Sullivan County legislators press for local NYSEG hearing, urge PSC to limit delivery-rate increase
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
At an Executive Committee meeting, legislators and staff discussed NYSEG's pending rate case and urged the New York State Public Service Commission to hold an in-person hearing in Sullivan County, to allow hedging for time‑of‑use customers and to consider local grid investments without shifting immediate cost burdens onto residents.
At a Sullivan County Executive Committee meeting, county legislators and staff discussed upcoming rate-case hearings for New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG) and pressed the state Public Service Commission (PSC) to hold a local, in‑person hearing and to consider policy changes that would reduce sharp winter bill spikes for local customers.
The discussion began during public comment and continued as committee members considered sending formal letters to the PSC and the administrative law judge overseeing the case. One legislator said many constituents experienced unusually high winter bills and urged the county to discourage a steep delivery‑rate increase by NYSEG. “I have an $800 bill. I have a $1,200 bill,” the speaker said while describing affected residents.
County staff member Heather told the committee that the closest in‑person public hearing listed for the NYSEG rate case is in Binghamton, not Sullivan County, and that travel times from Monticello are roughly an hour and 24 minutes. “It looks like NYSEG is having the public hearings right now in the localities where they’re closing walk‑in business offices,” Heather said, adding that the administrative law judge typically determines hearing locations in consultation with Department of Public Service staff and the utility.
Committee members and staff emphasized two areas for formal comment: 1) request that the PSC allow NYSEG to hedge for time‑of‑use service classes to reduce volatility for customers who are concentrated in Sullivan County’s Liberty office service area; and 2) press for targeted investment in the local distribution grid to address recurring capacity problems that have caused rolling brownouts and damaged customers’ appliances. One committee member said those investments are essential for economic development but should not be paid for through higher immediate delivery charges on customers.
Staff recommended a two‑pronged approach: (a) county legislators submit written comments through the PSC’s MatterMaster portal asking for a local in‑person hearing (the committee offered the county government center as a potential venue) and (b) prepare a separate letter describing local impacts and urging PSC consideration of hedging authority for the time‑of‑use service class.
The committee also discussed outreach steps for constituents: circulating the MatterMaster comment link, promoting written comments via county social media, and coordinating with legislators who attended a recent NYSEG meeting. Heather noted the PSC’s public comment period was ongoing and that a digital public hearing remained scheduled for the coming week; she urged prompt action so county comments would be considered.
The committee did not adopt a formal resolution during the discussion excerpted in the transcript, but members agreed to draft letters and to assist with constituency outreach.
Context: NYSEG’s filing would affect delivery charges (the utility’s distribution component). County officials repeatedly emphasized that supply charges remain subject to market fluctuations and that delivery changes proposed in rate cases can amplify customer bills during supply spikes. The transcript shows the committee linking the local hearing request to both constituent hardship and local capacity concerns.
Looking ahead: County staff and legislators planned to draft and circulate a letter to the PSC and the administrative law judge and to publicize the MatterMaster portal to prompt written comments from residents.