City, township continue fight over electric rate increases

Painesville Township residents are continuing to object to their electric bills and what some are considering unfair rates of service.

Township residents that do not get their electricity from FirstEn-ergy do so from Painesville City Municipal Electric. The catch is that PCME charges customers outside the city of Painesville at an increased margin of just over 15 percent.

Concord and Perry Township, North Perry, and Grand River are also among the “outside

customers” that face the increased rate percentage.

Due to recent restructuring, the increase in charges that outside customers face dropped from 20 percent in 2017 to 15.9 percent in 2018. In a released statement, Painesville City Manager Monica Irelan, stated “even with this decrease our outside customers feel this to be unfair; therefore, we will be analyzing this concern as well.”

Irelan went on to say that while they investigate their options the increased rate will remain around 15.9 percent throughout the 2020 restructuring period.

Painesville Township Trustee Gabe Cicconetti considers Irelan’s response lacking.

“I feel that there is a lack of empathy,” he says. “(Monica Irelan) says that if our residents don’t like it, then they can leave (PCME). That may be technically true, but in all reality, it’s not feasible.”

According to Cicconetti, the reasons that they were given for the increased rate, including line loss and infrastructure cost, simply don’t add up. With a PCME substation located in the township on North Ridge Road, Cicconetti claims that roughly 80 percent of township residents are just as close to that station as Painesville residents are to their own station within the city limits; negating any line loss costs.

Cicconetti also claims that infrastructure costs were said to be another reason for increased rates. However, when he talked with Painesville’s Electric Superintendent Jeff McHugh, he learned that there has not been any infrastructure repairs or new construction, outside of typical line repair, in the township for over three decades.

Moreover, Painesville Township trustees are calling foul for also having to foot a portion of the electricity used to power Painesville’s streetlights. At an Oct. 1 council meeting, township Trustee Chuck Hillier noted “how unfair it is to our residents to pay for the City of Painesville’s street lights.”

When asked, Irelan stated, “At this time, there is no discussion to remove the street lights out of the Electric System.”

“When we look at the revenue requirements needed to be a sustainable business, every item that the Electric Department manages is used to calculate the rate,” she said. “In Painesville, the streetlights are managed by the Electric Department; therefore, the cost to run the streetlights are in the electric rates.”

A further point of contention arose when customers compared 2017’s summer rates with those of 2018. The increased amount had customers believing a rate hike had occurred.

Irelan clarified that the discrepancy stemmed from outside customers being accidentally charged winter rates during the summer of 2017. Because winter rates are typically lower, it made 2018’s summer rates appear unusually higher than the year previous.

Despite being undercharged, Irelan has stated that the city “apologizes for the error in 2017 that led to any of our customers to lose trust in our restructuring.” She has also said that the city will cover the difference as a means to do right by their customers.

“We are running an analysis to see what it would take to eliminate the seasonal rates,” she said. “Seasonal rates are widely disliked, so we want to see what it would take to implement a leveled year rate. Any leveled rate changes would have to await Council approval first.

“We hope to put this in effect in summer 2019, but it all depends on of we can work out all the bugs before June.”

This is not the first time the city and the township have disagreed over usage rates. Despite ongoing discussions, Cicconetti feels “at this point, they’re not doing anything. They’ve made it pretty clear, aside from the incorrect charges adjustments, they have no intention of restructuring or looking at the Township’s concerns.”

This dissatisfaction has since led to a grass roots Facebook group that sees township residents discuss possible options. One of which, according to Cicconetti, involves a potential mass migration to First Energy. The logistics of which are being determined through “ongoing discussions.”