Hartford State Senator John Fonfara’s attorney sent a letter to Gov. Ned Lamont looking to set the record straight over the reported $1 million in fines levied against the senator’s former energy supply company, Wattifi, by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA), claiming PURA improperly penalized the company, and that there is a campaign “to impugn his reputation by those seeking to prevent his appointment to PURA.”

“In fact, as detailed below, the alleged penalties referenced in these news reports were groundless and improperly ordered – reflecting the very same unlawful PURA practices that have rightly received much scrutiny in recent months,” wrote R. Bartley Halloran of BBB Attorneys in his March 30 letter to Lamont and legislative leaders. “Perhaps worse, these penalties appear to have been ordered in direct retaliation for Senator Fonfara voicing concerns about legislation that would have unwisely aggrandized the authority of PURA’s chairperson.”

Fonfara is purportedly in line to become a PURA commissioner under a backroom deal orchestrated by the Lamont administration in a last-minute effort to get embattled PURA Chairman Marissa Gillett over the finish line before the Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee. Fonfara is on the committee and voted in favor of advancing Lamont’s nomination of Gillett to serve another five-year term.

Under the reported terms of the deal, PURA would become a quasi-public agency and Lamont would appoint the full cadre of five commissioners to serve, including Fonfara. However, shortly after Gillett’s confirmation, it was reported that Fonfara’s former energy company, Wattifi, had racked up over $1 million in PURA penalties.

As previously reported by Inside Investigator, Wattifi had sought to relinquish its electric supplier license months before PURA issued a decision requiring third-party electric suppliers to pay part of the cost for the major utility companies to update their billing. Despite having taken the necessary steps, PURA prevented Wattifi from relinquishing its license and instead began to penalize the company for nearly a year before revoking their license. 

During debate on Senate Bill 7, Fonfara warned language in the bill would have placed too much authority into the hands of Gillett. Although Fonfara voted for passage, that language was later removed in the budget implementer. 

“We do not believe it is a coincidence that PURA refused to let Wattifi relinquish its license in the months immediately following statements that Senator Fonfara made during the floor debate on SB7, in May 2023,” Halloran wrote. “Ironically, the abuses Senator Fonfara warned against have, in fact, been committed against him and his company, as well as in many instances in other dockets against other Connecticut businesses.”

According to the lengthy letter, Halloran asserts that PURA did not have legal standing to issue the penalties because they were made under a motion decision signed by PURA Executive Director Jeffery Gaudiosi. It is the same argument being made by both Eversource and United Illuminating in a court case against PURA, that alleges Gillett has been improperly making major motion decisions under the guise of the full authority rather than indicating that it is a decision of the presiding officer. 

“Perhaps worse, these penalties appear to have been ordered in direct retaliation for Senator Fonfara voicing concerns about legislation that would have unwisely aggrandized the authority of PURA’s chairperson,” Halloran wrote. 

He also claims that Wattifi was not able to appeal PURA’s decisions or the penalties to superior court because they were improperly made under an uncontested docket, and only contested dockets can be appealed to court.

“Senator Fonfara has been questioned about why his company did not appeal the cost allocation attributed to Wattifi that formed the basis for the widely discussed penalties,” Halloran wrote. “The reason is very simple. He did not have a legal avenue for appeal because, in its final decision in the Cost Allocation Docket, PURA improperly characterized the docket as an uncontested docket from which no appeal is available.”

At the same time, however, the governor’s office is circulating a document defending the penalties levied against Wattifi, including a timeline of previous issues PURA had with Wattifi.

However, nowhere in the timeline does it mention Wattifi’s attempts to relinquish its license, the fact that it had no customers when PURA issued the decision that would cost Wattifi $57,000 for utility billing upgrades, nor that Wattifi dissolved its business before PURA began to levy the penalties. The document indicates that Wattifi did not take the opportunity to fight the notice of violation and that the penalties would have been waived had the company simply paid the $57,168.42 to the utility companies.

“With respect to the referenced [Notice of Violation], Wattifi, elected to waive its right to adjudicate the NOV, and the NOV became a final order of the Authority,” the document states. There is no attributed author. 

The document defends the fact that there were no commission votes at several of the stages outlined in Halloran’s letter, saying that “PURA regulations expressly authorize a presiding officer to issue motion rulings on behalf of the agency.”

In previous comments to Inside Investigator, PURA has indicated that, as chair, Gillett generally serves as presiding officer in docket cases, although occasionally one of the other commissioners will serve in that capacity.

“For decades, the Authority has issued procedural, evidentiary, and intermediary rulings without holding a public meeting and voting as a full panel since voting on these motion rulings is not a legal requirement,” the document states. “Ultimately though, every final decision in a proceeding is voted on by the panel of commissioners.”

Senate Republican Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, blasted the purported deal reached to approve Gillett’s nomination, calling it “one of the worst things I’ve seen in politics in this building,” and, apparently, some Democrats weren’t happy with the arrangement either.

A bill proposed and passed by the Government Administration and Elections Committee shortly after Gillett’s nomination hearing would bar anyone who had previously received a PURA penalty from serving as a commissioner on the regulatory body. 

The bill also seeks to break up the utility companies, preventing Eversource and Avangrid from owning both gas and electric utilities, and would make any “public service company” with more than 200,000 customers subject to Freedom of Information laws. The legislation passed out of committee with a party line vote with Republicans voting against it. 

“I do not write this letter to advance Senator Fonfara’s potential nomination to PURA. Nor, primarily, is my purpose to defend his reputation and integrity from these false and malicious attacks,” Halloran wrote in his letter. “Rather, I write on Senator Fonfara’s behalf to defend the public’s right to have its regulatory authorities comply with law and ethics and to be held accountable when they don’t. I urge you to take immediate action to investigate the source of these false allegations and to address the harm that has been done.”

Republish This Story

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