Where we stand:
Florida’s Public Service Commission has put the wishes of power companies above the interests of consumers.
Hurricane Irma’s destructive path through Florida last month left some critical policy decisions facing the commission that regulates the state’s major electricity providers. Those decisions, including how much consumers will have to reimburse the utilities for restoring power and repairing damage to the electrical grid, could have a big impact on the budgets of Florida’s families and businesses.
Recent history, recounted in a damning new report from a Tallahassee-based government reform group, suggests consumers better hold on to their wallets. The Public Service Commission, governed by five gubernatorial nominees, has been “captured” by the investor-owned utilities it is charged with regulating, according to Integrity Florida’s report.
A commission spokeswoman, speaking to the Miami Herald, insisted its decisions are “made in the public interest.” The report’s main target, Florida Power & Light, dismissed it as an “error-riddled stunt.” But Integrity Florida can cite numerous examples to back up its contention dating back to 2010, when four commissioners who rejected rate increases from FP&L and Progress Energy (later bought by Duke Energy) were purged by legislators or their appointees.
In the years since then, the commission has granted a series of hefty rate hikes for utilities over the objections of groups representing business and retail customers. The commission’s inclination to yield to utilities has been visible in other decisions, too. In 2014, it granted requests from from FP&L and other investor-owned utilities — Duke Energy, Gulf Power and Tampa Electric Co. — to slash energy efficiency goals by more than 90 percent, and it ended a solar rebate program. In 2013, it allowed Duke to stick consumers with a $3.2 billion bill for costs from its closed Crystal River nuclear plant and another proposed nuclear plant the company canceled in Levy County.
Judging from an appointment he made last month to fill a vacancy on the commission, Gov. Rick Scott isn’t serious about ensuring it is an independent and credible watchdog over utilities. The governor’s pick, former GOP legislator Ritch Workman of Melbourne, has a resume that includes driving for Uber, but no particular expertise on utilities — certainly not enough to qualify him as one of the chief regulators of the industry in a state with more than 20 million people.
Workman received thousands of dollars in contributions from the state’s biggest utilities for his campaigns and political committee. And as a House committee chairman in 2014, he killed a proposed constitutional amendment, opposed by utilities, to create a property-tax exemption for businesses installing solar panels.
Governors choose their appointees to the commission from a short list provided by a nominating council whose members are chosen by leaders in the Legislature. Utilities wield considerable influence over governors and legislators, not just through campaign contributions, but also through lobbying.
Integrity Florida suggests legislators consider reversing the 1978 decision to move from an elected to appointed commission, and prohibit candidates from accepting campaign contributions from any interests they would regulate if elected. But it’s worth remembering that former Gov. Reubin Askew, a reformer, spearheaded the switch to an appointed commission to insulate its members from campaign politics.
We prefer a different set of suggestions from Integrity Florida: Change the makeup of the nominating council to require a diversity of interests among its members, starting with consumer groups. And cap the number of commissioners from one political party at three, so the commission is at least bipartisan.
If you’re tired of seeing your interests shortchanged by the commission, join us in demanding reform from legislators.