PRC putting a high price on timely transparency

If ever there was a question about whose interests the state Public Regulation Commission is looking after, outgoing PRC Commissioner Sandy Jones answered it loud and clear last week. And guess what? It’s not yours.

The PRC administrative staff has enacted a new policy requiring its staff to wait 15 days before electronically posting hearing transcripts. That’s 15 days AFTER the PRC receives its copies. And if you can’t wait, you’ll have to pay for the privilege of getting copies earlier.

Previously, staff immediately posted transcripts after getting them from court reporters, which typically took four to eight days after a hearing ended, depending on how fast proceedings were transcribed. Once posted, records are openly accessible for free. And people can read transcripts for free directly at the PRC offices.

So why does the change matter? Because it’s yet another obstacle for the public and watchdog groups trying to ensure the PRC does right by those its decisions affect.

This commission makes decisions that impact each and every one of us — it is the elected body that regulates utilities, telecommunications and motor carriers. When PNM wants to raise your electric rates, it has to go before the PRC to justify it. If an ambulance company wants to set up shop in – or pull out of – your community, it needs to go before the PRC.

Under the new policy, if you want a copy of a transcript documenting hearings on one of these important issues, you have two options: You can wait 15 days, which often isn’t feasible when you’re trying to challenge a rate hike or other proposed action. Or you can pay hundreds of dollars to get an early copy of a transcript, which is difficult for everyday citizens and some non-profits that are running on shoestring budgets.

As PRC Commissioner Valerie Espinoza points out, these changes make it inconvenient for the public and case intervenors who don’t have deep pockets. “That information should be readily available for intervenors who need it to do their work,” she rightly notes.

Under the new policy, the PRC will charge 25 cents per page, digital or printed, for a copy of the transcript through the Inspection of Public Records Act. But that might still take time, so parties can opt to pay court reporters directly for a copy, which typically costs between $5 and $7 per page.

Jones, who was defeated in the Democratic primary in June, says the policy better compensates court reporters since more parties will likely pay them for early copies rather than wait for E-Docket posting or an IPRA response. He says it also makes things fairer because utilities with deeper pockets often pay court reporters for expedited copies while others wait to access the E-Docket for free. “It seems like everyone should pay to get it right away,” Jones says. “Once it’s posted, court reporters don’t get to sell their copies.”

Jones’ half-witted attempt to justify this horrible policy fails on several fronts. It was administrative staff that created and enacted the new policy, not the PRC commissioners. Nevertheless, that court reporter Jones is so worried about is already paid for time and work by the PRC — or more specifically through the taxes we all pay. Rather than worrying about that court reporter making extra cash on the side, Jones should be fighting to ensure everyone has a meaningful opportunity to participate in the process — and that includes having the agency post transcripts of hearings ASAP.

What Jones either fails to consider — or perhaps just doesn’t care about — is that some individuals and entities just can’t afford the extra fees to get expedited transcripts, organizations like the Coalition for Clean Affordable Energy. And it’s also worth noting that we, the taxpayers, are going to get stuck paying for the same transcripts multiple times. The Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority, for example, was forced to pay $6 per page for a transcript of a two-hour hearing. Nann Winter, an attorney for the authority, said she had no choice but to spend the $400 for that transcript, a bill ratepayers ultimately have to pay. And that’s on top of the tax money that court reporter is paid to document the hearings in the first place.

The New Mexico Foundation for Open Government is calling the policy a “significant setback” for news reporters and the public. FOG maintains charging for digital copies is a clear violation of IPRA. Overall, the policy is terrible — and PRC commissioners owe it to constituents to rescind it and remove the obstacles to access, transparency and accountability their agency has created.