Connect with us

Connecticut

CT electric rates: In lead-up to Election Day, is issue less salient?

Published

on

CT electric rates: In lead-up to Election Day, is issue less salient?


It’s a stunning, temperate Sunday as Rep. Jaime Foster, D-Ellington, knocks on doors in a neighborhood she has served for two terms in the Connecticut legislature, hoping to make it three. Today there’s no need for heat, no need for air conditioning, and apparently no need to bring up the cost of running either.

It’s an issue that just a few months before had pretty much everyone in the state seriously energized — pun intended. But on Foster’s rounds this day, no one mentions the big electric rate changes and eye-popping bills that slammed consumers beginning July 1, followed by a second round of increases Sept. 1.

“Right now utility rates come up sometimes,” Foster said. “In July, that was all anyone talked about.”

For weeks this summer, Republicans pushed for a special legislative session to authorize the use of leftover pandemic federal funds from the American Recovery Program Act (ARPA) to provide ratepayer relief as well as make serious structural changes to electricity costs and payments. Their weekly news conferences were actually continuations of similar proposals Republicans made during the last two legislative sessions.

Advertisement

“I think the Democrats made it easy for us and created this as a political issue,” said House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford. “Back in February when we put together our proposals — they were fairly modest — and they refused to even have a public hearing on them. So it sort of created fodder for us.”

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford. He had pushed for a special legislative session this summer to authorize using leftover ARPA funds to lower electricity bills. Credit: Jan Ellen Spiegel

In contrast to Foster’s experience, Candelora said utility rates in the context of affordability are the single biggest issue people point to as he knocks on doors for other candidates. He is facing no opposition this election cycle.

Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, and co-chair of the Energy and Technology Committee, does have an opponent. He said utility rates have come up occasionally as he campaigns.

“(Republicans) were searching for a salient wedge issue; this was the one,” he said, adding that Democrats may have opened themselves to the Republican offense. “We saw this coming, and we tried to give our leadership a heads up, and they didn’t think it was a significant issue. I think they came to appreciate the fact that in some races, in very challenging, competitive districts, it was a bigger issue, and some of my colleagues, particularly first termers, were struggling to articulate a point of view on it and to put it in context.”

Advertisement

It would have been a logical subject for the voters to bring up with Foster as she knocked on doors in a maze of identical rental town homes, asking residents whether they needed anything or there was something they wanted her to work on. Foster is vice chair of the Energy and Technology Committee. Like Steinberg, she knows the subject matter.

And Foster herself twice in the last two years also filed legislation to use ARPA funds to help cover some electricity costs.

“It is a complicated issue and when we started peeling back those conversations, those talking points, it had less hold on the public,” she said in explaining the flagging interest.

Jeffrey Berte, a constituent Foster asked about the rates, offered the observation: “Utility companies never seem to lose money.”

Advertisement
” data-medium-file=”https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-336×224.jpg” data-large-file=”https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-771×514.jpg” alt=”” class=”wp-image-1096890″ srcset=”https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-771×514.jpg 771w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-336×224.jpg 336w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-768×512.jpg 768w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-1536×1024.jpg 1536w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-2048×1365.jpg 2048w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-1200×800.jpg 1200w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-1024×683.jpg 1024w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-1568×1045.jpg 1568w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-2000×1333.jpg 2000w, https://ctmirror-images.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/IMG_2429-400×267.jpg 400w” sizes=”(max-width: 771px) 100vw, 771px”>
Rep. Jaime Foster, D-Ellington, campaigning. She asked Jeffrey Berte about electric rate increases, which had been a big issue during the summer. “Utility companies never seem to lose money,” he said. Credit: Jan Ellen Spiegel

Troy Dabbondanza, another constituent she asked, said he’d seen a lot of social media posts about it. “People asking about the energy bills and about the — trying to think what it was.”

“The public benefits charge,” Foster offers.

“Yeah, public benefits,” he said.

That does, indeed, seem to be the key issue.

And Foster saying it’s complicated could be an understatement.

Advertisement

Truths, fictions and your electric bill

What happened this summer, that at least for a while propelled electric rates into a big and seemingly pervasive campaign issue, was a confluence of cost factors: high electricity usage, some very high rates, bigger than normal payments that were needed for several items — especially the Millstone nuclear power station, a new bill format and a whole lot of confusion and misinformation about all of it.

Let’s start with a few basics. The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) sets rates. There are many different rates that fall into several categories. The one most people are familiar with is for the actual power, which is adjusted twice a year — in January and July.

There’s a big buckets of rates that are set through a Rate Adjustment Mechanism, RAM. Broadly, it’s typically a bi-annual process that reconciles what PURA thought the utilities, Eversource and United Illuminating, were going to be spending in a year ahead and what they actually spent. These expenditures cover a host of services the utilities perform that, along with other factors, by law they must be reimbursed for.

Connecticut electric bills now provide more detailed information that shows the specific charges with several categories. Credit: CT Office of Consumer Counsel

Another basic fact is every single charge on your bill except one is based on how much electricity you use. What you use is multiplied by whatever the rate for that charge is — and that’s what you pay. It then follows that one of the ways to pay less is to use less electricity. This was not the summer to do that.

July was hot. Really hot. It wasn’t the hottest July or summer on record in Connecticut, but it was close. People were using a ton of air conditioning, which meant they were using more power. Ironically the rate for that power went down substantially in July over the previous period.

Advertisement

But the bulk of the charges set through the RAM went up, and some went way up.

It was rates in a large group of charges called the Public Benefits category that got a lot of the focus and pushback. As a result of a new bill format, most customers are getting a more granular list of the charges in that category. This led many people, including some legislators and candidates, to mistakenly think new charges had been added. There are a few more recent charges, but most have been part of what customers have been paying for years — if not decades.

The item within the public benefits category that became the main political football is money customers have to pay to make up for those who have not paid their bills. Utility customers have been paying for this “since the dawn of time,” in the words of one state official.

The non-payments, known as arrearages — bad debt in other words — is an ongoing operational expense. But ratepayers only have to cover them in the public benefits category for those customers who are classified as hardship cases. That process is done through the RAM. Due to COVID, however, and the general lag time in processing bad debt — a year or more — more than usual came due recently.

The bad debt from non-hardship cases is handled differently and outside the RAM process. PURA has the ultimate say on how much of that debt will be paid by ratepayers.

Advertisement

The issue of bad debts plus a moratorium on utility shutoffs that had been put in place when COVID started have also caused confusion. Shortly after the pandemic lockdown began in March 2020, PURA authorized a moratorium on shutoffs for non-payment of all regulated utilities. By September 2021, that moratorium had ended for all non-hardship customers.

The hardship customer shutoff moratorium technically ended at the end of October 2023. But then the regular 6-month winter shutoff moratorium kicked in — so it wasn’t until May 1 of this year that no moratorium existed.

Republicans have invoked that moratorium as the cause of some of the rate increases, capitalizing on the notion that folks who pay their bills are getting stuck paying for those who don’t. But paying for bad debt is not new, and it’s impossible to know whether the moratorium was a major, or any, factor.

Right or wrong, the characterization stuck.

“I think what really got people’s goat was having to pay other people’s bills,” Candelora said. “That people understand. And so that was something going back to February that our caucus had honed in on and said, ‘you know, we should be using COVID money to pay that down.’”

Advertisement

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, and others noted that, given the amount of ARPA funds available after most of them were used to help out higher education, dedicating ARPA money would have amounted to little more than a gesture. The calculation is ratepayers would have had their bills reduced by about $5 a month.

“If we simply want to look at it as a political issue as opposed to a legitimate policy, I’m sure we could have done something, but I don’t know that it would have been meaningful,” Rojas said. “They wanted to make it more political, and it was hard to take it seriously.”

Rojas, who also has no opposition in this election, is campaigning and door-knocking for other candidates. He said he’s not hearing about utility rates from voters with the frequency many would have assumed.

“It was certainly far more when the first bills came through,” he said. “It’s important to not overreact to the situation or try to exploit it for political reasons because I think it only confuses the public more on something that’s already complex.”

Rojas and Candelora both admit using ARPA funds to cover some of the bad debt is a short term fix. Rojas said he would be open to discussing one of the other solutions Republicans have been pushing — moving the bad debt payment from ratepayer bills to the state budget. Candelora said he thinks people understand that long term solutions will take a lot of time.

Advertisement

There is one new longer-term policy now in place, however. It’s called the Low Income Discount Rate, LIDR, which began in late 2023. It uses metrics from other low-income programs such as SNAP, previously known as food stamps, to automatically give low-income ratepayers lower electric rates.

Implementing this system finally catches Connecticut up to its neighboring states, which have done this sort of thing for years. Among its goals is to help lower the number of unpaid electricity bills.

Ironically, a far more significant contributor to the higher energy bills was the cost for the Millstone contract — hammered out in 2017 to keep the region’s largest power generator from making good on its threat to shut down. The biggest supporters at the time were Republicans, especially the then-Republican Senate co-chair of the Energy and Technology Committee, Paul Formica, who represented the district in which the plant is located.

Costs to ratepayers for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station skyrocketed this summer. Credit: CT Office of Consumer Counsel

The actual power purchase agreement took another couple of years to finalize. Its structure requires Eversource and UI to buy the power for a fixed price, which they can sell on the wholesale market. That means it competes with the cost of natural gas.

Effectively, if gas prices are high, Millstone is a good economic deal. But under current conditions of extremely low natural gas prices, Millstone is costly and Connecticut ratepayers have a lot of ground to make up. That’s because conditions from COVID and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, when natural gas prices spiked, caused year-ahead predictions that Millstone’s power prices would work to Connecticut’s benefit — but they didn’t.

Advertisement

In 2023, Millstone cost Eversource nearly $297 million more than in 2022, and it cost UI more than $54 million more, according to information provided by the Connecticut Consumer Counsel’s office. Those were by far the largest increases in cost each utility incurred.

An effort to lessen ratepayer pain by stretching payments out over an extra year failed. To make matters worse, a delay in the RAM timetable meant paying for all of it over 10 months instead of the usual 12.

Costs to ratepayers for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station skyrocketed this summer. Credit: CT Office of Consumer Counsel

Then PURA announced another rate increase would be coming in September to adjust for a couple of new programs that utilities hadn’t been paid for. An EV charging program, in particular, had three years of costs to make up.

But then something else happened: the weather cooled down.

The calm after the storm

While a number of people think just being able to turn off the air conditioning combined with lower rates for power account for less chatter about electric rates overall, Sen. Ryan Fazio, R-Greenwich, the ranking Republican on the Energy and Technology Committee, said he still hears plenty about it, even in his wealthy district.

Advertisement

“I hear it a lot at people’s doors. It’s a major concern,” he said. “It’s something that really is resonating with people. People are very frustrated.”

Fazio is among very few candidates with a detailed energy plan on their website. He was an architect of the initial Republican plan floated two years ago to address utility rates and other energy concerns. He also supports using ARPA money to give ratepayers a little relief and advocates for moving the public benefits charges into the state budget.

He said he thinks people understand that real energy reform is a long-term process.

“There’s a plan that’s out there for medium and long term relief. And I think most residents understand that that’s desirable,” he said. “The goal is to change policy, and it has been for two years. And the public is absolutely furious at the bills that they’re paying and they want to see changes.”

Fazio’s opponent in what is expected to be a tight race is Nick Simmons, a first-time state senate candidate with experience in the Biden and Lamont administrations.

Advertisement

“It’s certainly a very urgent need and a top issue for a lot of voters that I speak with, and which is why it’s also become one of my top issues, which is overall affordability and cost of living,” Simmons said.

He points to the Millstone situation, saying he would have preferred better accountability and renegotiation options as a way of preventing customers from paying more than they should.

“What I’m hearing from many Republicans is more political gimmicks than actual focus on solutions,” he said. “Let’s get into a [legislative] session. Let’s all come together and come up with some real structural changes that are going to make a difference.”

Up in Ellington, Jaime Foster’s opponent, Republican Jen Dzen — a member of a well-known farming family — has posted on Facebook a Senate letter from August asking for a special session to deal with energy bills.

Her own comments on Facebook refer to the Systems Benefits Charge as “new” — which it is not, and mischaracterize the handling of bad debt. After initially agreeing to an interview, Dzen did not respond to further requests.

Advertisement
In the state house race between incumbent Democrat Jaime Foster and Republican Jen Dzen, high electricity rates were a big issue during the hot summer but have faded as the weather cooled and other issues have surfaced. Credit: Jan Ellen Spiegel

Foster has won tight races in her two previous elections — two years ago by fewer than 100 votes. While high energy bills are not unimportant, priorities have shifted since she first proposed using ARPA money to help with utility bills.

“I have had conversations about it. And I think the problem with that argument is that people don’t realize what difference that would have made,” she said. “If we start spending ARPA on something that was urgent in this neck of the woods, it would be to save our hospitals.”

She is referring to the crisis situations at Manchester Memorial and Rockville Hospitals due to the stalled sale between their owner, Prospect Medical Holdings, and Yale New Haven Hospital.

“The special session — I would have been there in a heartbeat if I felt like it would have been the right precedent to set in a way that was going to sustainably make a difference,” she said. “I don’t disagree fundamentally with the concept of helping address arrearages. I just disagree with the politicization of rushing it.”

Advertisement

Foster said when she tells constituents she might have to choose between using money to give them a $5 break on their electric bills or saving their local hospitals, “I’ve never heard one person tell me ‘I want to save $5 on my utility bill.’”



Source link

Connecticut

The Great Westport Sandwich Contest kicks off with event at Old Mill Grocery

Published

on

The Great Westport Sandwich Contest kicks off with event at Old Mill Grocery


People in Westport have the chance to pick the best thing between sliced bread.

The Westport Weston Chamber of Commerce held a kick-off event at Old Mill Grocery on Monday for The Great Westport Sandwich Contest.

The contest runs throughout March with 21 restaurants, delis and markets competing in 10 categories to be crowned the best sandwich maker.

Residents can vote in the following categories: Best chicken, best steak, best vegetarian, best combo, best club, best NY deli, best pressed sandwich, best breakfast sandwich, best wrap, and best fish/seafood sandwich.

Advertisement

After people sample sandwiches, they can vote for their favorites in each category on the chamber’s website. They will also be placed into a drawing to win a free sandwich from one of the 10 winners.

“Of course, the goal is to have people come to Westport and check out restaurants, our markets and our delis. This is a great promotion. I mean it is a competition, but mostly it’s to bring people to the restaurants. It also gives a great community activity because they are the ones who get to vote who makes the best one,” says Matthew Mandell, the chamber’s executive director.

Winners will be announced in April and receive a plaque.

The chamber has held similar contests to determine what establishment has the best pizza, burger, soup and salad.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels

Published

on

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels


Connecticut lawmakers are again looking to restore Shore Line East rail service to its pre‑pandemic levels, a proposal that could add about 90 more trains per week.

Lawmakers are also weighing a separate cost‑saving proposal to shift the line from electric rail cars back to diesel.

The plan comes as ridership remains well below 2019 numbers, though state data shows those numbers have begun to climb.

The Department of Transportation provided the General Assembly’s transportation committee with the following data:

Advertisement
  • 132 trains per week today versus 222 trains per week in 2019, according to the CTDOT commissioner.
  • In 2019, most weekday SLE trains traveled between New Haven Union Station and Old Saybrook. This allowed SLE to operate with only five train sets in the morning and four train sets in the afternoon.
  • It should be noted that 2019 SLE service levels were very different due to constrained infrastructure; 2019 service levels had a reduced number of SLE trains serving New London (13 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today), while other stations had increased service (36 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today).

“2019 levels beyond Old Saybrook to New London would require more crews and more train sets than were used in 2019, requiring significantly more financial resources,” the department wrote in its written testimony.

The department said the governor’s FY2027 budget does not include funding for a full restoration. In other words, even if the legislature requires additional trains, the funds are not included in the current financial plan.

Governor Lamont said on Monday to remember that the state subsidizes the line more than any other rail right now.

“There’s not as much demand as there are for some of the other rail services in other parts of the state, so that’s the balance we’re trying to get right,” Lamont said.

At a public hearing on Monday, concerns about the line’s reliability and schedule were a central focus in the testimony.

“We’re making the line less attractive, some would say. The schedules are very, very difficult to manage,” said Sen. Christine Cohen of Guilford, the co-chair of the committee.

Advertisement

The current schedule for eastbound morning commuters is difficult. The train either arrives in New London just after 7 a.m. or after 9 a.m.

“So obviously not really … conducive to a typical workday,” Cohen said.

Cohen, who represents communities along the line, said she continues to reintroduce the bill to expand service year after year, pushing the state to do more with the line.

She thanked the department for the work it was able to do with the recent funding to establish a through train to Stamford.

“What do we need to do, and what are the challenges that you face in terms of expansion at this time?” Cohen asked.

Advertisement

Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto responded that the biggest hurdle is the cost of labor and access fees to Amtrak, which owns the territory.

“The cost to provide rail service is very expensive,” Eucalitto said.

He said CTDOT knows the current schedule is “not ideal,” but the economics of a work-from-home society are difficult.

“People expect 100% of the trains that they had in 2019, but they only want to take it two days a week,” Eucalitto said.

Asked about the eastbound schedule, the commissioner explained Shore Line East still operates on a model that sends trains toward New Haven in the morning rather than toward New London.

Advertisement

Changing that would require more equipment, more crews, and a second morning operations base, as well as negotiations with Amtrak, which owns the tracks.

Amtrak is “protecting their slots to be able to run increased Northeast Regional service as well as increased Acela service,” Eucallito said. “They’re going to look at us and question, ‘Well, how does that impact our need for Amtrak services?’ They’ll never give you an answer upfront, it’s always: ‘show us a proposal and then they’ll respond to it.’”

Cohen, who chairs the Transportation Committee, touted how a successful Shoreline East benefits the environment, development along the line, and reduces I-95 congestion.

“We need to start talking about how much money this costs us and think about all of the ancillary benefits,” Cohen said during the hearing.

Cohen said there is multi-state support for extending the line into Rhode Island.

Advertisement

“We will need some federal dollars. But as you say, there are other businesses up the line in New London,” Cohen said. “We’ve got Electric Boat. We’ve got Pfizer up that way. If we can get those employees on the transit line, we’re all the better for it.”

Rider advocates said the issue is familiar.

“I’d rather see solutions, and not things that are holding it back,” said Susan Feaster, founder of the Shore Line East Riders’ Advocacy Group.

She said she worries the line is facing a transit death spiral, with reduced service leading to lower ridership and falling fare revenue.

“They have to give us the money,” Feaster said. “It shouldn’t have to be profitable.”

Advertisement

Like other train lines across the country, Shore Line East relies on subsidies.

“We’re not asking for everything to be done overnight, but just incrementally,” Feaster said.

The line received $5 million two years ago, which increased service levels.

The proposal comes as the state reviews whether to return to diesel rail cars that are more than 30 years old.

The state says the switch would save about $9 million, but riders have said it would worsen the passenger experience.

Advertisement

NBC Connecticut asked Cohen whether she’ll ask DOT to reverse that proposal.

“I really want to,” Cohen said. “I appreciate what CTDOT was trying to do in terms of not cutting service as a result of trying to find savings elsewhere. This isn’t the way to do it.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections

Published

on

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections


HARTFORD, Conn. (WFSB) – Thousands of Connecticut families with ties to Iran are watching and waiting as their home country undergoes a historic change.

Among them is Ramin Ahmadi, a Yale doctor, human rights activist and founder of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. He has spent decades advocating for freedom in Iran from his home in Connecticut.

Ahmadi moved to the United States when he was 18. On Saturday morning, he learned of military strikes in Iran and the death of the country’s supreme leader.

Ahmadi said protests for democracy and human rights in Iran intensified in December, drawing millions of participants — including his own family and friends.

Advertisement

“The situation in Iran was a humanitarian emergency and it needed an intervention,” Ahmadi said.

He said he celebrated when he heard the news Saturday morning.

“I was celebrating along with all other Iranians inside and outside the country,” Ahmadi said. “I do regret that we cannot bring him to a trial for crimes that he has committed against humanity.”

Ahmadi said he spoke with his sister in Iran after she celebrated in the streets. She was later told to return home for her safety.

He shared a message she relayed from those around her.

Advertisement

“They said do not let our death be exploited because worse than that is having to live with the criminals who have done this to us for the rest of our lives,” Ahmadi said. “We do not want to do that.”

For those questioning whether the conflict was America’s to engage in, Ahmadi offered a direct response.

“We will all be affected,” he said. “And to those that tell you that the U.S. and Israel are beating the drums of war in Iran, one has to remind them that it was not like before this Iranian people were listening to Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 in D minor. We had a war already declared on us by this regime. We were being slaughtered on a daily basis.”

Ahmadi said he believes the path forward begins with young military officers forcing out what remains of the regime, followed by free elections.

“Everyone’s life will be safer in the future and not just Iranians,” Ahmadi said.

Advertisement

Connecticut lawmakers are also responding to the U.S. strikes on Iran.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending