(Left to right) State Rep. Kara Rochelle, Ansonia resident Thomas Egan, and Ansonia Mayor David Cassetti.
ANSONIA/DERBY – Looking at your recent electric bill probably made you mad as hell, so we asked the three candidates for state House 104 what they’re going to do about it.
Background
If you read Facebook or turned on the TV news over the summer, chances are you came across Connecticut residents angry at the increase in electric bills.
Some of the blame has been put on the part of the electric called “public benefits.”
That section of the bill was up by an average $43 for United Illuminated customers as of July 1, according to The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA). UI is planning on asking for another rate increase for next year, according to CT News Junkie.
About 80 percent of the ‘public benefits charge’ is because of a 2017 deal that required utility companies to purchase energy from the Millstone power plant in Waterford, the only nuclear power plant in Connecticut.
Though it should be noted Republican state Sen. Rob Sampson called this the “Millstone Myth” in a column in August.
Sampson and his fellow Republicans want to convene a special legislative session in Hartford to deal with electricity bills. They blame Democratic policy for the increase.
State Democrats said a special session wouldn’t fix the issue, and that the Millstone deal was a Republican idea.
Cassetti-Egan – Rochelle
With the election for the 104th state House of Representatives district scheduled for Nov. 5, The Valley Indy reached out to the candidates, Ansonia Mayor David Cassetti, Ansonia resident Thomas Egan, and incumbent state Rep. Kara Rochelle to explain what they’ll do about electricity bills.
Their answers were received in written statements.
Click here to read Cassetti’s full response.
Click here to read Egan’s full response.
Click here to read Rochelle’s full response.
Why Did My Bills Spike?
The candidates agreed that energy costs for ratepayers need to be lowered. How we got to this point? Not so much.
Cassetti said he has received calls from residents who are struggling with their recent bills, and that those bills are the product of a Democratic-controlled legislature passing down costs to ratepayers.
“Here’s the really unpleasant truth: the increase is the result of the higher cost of doing business in our state, a consequence of the policies endorsed by my opponent and her colleagues in a one-party controlled state House,” Cassetti wrote in his response.
Cassetti said that some state programs, including the shut-off moratorium, were a good idea. However, they should have been paid out of federal Covid relief funds or the state’s budget instead of being passed down through utility bills, he wrote.
Egan pointed to the Millstone deal as a driving cause.
“The July 1, 2024, increase is primarily the result of a deal to keep the Millstone Power Plant operational, alongside costs associated with unpaid bills accrued during the pandemic, due to the moratorium on utility shut-offs,“ Egan wrote. “Residents in the 104th District have experienced these rate hikes, adding financial strain to households and businesses alike.“
Egan said that many of the state programs involved in the public benefits charge are worth keeping, and that the charges should be audited to identify inefficiencies.
Rochelle said that there are both long- and short-term causes for increases in bills, including summer increases in usage and wholesale energy costs. She also pointed to the Millstone deal for the sharp uptick in public benefits costs.
“Public benefits have always existed, they were just hidden in your bill. Now that they are in a separate category, combined with the heatwave this summer, this portion was higher than normal. Many don’t realize the public benefits portion includes items like the Millstone deal, driving the majority of the increases,” Rochelle wrote.
Rochelle said that paying for state programs in other ways could knock out a small portion of that charge – but that it would still be paid by taxpayers at the end of the day. She described the idea of including public benefits in the state budget as a “sleight of hand.”
So How To Fix It?
Cassetti said that solutions should be discussed in a special session before the election, joining calls by many state Republicans. He said that federal relief funds should be used to relieve some costs now, and that power purchase agreements for green energy – agreements like the Millstone deal – should be under stricter scrutiny going forward.
“While I believe CT should have a healthy portfolio of green energy, the state should not procure, in large amounts, energy that costs significantly more than the wholesale price of energy in the market. Want clean and new energy, but it should be capped and the ratepayer should be taken into consideration first and foremost,” Cassetti wrote.
Egan said that utility companies should be looked at with greater scrutiny.
“I’ll support transparency in the regulatory process to hold utility companies accountable, ensuring ratepayers aren’t unfairly burdened by policy decisions. Relief measures for low-income households must also be a top priority,“ Egan wrote.
Rochelle said that some of the costs will be relieved once other states, who also benefit from the Millstone deal, begin to share those costs with Connecticut, which currently pays for the entire deal. She said other public benefits charges will also be reviewed in the coming year.
“There is no doubt that next session this will continue to be a high priority issue and we will be looking at impactful policies that will aim to lower rates. I am committed to reviewing all of the programs under the public benefit charge to see if there are ways we can lower costs. The bottom line is we need long term solutions and not gimmicks, otherwise we will be back in the same place in July,” Rochelle wrote.
Rochelle added that compensation for energy company executives should not go up while consumers’ rates are spiking.
Analyzing Millstone
Cassetti said the problem isn’t Millstone, but how it’s being paid for. He said that the state has had plenty of time to consider cutting costs in other areas – such as the other programs included in the public benefits charge – but that it hasn’t done so.
“The Millstone energy deal avoided billions of dollars in cost to potentially replace the power generated by Millstone. Imagine what the costs would be to replace Millstone with something like offshore wind which is 15 cents/kwh v. 5 cents/kwh if Millstone were to shut down? Again the ratepayers would suffer,” Cassetti wrote.
Cassetti said that the Millstone deal was necessary to keep the plant open. He said that the state should consider a task force to investigate how utility companies purchase power.
Egan said that renewable energy programs like Millstone are necessary to bring rates down in the long run.
“If elected, I will prioritize diversifying our energy sources and expanding renewable energy programs to reduce dependence on volatile, fossil-fuel-powered electricity,“ Egan wrote.
Rochelle said that the Millstone deal was deeply flawed, and that she would not have voted for it had she been in office.
“The legislation required the state’s electric distribution companies, Eversource and United Illuminating, to enter into power purchase agreements with the only remaining nuclear power plants in New England, Millstone and Seabrook in New Hampshire. This was flawed because Connecticut shouldered the burden on this deal, despite the fact that multiple states benefit from Millstone remaining open,” Rochelle wrote.
Rochelle said the deal should have required other states to pay in from the start, and that it would have reduced the costs of the deal by about two-thirds if it had been done that way.
