Groups say regulators broke state rules with praise of Georgia Power rate deal
Last month, Georgia Power and the Public Service Commission's public interest staff announced they had struck a preliminary deal to keep the company's current base rates steady for the next three years.
Speaking at a May 21 news conference at the state Capitol, where he was flanked by Gov. Brian Kemp, PSC Chairman Jason Shaw touted the agreement as a "very big deal for our state," adding it was "good for Georgians."
Now, some groups claim those remarks - and other comments commissioners made before formal hearings to consider the deal - violated state rules, and they argue three of the PSC's five members should recuse themselves from an upcoming vote.
On Friday, four consumer advocacy and environmental organizations - Georgians for Affordable Energy, Center for a Sustainable Coast, Georgia Conservation Voters Education Fund and Georgia WAND - lodged a complaint about the saga with the PSC.
The groups argue Shaw's recent remarks, along with statements by Vice Chairman Tim Echols and the actions of Commissioner Lauren "Bubba" McDonald, are evidence of "prejudgment" and "a lack of open-mindedness that eliminates public trust."
The complaint requests that all three commissioners recuse themselves from an upcoming vote on the proposal to keep current rates in place. They also ask the commission to reject the rate "freeze" and instead hold "rate case" hearings as planned this summer. If the commission moves forward as planned with hearings on the rate freeze, the groups ask that an impartial hearing officer be appointed to decide the case.
Shaw declined to weigh in on the complaint. Echols and McDonald did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Patty Durand, a former Democratic PSC candidate who now serves as director of one of the groups behind the complaint - Georgians for Affordable Energy - called the rate freeze a "catastrophe for Georgia Power customers."
"It freezes rates for three years but does not freeze spending," Durand said in a statement. "The Georgia PSC must hold a rate case proceeding this fall so Georgia Power customers can see what is being spent in their name, not in 2028 when it is too late."
Georgia Power has said the agreement balances the "affordability needs of our customers while ensuring Georgia Power remains equipped to continue its support of our state's incredible growth."
The utility typically files a request every three years for the PSC to adjust its rates and was scheduled to submit a new one this summer. If the tentative deal is approved, it would take any imminent increase to base rates off the table.
Still, customers' bills could rise again before long.
As part of the agreement, the company will ask the PSC next year to allow it to collect storm-related costs from customers. In 2026, Georgia Power is also expected to make a separate request to pass customers the bill for the cost of fuel used in its coal, gas and nuclear power plants.
The proposed move to keep rates steady is unusual but not unprecedented. In 1995 and again in 2016, the PSC and Georgia Power reached agreements to keep base rates frozen for three years, according to Tom Krause, the PSC's public information officer.
State rules on PSC responsibilities
The basis for the complaint centers on a portion of the state's rules and regulations dictating PSC procedures and responsibilities.
The groups point to a subsection titled "Opinions of Commissioners," which says the regulators should "reserve" their opinion on matters before the PSC until all facts and evidence are submitted and considered. The rules also state PSC commissioners should "hold no presumption in favor of the position of any party, including the Public Interest Advocacy Staff."
The PSC has not yet held hearings on the agreement between Georgia Power and commission staff, nor has it voted on it. A hearing on the deal is set for June 26, with the commission set to vote on the rate "freeze" on July 1.
But the groups argue the three commissioners effectively endorsed the deal before other interested parties had a chance to weigh in.
The complaint references the May 21 news conference during which Shaw spoke favorably about the "rate freeze." Shaw also said at the event that anyone with concerns about the deal would have a chance to express their reservations in upcoming hearings as part of an "open and transparent process."
McDonald appeared at the news conference alongside Shaw and Kemp but did not comment on the proposed rate freeze. Still, the groups claim the event was held in support of the deal and that commissioners' participation "shows an undeniable bias" that compromises due process.
Comments Echols made in a May 27 article in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution previewing races underway for seats on the PSC were also cited in the complaint. Echols is the only one of the three commissioners named who is currently up for reelection.
In the article, Echols said: "Freezing the rates for three years is the best thing we can do for ratepayers right now, and I have advocated for that incessantly."
Krause, the PSC's spokesperson, declined to comment on the complaint. Krause said the commission will consider the groups' motion at a future meeting but did not specify when.
The groups made no allegations of wrongdoing against Gov. Kemp.
A spokesperson for the governor said in a written statement Tuesday: "The Governor stands by his remarks that the agreement is a good deal for Georgia's consumers struggling with the continued impact of 40-year high Bidenflation, and as the Governor stated at the press conference, it is absurd to suggest otherwise." The statement also said the governor cannot comment on the alleged violation of PSC policies, since it is a pending matter for the PSC.
Pressure over rising bills
The agreement to hold rates steady follows six PSC-approved rate hikes that have taken effect since the start of 2023. All told, the increases have pushed the average Georgia Power residential customer's monthly bill up by about $43, according to data from the company.
Critics of Georgia Power and the commission have also questioned whether the announcement of the rate freeze was timed to coincide with the primary elections for two PSC posts that are now underway.
Early voting in the Democratic and Republican primaries runs through June 13, with Election Day for the primary set for June 17. The general election will be held Nov. 4.
The deal to punt on a rate case this year would allow Echols and Commissioner Fitz Johnson - who is seeking to hold onto the seat Kemp appointed him to in 2021 - to avoid taking a position on anotherpotential rate increase ahead of the November general election.
At last month's news conference at the Capitol, both Shaw and Kemp dismissed the notion that the rate freeze had anything to do with the elections.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
NorthWestern Energy announces another rate increase
(Photo by Scott Olson | Getty Images) NorthWestern Energy's electric customers could get a double whammy this summer. On May 30, NorthWestern Energy said it planned an increase of $9.04 on a typical residential electric bill as part of a quarterly adjustment on electric supply. Earlier last month, the monopoly utility announced it was pushing up rates 17% without regulatory approval, effective May 23. The earlier increase amounts to $17.07 a month on top of a typical residential bill of $101.14, according to NorthWestern Energy. If the Montana Public Service Commission signs off on the most recent increase, the average residential customer will be paying $127.16 in July, according to information from the agency. Altogether, that would be a more than 25% increase from May 1 to July of this year. NorthWestern Energy spokesperson Jo Dee Black said the latest change reflects dollars for electric supply costs generally passed through to customers and adjusted quarterly since 2023. 'This approach helps avoid large, once-a-year adjustments,' Black said in an email. However, an engineer for the Montana Environmental Information Center said the increase shows NorthWestern's argument the large gas plant it built in Laurel isn't offsetting bills as the company promised. Nick Fitzmaurice, energy transition engineer for the energy watchdog, also said customers will be paying 39.4% more a month this July than they did in August 2022. 'NorthWestern' subversive tactics unfairly hide the truth from Montanans, who are now paying the price with skyrocketing electric bills,' Fitzmaurice said in an email. PSC spokesperson Alana Lake said the agency routinely examines a utility's accounting to ensure accuracy, and the Commission had questions about this recent increase, so it has yet to sign off on it. However, Lake also said the increase will be implemented unless the PSC finds an error in NorthWestern's calculations. 'It is important to note that these rates will only be in effect until September 2025,' Lake said, if they are approved. 'At that point, (NorthWestern) must file an application with justification for final approval of these adjustments, which will need to be reviewed and approved by the Commission.' The 17% hike is separate, already in effect, and part of an upcoming hearing on an application for rate increases NorthWestern Energy filed with the PSC in July 2024. NorthWestern earlier defended the increase it implemented prior to approval by the Montana Public Service Commission — and the PSC confirmed the utility acted legally. The monopoly energy company said regulators didn't act on its application for a rate increase in a timely fashion, so it used a law that allows it to implement one on its own in the meantime, after nine months have passed. However, PSC President Brad Molnar earlier said NorthWestern is responsible for delays in the case, and its customers are going to feel pain as a result of the increase, which he characterized as 'crushing.' A hearing on the rate case will take place starting Monday, June 9, and run possibly through June 20. If the PSC decides NorthWestern erred in the increase, the company will return the extra money to customers, plus 10%. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
NorthWestern Energy ‘not as in touch with Montanans' as rate case unfolds
The Montana Public Service Commission is hearing NorthWestern Energy's rate case this week and next. (Photo by fhm | Getty Images) Even before the Public Service Commission approved a settlement that meant a 28% rate increase for NorthWestern Energy customers, Chris Blazer's friend struggled. Blazer, of Helena, said her friend lives on just $2,000 a month. 'Even five years ago, before the big rate increases, she was living in darkness and cold so that she could feed herself and her horses,' Blazer said. Blazer made her comments Wednesday to the Public Service Commission during a hearing on the monopoly utility's rate case. She said some people do not realize the impact so-called 'minor increases' have on customers' lives. In August 2022, NorthWestern Energy's electric customers paid $91.27 a month, according to its own records. On July 1, likely before the PSC issues an order in the current case, those same customers could be paying $127.24, a 39.4% increase in three years. NorthWestern Energy said rates could drop compared to the current rate if the PSC approves a settlement in the case — the PSC put June rates at $118.20 for the average electric customer. But a couple of other adjustments are pending in the meantime, and a group of organizations intervening in the case are asking commissioners to take a closer look at costs. At the hearing this week, a lawyer representing the group also quizzed a NorthWestern Energy vice president about the utility's response to an earlier order requiring the utility to assess its programs to help people with lower incomes. In a discussion about rate increases nationally, PSC President Brad Molnar said NorthWestern customers pay the 12th lowest electric rates in the U.S. 'So we're actually living pretty well,' Molnar said. *** On the witness stand earlier in the week, NorthWestern Energy CEO Brian Bird agreed with Commissioner Annie Bukacek's perspective that the utility's rates are reasonable in comparison to other expenses people pay. Bird said coffee can be $5 and a Big Mac meal can be $9.99. By comparison, he said, NorthWestern Energy powers all appliances in a person's home and supplies all of its natural gas for $6 a day. 'I think people don't really appreciate that when we can do that as affordably as we have,' Bird said. Customer Jocelyn Leroux, however, said NorthWestern Energy executives don't appreciate the financial pressures Montanans face — for some, an extra $20 on a bill is money that used to pay for groceries. 'Imagine having to choose between sweating through the night to save on electricity, or turning on the air conditioning, and going light on food for the week,' said Leroux, with the Montana chapter of the Sierra Club. 'These are the kinds of calculations that many people are forced to make.' She said the reason customers are forced into these choices is NorthWestern executives 'seem to be prioritizing their own financial status' over more affordable and cleaner energy sources — despite all the wind and solar potential in Montana. A NorthWestern Energy shareholder report on the utility's website outlined compensation for executive officers in 2024, including salary, stocks, deferred compensation and other pay: Brian Bird, CEO: $4.81 million Crystal Lail, CFO: $1.74 million Shannon Heim, general counsel: $1.00 million Bobbi Schroeppel, VP customer care, communications, HR: $892,457 John Hines, VP, supply/MT government affairs: $929,887 In an introduction to the report, Bird encouraged shareholders to review the information in preparation for an April 30th meeting. The executive pay section describes its aim. 'Our executive pay program is designed to align the long-term interests of our executives, shareholders, and customers,' the report said. But some Montanans still need help paying the bills. Tuesday, lawyer Jenny Harbine asked if NorthWestern Vice President Schroeppel had reviewed data that showed 20% to 50% of Montana households with incomes of less than $75,000 said they needed to reduce or forego spending on basic necessities to pay their utility bills. Harbine represents a group of organizations that are asking the PSC to reject a settlement in the case. They argue NorthWestern is falling short when it comes to responsibly planning for the future, taking climate change into account and ensuring reasonable bills, especially for customers with lower incomes. When it comes to household budgets, though, Schroeppel said the reverse is true at times, and some households forgo paying their electric bills to afford other items. Harbine also wanted to confirm some of those families might not be buying daily lattes and burgers. 'Can we agree that Mr. Bird's testimony about the cost of a daily soda or Big Mac or coffee may overlook the experience of these families?' Harbine asked. 'I can't speak to that,' said Schroeppel, vice president of customer care, communications and human resources. Harbine asked if Schroeppel was aware the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program reached only 15% of the eligible population in Montana in 2024. Schroeppel said she's seen numbers as high as 20% across the state. However, she said the figure includes customers served by other utilities. In response to Harbine, however, she conceded the majority of that population is made up of NorthWestern customers, although she also said LIHEAP is a program run through the state health department, not the utility. In an order in January 2024, the Public Service Commission directed NorthWestern Energy to evaluate the efficacy of low-income energy assistance programs. The PSC ordered the utility to, 'at a minimum,' address information gaps about trends in affordability for low-income customers, barriers to programs, and the most effective outreach. Harbine wanted to know if NorthWestern had made any changes since the order. The group Harbine represents is comprised of the Montana Environmental Information Center, the Human Resource Council District XI, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the NW Energy Coalition. Schroeppel said the utility had not made changes, 'but I don't read the commission order to indicate that that's what they were looking for.' Rather, she said, the directive was to pull a stakeholder group together to understand why customers don't participate in programs and determine the best way to reduce barriers and communicate. To that end, she said NorthWestern is evaluating significant customer research that's 'hot off the press' and includes national data as well as information from its own customers. After reviewing the research, Schroeppel said, the utility will talk to the stakeholder group, start 'strategizing around (the PSC's) objectives,' and likely hire a consultant to 'further facilitate the stakeholder group' and look at data to understand what needs to change. Harbine wanted to know if the group had produced any recommendations based on the PSC order. Schroeppel said the group is at that point right now, saying it has 'a whole host of recommendations,' including, for example, to allow 'categorical eligibility.' That would mean a customer could be automatically eligible for utility assistance if the person already qualifies for, say, Medicaid. Harbine wanted to know if the group would make a proposal that addressed the PSC's order before its next rate case, but Schroeppel said she anticipated it would issue findings and an update instead. 'The proposal would come more along the lines if we were going to come in and ask to change something,' Schroeppel said. 'And you don't anticipate asking to change something?' Harbine said. Schroeppel said NorthWestern does not anticipate changing anything yet because it needs to do more work around analytics and the cost of different ideas. 'I think some of the barriers can probably be just worked on between the various agencies and the stakeholder group,' Schroeppel said. Harbine wanted to know if Schroeppel believed NorthWestern was committing enough resources to address affordability concerns, and Schroeppel said she does. But Schroeppel said the consultant will help, and she anticipates that work will extend 'beyond the scope of what this initial commission order was' and look at 'future programs,' including ideas from other utilities. The hearing is expected to continue through June 20.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fulton County judge indicates he will likely uphold decision to remove PSC candidate from ballot
A Fulton County judge is likely to rule Daniel Blackman ineligible from the June 17 Democratic primary for District 3. Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder (file) Georgia polling stations could soon have signs telling voters that a Democratic candidate for the Georgia Public Service Commission may appear on the ballot but is disqualified. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Ural Glanville is likely to officially rule Daniel Blackman ineligible from the June 17 Democratic primary for District 3, which includes Fulton, Clayton and DeKalb counties. Blackman was disqualified last month by an administrative law judge and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger for failing to meet residency requirements. Glanville ruled from the bench Tuesday, saying the decision to disqualify Blackman 'properly considered the petitioner's failure to update his voter registration until April of 2025.' A formal ruling is expected from the judge by the end of Wednesday. If Blackman is officially deemed ineligible, counties across the state will have to post signs warning voters that their votes for Blackman won't count. Early voting is underway now and ends Friday. That would leave three other Democrats in the race, including Keisha Sean Waites, a former Atlanta City Council member and Georgia House representative; Peter Hubbard, founder of the Center for Energy Solutions; and Robert Jones, who worked in energy regulation in California. Blackman had been considered a frontrunner in the race. He served as the Environmental Protection Agency's Southeast regional administrator under the Biden administration, and he's a former PSC candidate who came close to winning a seat on the commission back in 2020. Blackman has remained on the ballot while appealing the May 27 ruling from Administrative Court Judge Dominic Capraro, who concluded that Blackman voting in Forsyth County in the Nov. 5 general election was proof that Blackman was not a legal resident of Fulton County. The Democratic primary winner will face appointed Republican Commissioner Fitz Johnson in November to fill serve a one-year term. There will be another election in 2026 when Georgians will elect a commissioner for the district to a full six-year term. State attorneys argued that Blackman's evidence that he lives in Fulton County was uncorroborated and that there was proof that he continued to live at his family home in Forsyth County. Under state law, a commission member must live in one of five districts for at least 12 months before an election. Blackman has said his wife and children remained in Forsyth to finish the school year while he relocated to an Atlanta residence. Blackman's attorney Matthew Wilson argued that Blackman met state requirements as a commission candidate, including registering address changes 30 days in advance of an election. 'He told others his intent was to move to Fulton County and remain there for an indefinite period of time, starting October 2024,' Wilson said at Tuesday's Zoom court hearing. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE