Connecticut Utilities Pursue Claims Against Ex-Regulator Gillett

Connecticut’s two largest utility companies, Eversource and Avangrid, are intensifying their efforts to investigate potential biases exhibited by the former chair of the state’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA), Marissa Gillett. Despite her resignation on October 10, 2023, following mounting allegations of misconduct, the utilities are pursuing legal action to gather evidence that Gillett acted with bias while overseeing rate cases during her tenure.

The legal actions stem from lawsuits filed over the past year, where Eversource and Avangrid assert that Gillett not only ignored state laws but also exerted excessive control over various regulatory matters. These claims have gained traction, especially as attorneys for PURA acknowledged in recent court filings that many of Gillett’s decisions, including her self-appointment as “presiding officer” in numerous contested cases, violated the state’s Uniform Administrative Procedures Act.

Both companies are seeking access to records related to Gillett’s actions and wish to interview her former colleagues to substantiate their claims of bias. Notably, these allegations include accusations that Gillett collaborated with state lawmakers on an op-ed that criticized utility companies as disseminators of “propaganda.”

Perry Rowthorn, attorney for Avangrid, emphasized the necessity of a thorough investigation during a court hearing, stating, “All of these issues remain in play, and we need to get to the bottom of it.”

Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Changes

During the hearing, the presiding judge, Matthew Budzik, expressed skepticism regarding the utilities’ arguments, questioning the necessity of delving into the past actions of Gillett. He noted that the state has already agreed to revisit PURA’s decision to deny Avangrid’s request for a gas rate increase, instead mandating a price reduction. Budzik remarked, “I’m not sure what you want me to do other than say that this process was infected by all these issues and you have to do it over again.”

While the state is implementing new procedures to address the problems identified during Gillett’s leadership, the utilities argue that these changes have not yet fully taken effect. They contend that a comprehensive understanding of the internal issues at PURA is crucial for ensuring transparent regulatory processes in the future.

Testimony from Gillett’s former colleague, Michael Caron, has further bolstered the utilities’ claims. In a deposition, Caron described Gillett as a “control freak” who exhibited bias against utility companies. He noted that while she was undeniably talented, her approach often complicated the agency’s regulatory responsibilities. “There’s some who find her a champion [of consumers] and there’s some who believe she’s upending the regulatory compact,” he stated.

Political Reactions and Ongoing Investigations

The ongoing legal disputes have attracted attention from Connecticut lawmakers. William Tong, the state’s Attorney General, has also weighed in, filing a complaint accusing the utilities’ attorneys of using Caron’s deposition to explore unrelated topics. Tong’s office is seeking a temporary halt to future depositions until the court can clarify the scope of the inquiry.

In their response to the complaints, attorneys for Eversource and Avangrid argued that their questioning regarding Gillett’s biases is essential for understanding the broader impacts on agency procedures. They emphasized the necessity of transparency in uncovering any attempts to conceal or modify regulatory practices that may have been designed to evade public scrutiny.

Both Gillett and the authors of the controversial op-ed, state Senators Norm Needleman and Jonathan Steinberg, have consistently denied any wrongdoing regarding the op-ed’s drafting. Steinberg, who co-chairs the Energy and Technology Committee, expressed hope that the legal disputes would resolve soon, allowing PURA to refocus on issues that matter to Connecticut residents. “Chair Gillett is gone; I would have hoped that the utilities would have moved on,” he remarked.

The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching implications for regulatory practices in Connecticut, as both Eversource and Avangrid seek to restore confidence in a system they allege has been compromised. As the situation evolves, the utilities and state regulators remain in a complex legal and political landscape that will likely be closely monitored by stakeholders across the region.