Electric rate increase vote doesn’t stand up to closer examination
About a year ago, Kit Carson Electric Cooperative filed a request before the Public Regulation Commission (PRC) to increase rates for electricity to all residential, business, organizational and institutional users. More than 200 residential users filed protests against the increase.
The co-op attorneys tried to have all these protests tossed out. The PRC attorneys disagreed and the protests were allowed to stand. There followed months of maneuvering among the co-op attorneys, the PRC staff, the PRC hearing examiner and nine determined, regular citizens, called intervenors — who fought tooth and nail for months to prevent any increase in residential rates.
Because businesses and other institutions didn’t protest the co-op’s request, they all saw a hefty increase in their electricity bills as of two months ago.
On Dec. 7, 2016, the PRC was presented with two proposals. The one by the PRC staff would raise the rates somewhat. The one by the PRC hearing examiner would raise the rates a lot.
Commissioner Patrick Lyons made a motion that the lower one be approved and that the commission return the following week after the PRC staff would have figured out exactly what the rates would be. We, the intervenors, held our breath. The increase would be painful but not as painful as the one suggested by the hearing examiner. The vote came down: two commissioners for and two against. It was up to the commission chair, Valerie Espinoza, to break the tie and vote for the lower rate. Espinoza broke the tie all right. She voted against the lower increase, explaining that the holidays were upon us and she did not want to drag us back for another hearing.
We, the intervenors, had spent weeks and months of time and our own money on this, including thousands of pages of pro se legal filings requiring trips to Santa Fe and five days of hearings before the hearing examiner. We were stunned at Espinoza’s explanation. With her vote against the lower increase, Espinoza opened the door for the higher increase. And, that’s what we got. The commission held a second vote, and it was to increase rates. Although Espinoza was one of the two votes against that rate, everyone knew what had just gone down. The co-op got the higher rate increase and Espinoza, whom we voted to represent the Taos district, got to look like she was on our side.
With the infusion of cash from the increased rates, the co-op CEO and the board of trustees will be able to borrow more money to enhance their grand dreams. Maybe more increases for the CEO’s salary, already large enough to place him in the upper two percentile in New Mexico wages. Maybe more adventures and meetings and trips for the trustees. And, if they keep punching each other out, the co-op will have no problem affording hospital bills for the loser in the fight. All these goodies are in their future.
If this doesn’t warm the cockles of your heart, you might want to rethink your holiday spirit of giving. And giving. And giving. And for all the many folks living on Social Security checks that average less than a thousand dollars a month, well, good luck to you. And as if there weren’t already enough shuttered businesses, expect to see a few more thanks to the co-op CEO’s idea of economic development.
If anyone wonders how New Mexico managed to make it to the “worst run state” in the country, wonder no more. Observe the people we put in office. Behold and weep.
Romero lives in San Cristobal.
