Haines Borough officials said this week that information that can’t be disclosed led them to vote in favor of a settlement with the Alaska Power Company to increase electric rates by 11 percent.
Assembly members Mike Case, Diana Lapham and George Campbell voted to accept the settlement offer. Assembly members Ron Jackson, Dave Berry and Joanne Waterman opposed it. Mayor Jan Hill broke the tie.
Alaska Power Company, the energy subsidiary of Alaska Power and Telephone, initially requested an 18.12 percent across-the-board rate increase for its customers in Haines and other small communities.
The Haines Borough and five other communities that filed with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska as interveners in the rate case recently voted to accept an 11.12 percent settlement instead of pursuing an RCA hearing.
Acceptance of an 11 percent increase rate irked some residents, including former Mayor Stephanie Scott, who pointed to an attorney general’s expert witness who testified APC should get no more than 5.1 percent.
Mayor Jan Hill said she voted for the settlement because of confidential information revealed during the assembly’s numerous closed-door meetings with its attorney. “I received enough information that made me feel this was the best option that we were afforded.”
Hill called the 11 percent the “middle of the road” option. “I’m not a gambler. Let’s put it that way. I’m especially not willing to be a gambler with things involving the borough.”
Hill said she feels she made the “right decision by the community,” but said residents have approached her about it. “I understand what it means when your light bill is going to go up, because so is mine. It’s not like I made this decision in a vacuum.”
Assembly member George Campbell also said there was information he couldn’t reveal that led to his vote. “No, I don’t like it, but I also recognize that there are a lot of very experienced people who were working on this situation. There’s a lot of information out there, way more than people are referring to.”
Campbell said if the borough rejected the settlement, he saw the chance of being stuck with an even larger increase at the hearing. The issue also would continue to cost the borough attorney fees, he said.
Regarding the lack of public input and the assembly’s refusal to talk about the settlement openly before accepting it, Campbell said doing so would have compromised the borough’s legal strategy.
“Part of strategies and negotiations is keeping your hand close to your chest and not letting people know what you are thinking so you can get your desired results,” Campbell said.
“We vote in people to represent our community and we ask them to do that. Sometimes you have to trust your officials. That’s why it’s important to go out and vote,” he added.
Assembly member Dave Berry, who voted against settlement, called the 11 percent increase “horrendous.”
“I just had a hard time swallowing that high of an increase, so I voted for the people who are going to have an extremely hard time paying it,” Berry said.
New assembly member Ron Jackson said he voted against the settlement because the assembly wasn’t provided information about the economic impacts of the increase and what it would mean financially for the community.
“During the discussions I wasn’t able to get good answers for that. It just didn’t seem like the right thing to do,” Jackson said.
Jackson also wanted to know why the attorney general’s expert witness and his recommendation of a maximum 5.1 percent increase wasn’t being taken more seriously. “I wanted to know what was it in all the discussions they had that invalidated the 5.1 (percent) and there wasn’t any answer for that, either.”
Jackson said he has heard more concerns about the closed-door discussion and lack of a public hearing than he has about the increased rate. Jackson said there were things discussed in executive session that likely could have been discussed in public.
“I think I would question that a little more thoroughly, yes,” Jackson said of voting to go into executive session. “I would also want to really make sure after we got through that we took some time to explain what we could. You can’t tell everything, but we could at least talk about some things.”
After the assembly voted Nov. 12 on the settlement, former Mayor Stephanie Scott sent assembly members and borough staff a plea for more information to be released. Scott said she was “heartbroken” by how the group shut the public out of discussions.
“Their job is to reach out to the electorate and tell them what is going on, and they did not do that. And when they realized that they didn’t do it, they should put the brakes on,” Scott said. “They need to wake up the people, not take advantage of sleepiness.”
Scott also said she never thought becoming an intervener in the case, a move she pushed, would result in an attorney largely calling the shots.
“I never for a moment imagined the person we were placing at the table would become instrumental in forging a settlement, especially without including the community in this agreement,” Scott said.
The RCA usually approves settlements, said Sam Cason, assistant attorney general for the Alaska Department of Law’s Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy department.