 2012 to late 2016, House supervised 80 professional staff and three commissioners, all of whom he said, “took pride in our work as civil servants.”
“During that period, we enjoyed an arm’s length relationship with Connecticut’s public utilities, treating them professionally as neither friend nor foe but entities coming before PURA with dockets wherein we carefully and diligently applied facts to the law,” he said. “PURA ruled on dockets in favor of utility requests, against their requests and modifying them. We did so with the high regard for Connecticut law and great respect for ethical standards.
“We also frequently spent days in the Hartford Armory emergency bunker working to restore the distribution of electricity to Connecticut residents and businesses,” he said. “Not once were we joined in that work by a Connecticut legislator.”
Outgoing PURA commissioner Jack Betkoski said he agreed with House’s remarks. Betkoski was a commissioner under House’s chairmanship but has been pushed off the authority after disagreeing with current chairman Marissa Gillett on a decision that cut water rates.
Gillett is at the center of the utility rate controversy that is the subject of the Looney-Duff claim of intimidation.
Eversource and United Illuminating parent Avangrid contend that, under Gillett, PURA has delivered a series of arbitrary and potentially illegal rate decisions that are undermining their ability to collect sufficient revenue to maintain and upgrade their grids. Credit rating agencies S&P Global and Moody’s seem to agree, having recently issued a number of utility credit downgrades based on what they have described as the state’s adverse regulatory climate.
CT utilities go to court to challenge PURA decisions that led to credit downgrades across industry
PURA has said Gillett is prevented from responding to criticism by her role as quasi-judicial arbitrator. But supporters, including the state consumer counsel and attorney general, have said she is restoring regulatory vigor to a system that has for years permitted utilities and their investors to profit at the expense of rate payers.
As Senate Chair of the Energy and Technology Committee in the General Assembly, with oversight over electric utilities, Needleman has emerged as a leading Gillett defender and utility critic.
Much of the Looney and Duff criticisms involve Needleman’s correspondence with or about the utilities.
In a December 19 opinion piece in the CT Mirror, Needleman and his House co-chair Jonathan Steinberg of Westport accused reporters of regurgitating utility press releases and went on to imply that the credit downgrades were the result of an effort by utilities and credit agencies to discredit the current PURA regulatory scheme in Connecticut.
“To suggest that these ratings agencies are independent or objective is nonsensical,” the two wrote.
Needleman and Steinberg did not respond to or declined requests to discuss the claims.
In a January 6 piece in the CT Mirror cited by the Senate leaders, Needleman wrote that he received letters from “two major Connecticut utility companies” — one accusing him of defamatory speech and the other admonishing him for demanding greater utility accountability during his most recent election campaign.
“These letters are deeply concerning,” Needleman wrote. “Not only do they and the language they use represent a clear attempt to stifle legitimate criticism, they’re also a bald-faced attempt to intimidate an elected official (me) charged with setting energy policy in the state.”
The letter concerning defamatory language, from Avangrid on July 17, complained that Needleman had repeatedly accused United Illuminating of, among other things, “taking improper actions to pressure regulators.”
Avangrid complained in the letter that Needleman had accused United Illuminating of “using a regulatory rate-adjustment request filing not for the legitimate purpose of securing rate adjustments that will enable United Illuminating to continue to invest in Connecticut’s energy grid” but for the “illegitimate purpose of trying to get (Gillett) fired.”
“These accusations are categorically false,” the letter said. “And they are not just defamatory, but defamatory per se under Connecticut law.”
The Avangrid letter concluded by saying that “it is not the purpose of this letter to attempt to stifle any legitimate public debate or prevent true and accurate comments about United Illuminating — even if those comments are critical and even if United illuminating may disagree with them.“
Eversource complained to Needleman in a Nov. 8 letter that a utility employee who lived in Needleman’s district had become concerned for her “personal safety” because of his criticism of the utility during his election campaign.
“These types of baseless attacks on our company promote anxiety among our customers, and, in turn, for our employees who live side-by-side with the constituents you are trying to provoke,” the Eversource letter said.
Looney and Duff also refer to a Dec. 30 letter from Eversource to local government leaders that they said “indirectly sought the support of municipal executives for future rate increases.”
Eversource to slice investment in electric upgrades after adverse rate rulings. Customers may feel it
The letter tells municipal leaders, who benefit enormously from taxes on Eversource capital equipment, that the utility will reduce capital investment in gas and electric distribution systems in 2025 because of reductions or anticipated reductions in the revenue PURA allows it to collect through customer rates.
“PURA’s short-sighted decisions to defund and disallow capital investment for electric, gas and water delivery infrastructure in favor of highly publicized but minimal rate reductions will have long-lasting detrimental impacts for customers and communities,” the letter said.
Needleman, who is the Essex First Selectman in addition to serving in the state Senate, replied with a four page letter of his own to his municipal colleagues three days later.
“LIke you, I am in receipt of a letter from Eversource electric and gas executives …,” Needleman wrote. “After reviewing the alarmist rhetoric and excessive fear mongering packed into their two-page letter, I feel compelled to share with you some facts and primary sources that you can review prior to reaching any conclusions on this matter.”
“Because make no mistake, while there was no explicit call to action articulated in that letter, you will invariably be called upon by these monopoly entities to support “investment” (a.k.a. rate increases) and other innocuous sounding initiatives in the coming months as the 2025 legislative session heats up and the utilities’ rate cases (Yankee Gas and UI) currently underway continue to progress,” he said.