Utilities have many questions to answer
As much of the state sat through the weekend waiting for the lights to come back on, there was something a little too familiar about the back and forth over blame. Local and state leaders fumed. Utility executives defended their records. The congressional delegation sent a pointed letter to regulators charged with investigating the response, or lack thereof.
For residents without power, who pay some of the highest electricity rates in the nation, the lack of information was as frustrating as anything. Eversource said it would have the power back for most of the state by Tuesday, a full week after the tropical storm hit. That’s seven days without a refrigerator, air conditioning, internet access and, for people with well water, flushing toilets and working sinks.
Even there, the company was unable to provide a better answer than “Evaluating Outage” for thousands of people who at least want to be able to plan when their lives can resume some normalcy.
But that was too much to ask in a time of pandemic. People without power who under other circumstances would have decamped to their parents’ house, to a friend’s spare bedroom or maybe to a hotel were instead stuck with the choice of abandoning social distancing that is deemed urgent to stop the spread of coronavirus or doing without life’s necessities.
The only solace is that at least it’s not cold out. But late in the week came signs that this was not to be the same kind of official response. State Rep. Steve Stafstrom, of Bridgeport, on Friday asked a key question via his Twitter account: “Can someone explain to me why a ‘public utility’ that operates as a monopoly can be traded on an exchange and has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder profit?”
That’s something many people in the state would like to understand.
Theoretically, the advantage of having private companies take over public responsibilities would be that they are nimbler, less prone to bureaucracy and bloat, and are able to make changes as needed to quickly respond to changing conditions. But how does that work when there is no meaningful competition? It’s not like some upstart can come in and take over the business of wiring the state.
Also on Friday, U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2, urged that any investigation of the state’s main electric utilities compare them to the “superb response … by Connecticut’s Municipal Public Utilities, many of which are in Connecticut’s Second District,” including Norwich Public Utilities, which saw a far lower rate of electricity loss than larger companies such as Eversource.
“In all the recent weather disasters of the past decade, municipal providers consistently outperform Eversource and (United Illuminating) in power restoration and service,” Courtney wrote.
If public officials are serious about pursuing this line of inquiry, it could lead to a major rethinking of how Connecticut handles its utilities’ obligations. Privatization was pushed through decades ago with a promise of better service, lower prices and more convenience. A week without power from a strong but not at all unprecedented storm is not what anyone had in mind.
As they seek answers for what went wrong, officials need to pursue this line of inquiry.
“Can someone explain to me why a ‘public utility’ that operates as a monopoly can be traded on an exchange and has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder profit?” state Rep. Steve Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport