Connecticut utility giants Eversource and Avangrid are seeking the removal of Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) General Counsel Scott Muska from five pending dockets, claiming the attorney sought to conceal public documents and evidence in the utility companies’ pending rate appeal and lawsuit against PURA and citing newly produced emails that Muska and PURA officials denied existed for over a year.

The request for recusal was filed with PURA for rate dockets for United Illuminating, Yankee Gas, and PURA’s ongoing investigations into performance-based regulations for the companies.

The utility companies had made a Freedom of Information request seeking, among other things, an email from PURA Chief of Staff Theresa Govert to former Commissioner John Betkowski and current Commissioner Michael Caron asking the commissioners to request access to PURA staff through her office. The utilities alleged this would show PURA Chairman Marissa Gillett, whom they accuse of bias against the utility companies, had sought to consolidate power in her office.

PURA, through Muska, had repeatedly denied the existence of the email and other documents, both in emails to attorneys representing Eversource and United Illuminating, in court-ordered discovery, and before the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC), before suddenly producing the email last week following testimony before the FOIC by a PURA staff member that the email did, in fact, exist. 

Gillett subsequently announced her resignation shortly afterwards, just as Republican House Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, had sought a Committee of Inquiry to determine whether Gillett had lied under oath when she denied there was such a policy during her 2025 confirmation hearing before the Executive and Legislation Nominations Committee.

Although Gillett announced her resignation and recused herself from further participation in rate cases, Eversource and Avangrid argue that Muska should be recused from pending cases as well, claiming he not only demonstrated bias against the utility companies in concealing the requested information but also violated the Rules of Professional Conduct against making false or misleading statements and obstructing another party’s access to evidence.

“It strains credibility beyond the breaking point to suggest that Mr. Muska was unaware of this unambiguously worded email particularly when it was widely known that this was a subject of controversy for the agency and the subject of a FOIA request,” wrote attorneys Cheryl M. Kimball and Brendan P. Vaughn in their joint motion. “The production of the December 22, 2023 email after a year of staunch denials as to its existence directly contradicts the sworn statements made by Attorney Muska and calls into question compliance with Rules 3.3 and 4.1 of the rules of professional conduct.” 

According to a November 2024 FOI request, Attorney Thomas J. Murphy requested, “Emails, correspondence, or other documentation issued by Chairman Gillett or any other person employed by PURA now or in the past, indicating that Vice Chairman Betkoski and/or Commissioner Caron must obtain the permission of Chairman Gillett, directly or indirectly, to confer, make inquiries to or obtain assistance from, PURA attorneys or staff members on any matter coming before PURA.”

“No responsive documents,” Muska wrote in his January 6, 2025, reply, which was submitted as evidence. “After a review by commissioners and staff of emails and other agency documentation, the Authority did not identify any documents responsive to this request. In addition, the three commissioners (Gillett, Betkoski, and Caron), the commissioners’ administrative assistant, and the supervisor of the technical staff each confirmed in writing that they are not aware of any document indicating that permission of the chair is required to interact with Authority staff; therefore, there is no basis to believe that such documents exist.”

The filing for recusal lists another instance of Muska initially denying the existence of certain records, which were later produced, notably a records request by Eversource for an email written by Muska directing all requests requiring PURA approval to be submitted as a docket motion.

“On January 26, 2025, Attorney Muska informed counsel for Eversource that PURA had no responsive documents. However, such an email does exist, it was authored by Attorney Muska, and it was eventually produced,” the attorneys wrote. “The fact that Attorney Muska did not produce the email, which he authored, indicates, at a minimum, a violation of FOIA, and creates the appearance of bias.”

The fallout from the email production and Gillett’s resignation could weigh heavily on two pending court cases the utilities have brought against PURA: United Illuminating appealed PURA’s rate reduction alleging bias against the company, and both Eversource and Avangrid have filed a lawsuit against PURA alleging Gillett abused her power by improperly and unilaterally issuing substantive motion decisions under the guise of the full authority – one of several improper actions alleged by the utility companies.

Superior Court Judge Matthew Budzik is currently weighing whether to allow the chairs of the General Assembly’s Energy and Technology Committee — Sen. Norm Needleman, D-Essex, and Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, — to be deposed over Gillett’s possible involvement in Steinberg and Needleman’s December 2024 op-ed accusing the utility companies of manipulating credit rating agencies in an effort to tarnish Gillett and PURA. 

Text messages obtained by the Hartford Courant show Gillett and Steinberg discussing a “draft” prior to the publication of the op-ed, but the draft has yet to be produced, despite FOI requests. Gillett claims her cell phone was set to auto-delete text messages; Chief of Staff Govert claims her phone also auto-deletes and that her memory of December 2024 was affected by medication, and PURA has offered up bizarre documents, claiming them to be the draft in question.

The utility companies allege PURA is dodging discovery and have also requested a forensic examination of Gillett’s cell phone, hoping to obtain the auto-deleted messages.

In a filing submitted Sept. 25 in United Illuminating’s rate appeal, Assistant Attorney General James B. Zimmer, representing PURA, requested an extension of time because of the email and Gillett’s resignation, claiming that “PURA maintains that the emails are not responsive.”

With Gillett leaving PURA, the regulatory body is down to only two commissioners, not enough to make decisions on cases under Connecticut statutes. Gov. Ned Lamont, who has repeatedly backed Gillett throughout, has in the past refused to appoint the full contingent of five commissioners as required under law, enabling Gillett to maintain her status as presiding officer in nearly every docket.

Lamont indicated he would appoint the full contingent of PURA commissioners in exchange for reappointing Gillett as chairman during the Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee hearing – part of a purported backroom deal that involved Sen. John Fonfara, D-Hartford. Lamont now must appoint three commissioners, including a chairman.

Senate Republicans called the situation at PURA “a mess,” resulting in instability for ratepayers and said their calls for the governor to appoint the full contingent of commissioners has “fallen on deaf ears.”

“PURA is now down to just two voting commissioners. It’s bad practice. And it is a completely predictable crisis that didn’t have to be this way,” said Republican Senate Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, and Sen. Ryan Fazio, R-Greenwich, who has announced he will run for governor. “Year after year, Republicans have offered policy solutions to bring long-term rate reduction and stability for consumers. Republicans have also repeatedly stated that PURA should always be populated with bipartisan representation for all five seats, as outlined in the law.”

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.