PUC musings

The NH Public Utilities Commission (PUC) by law, requires a “public” hearing before it releases its oversight of a utility such as the Eastman Sewer Company. Part of the process of this public hearing is for questions to be asked not only by the public but also by the PUC commissioners to the Eastman Sewer Company and by extension ECA as the owner and also to the VDE. Even if no members of the public asked any questions, there would be delays and lawyers to pay to try to facilitate this transaction. Do the ECA/ESC/VDE need lawyers for this? Probably not. The questions are not that difficult and they know the answers.

I am not a sewer user but a section of pipe crosses my property and as an ECA member I am a part owner of the sewer company. Members may recall that there was a concern raised by Council and other members of the governance that the lake was in danger if needed repairs were not done soon. As the pipe that crosses my land in within 40 feet of the lake, I assumed it had been monitored over the years if there truly was concern over the lake. I was wrong—after more than 12 years of ownership ECA had done very little and as for the pipe that runs from West Cove to South Cove, very close to the lake, there is little information on its condition. In filing as an intervenor, I have presented the following questions:

Does the broad spectrum of the Eastman Community support the transfer of assets of the ESC to the VDE?

My view is that this is not the case because all Eastman residents were not permitted to vote directly on the proposed sale (only registered VDE voters), nor were adequate informational sessions provided that would have allowed for proper due diligence on the part of voters/members. Furthermore, the information that was presented was not accurate and was not acknowledged to be inaccurate until after the vote. The ability of voters/members to inspect open and transparent documents that fully disclose the next 5 year capital liability of the ESC as well as an independent (non-seller) agent to evaluate the current capital status was denied. The November and July (information) meetings were not recorded and request for the July meeting to be public and recorded was also denied by ECA/ESC/VDE.

Do you believe that this transaction is in the public interest?

Not as I would define "public interest" because ECA is organized as a 501 c 4 (non-profit) and as such must be operated to promote social welfare to ALL members to be eligible for tax exemption. Social welfare is defined as general welfare and the common good. The proposed transfer of ESC to VDE poses a risk to non-sewer users that they will be inequitably paying for a portion of the VDE operating expenses and other costs related to the sewer system and potentially some portion of the long overdue upgrading of the sewer capital infrastructure. It poses a risk to sewer users in that they would be disenfranchised by not having the ability to vote for the commissioners and by losing the tax deduction for capital expenses.