Utility Surcharge to Boost Performance? An Outrage

Adding a surcharge to our utility bills is a problem, not a solution.

After extended power outages from severe storms this past June, Governor O’Malley created a task force to make recommendations to accelerate utility companies’ improvement of electrical distribution and provide better service.  Improvements include the installation of some underground wires, aggressive tree trimming and giving extra attention to areas with frequent damage during storms.

In a 131-page report, the Grid Resiliency Task Force determined what consumers already know: that utility companies’ performance during severe storms and hurricanes ranges from poor to completely unacceptable.   Looking for ways to provide incentives for the utilities to reach acceptable standards for improvements and performance, the task force recommended a monthly surcharge on electric bills.  The amount of the monthly surcharge will be determined by the Public Service Commission (PSC).  Under the surcharge plan, the companies would be guaranteed advanced funding for improvement.  The panel reasoned that such advanced funding would guarantee that the work actually gets done.  Typically, utilities can recover costs only after they incur them.  Paying in advance puts the risk on the customers who have to pay more based on a promise of improved service.

Those who support the electric surcharge are quick to emphasize that it will not pay for investments already required of the companies under the new PSC higher reliability standards, aimed at cutting the number and length of service interruptions when they do occur.  We are assured that surcharge monies will be used to pay for only accelerating the companies’ ability to meet those standards. 

In 26 states, utilities are allowed to add surcharges for maintenance.  Nationwide, consumers find their utility bills have become cluttered with new fees and surcharges to pay for everything from investment in new gas pipelines to environmental compliance costs. 

While Governor O’Malley supports the surcharge, the Office of People’s Counsel, the AARP and this Delegate, do not.   Paula M. Carmody of the People’s Counsel, who represents the consumers, asked why electric customers should have to pay extra for companies to provide a reliable electric distribution system, their prime responsibility?  Indeed, why should customers have to pay a monthly surcharge for better performance?  As electric consumers, we have every right to expect quality performance without paying a surcharge.

In order for the task force recommendations to become policy, the PSC would have to implement them or the General Assembly would have to approve them as legislation.  Should the issue come before the House of Delegates, I will work diligently to defeat such legislation.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Hank November 29, 2012 at 04:46 PM
O'Malley is out of touch. It's just become a joke how often he has his hands in the pockets of the people he is supposedly serving.
Elizabeth A Hahn November 29, 2012 at 05:57 PM
Thank you again, Eric, for making moral and ethical decisions in your Delegate position. I appreciate it.
Grace B. November 29, 2012 at 07:58 PM
Yet the people of Maryland keep voting him, and his cronies, back into office.
Tim November 29, 2012 at 09:27 PM
It's simple math, depending on what numbers you want to believe in. Fact: If the utility 'legitimately' doesn't have the money to spend on improvements, you can keep on expecting improvements all you want - you won't get them. The committee's findings are reasonable. Of course, this assumes that the greedy utility companies actually spend said tax money on documented improvlements. This is where I'll agree with those who are skeptical. I hear the same arguments about deficit reduction federally speaking. Ultimately, you either don't pay more money for much maligned maintenance and continue to get poor service, or you do, and pray that it's actually used where they say it is. Neither prospect is promising, but the committee's findings themselves are completely reasonable - even if we don't feel like we should pay it. The fact we are dealing with an effective monopoly basically puts us at the mercy of greed - and not the greed from Annapolis.
Hank November 30, 2012 at 02:44 PM
Forget the surcharge anyway. I am rarely inconvenienced with power outages where I live, even during storms. Let those who are pay a surcharge/premium for increased emergency response during those times.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »