PUC hearing draws dismal crowd

Public opinion was mixed at the conclusion of a sparsely attended Public Utilities Commission hearing held Friday at the Senate chamber of the Legislature on Capital Hill.

About 15 people, many of whom were legislators, were present at one point during the hearing, but by the end of the three-hour hearing, only a handful stayed for the public comment portion.

Wesley Bogdan, who was the first to speak before the commission, said he was overwhelmed by the amount of information discussed during the meeting and disturbed that the public was going to have to pay for mistakes of the past.

“I think that’s just totally unreasonable,” he said.

“Why are we being asked to pay for 25 years of malfeasance? It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Greg Cruz, president of Taotao Tano, echoed Bogdan’s sentiments and said he feared rates would go up.

Ruth Tighe, who has regularly spoken about CUC’s need for a plan for its future, said she disagreed with Bogdan and Cruz.

“Somebody’s got to bite the bullet somewhere for 25 years of mismanagement,” she said, adding that the plan outlined during the hearing seemed reasonable.

“From what I heard, it was logical. It was clear,” she said.

One good thing about the increase in power rates, she mentioned during her comments, was that people were finally learning how to be energy efficient.

Rep. Victor Hocog, chairman of the House Committee on Public Utilities, Transportation and Communications, said he shared the concerns of Bogdan and Cruz, and agrees that CUC is insolvent. Hocog, a member of the Rota delegation, said the island is interested in providing renewable energy. He ended his comments by saying he would like to participate more in discussions and offered additional assistance. Hocog was one of the proponents of Public Law 16-17, which seeks to privatize CUC and establishes the business plan discussed during the hearing.

Like Bogdan, Jean Arthur said she was overwhelmed with the amount of information and had a hard time understanding what was being discussed. Arthur said she did not read the stipulations that were disseminated, but wanted to listen to the hearing “as a mother or grandmother would.”

Instead, she said, she was unable to understand the process. When she asked for clarification about the Georgetown Consultants role, she was reminded that it was not a question-and-answer portion, but a chance for the public to share their thoughts. She said it sounded like the Georgetown Consultants were trying to sell their service.

CUC’s insolvency was Rep. Tina Sablan’s first concern. Earlier in the testimony, officials said that once CUC was able to get rid of its debt to the Commonwealth Development Authority, the utility company would become solvent. Sablan objected to that, referring to past reports on CUC’s finances.

“If I recall, current liabilities far exceed $100 million,” she said.

How do you penalize a company that is insolvent, she asked.

“Of course we should give the benefit of the doubt to CUC,” she said. “But what are the consequences? Do you penalize and issue fines on a bankrupt corporation?”

Sablan objected to CUC providing free electricity for certain functions, an issue that had been raised earlier that the Georgetown Consultants said CUC needed to work on.

“There should be no free lighting,” Sablan said, adding that organizers of rosaries, carnivals and other events should pay for power like other customers. “Everything should be accounted for.”

Sablan ended her comments by saying she was very disappointed that CUC and Georgetown is recommending PUC waive the renewable energy standard.

“I recognized it was extremely ambitious,” she said of the law that mandated CUC to obtain 10 percent of its energy from a renewable source by the end of 2008. “But I don’t think we have the luxury of waiting and hoping renewable energy comes to the CNMI.”