PURA Chairwoman Marissa Gillett’s nomination to a second term was approved in a 13-8 vote by the state’s Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee, but not before facing a flurry of questions from lawmakers. Several took the Thursday meeting as an opportunity to get in their last swings at Gillett before her expected approval as the result of a “backroom deal” finalized late W nightednesday, which several lawmakers openly criticized.

“Frankly, in my 10 years in legislature, there’s few days where I’ve been angrier or more upset about the process and how we ultimately got here today, and how things were negotiated in dark rooms,” said Sen. Stephen Harding (R-Brookfield). “What was done in the dark of night, in the 11th hour, to get certain people to vote yesterday, presumably, is one of the worst things I’ve seen in politics in this building.”

Gillett has been a controversial and firebrand chairwoman since she was first appointed by Lamont in 2019. While her supporters have characterized her as someone who has effectively wielded power to hold public utilities to account, her opponents, which include several utility companies, have characterized her as running the commission dictatorially, failing to provide transparency on internal processes, and ultimately of abusing her power as Chairwoman to issue decisions that have unfairly deprived the utilities of their due compensation and raised costs for ratepayers.

In January, Eversource and Avangrid, the state’s two largest utilities, filed a court injunction against PURA. In response, PURA opened an investigation into its own internal practices last month, which it closed two days ago without a vote by its commissioners, further incensing the utilities who have accused Gillett of acting as a one-woman committee.

Despite the numerous controversies Gillett has weathered throughout her first term, she has managed to maintain the support of Lamont, Democratic lawmakers, and several public and environmental advocacy groups. That popular support faced its most difficult test last week, when an article published in the Hartford Courant uncovered text messages between Gillett and Rep. Jonathan Steinberg (D-Westport), that would imply she helped draft an op-ed critical of the state’s public utilities, published by CTMirror in December.

The op-ed was published under the names of Steinberg and Sen. Norm Needleman (D-Essex), both of whom are co-chairs on the state’s energy and technology committee, as well as outspoken Gillett supporters. While Gillett has since denied playing any role in drafting the piece, a stance she maintained in the face of lawmaker inquiries today, the piece only further contributed to the belief of her opponents that she is unable to work in good faith with state utilities. The fallout of this discovery led even Steinberg himself to publicly state that he believed “it possible” to tank her renomination.

This moment of doubt led Lamont and legislative leaders to negotiate a deal that was finished last night, which would guarantee Gillett’s reconfirmation by the committee in return for the nomination of Sen. John Fonfara (D-Hartford) and Rep. Holly Cheeseman (R-East Lyme) as PURA commissioners, bringing it in line with its statutory limit of five commissioners. The deal also promised Gillett opponents the removal of PURA from under the purview of DEEP, which Republican lawmakers have long criticized as a measure to politicize the agency.

The op-ed fiasco, and the “backroom deal” brokered in response to it, made popular subjects of questioning at today’s hearing. Harding asked Gillett outright whether or not she had any hand in brokering the deal.

“I did not have any involvement in what has been reported over the past 24 hours,” said Gillett. “I’ve tried to stay away from it when I was getting prepared today, as I was hoping to come here to discuss my qualifications and record, and I did not have any involvement in what has been reported.”

When provided the opportunity to, Gillett did just that; she highlighted the $30 million in fines PURA incurred on Eversource and UI for storm response failures, $5.5 million dollars in restitutions she secured for ratepayers, $12 million in fines she secured from utilities to pay off the state’s collectibles, the creation of PURA’s Office of Education, Outreach and Enforcement, as well as various rate reductions she’s negotiated. Gillett said that her management of the agency, and the rulings it has issued, are backed by the four instances in which the State Supreme Court has ruled in favor of PURA’s decisions.

Committee Co-Chair, Sen. Bob Duff (D-Norwalk) addressed the text messages between her and Steinberg, asking Gillett whether or not she had received anything in her private email from Steinberg or Newman. The texts alluded to her wishing to continue certain conversations with the two via their private emails, so as to avoid FOIA eligibility. He also questioned whether or not the op-ed fiasco should give any merit to the idea that she is incapable of serving as an impartial arbitrator, a notion many of her opponents have since vocalized.

“I did not,” said Gillett. “What I will say in my opening remarks, is the Supreme Court has upheld our decision making four times in the in the years that I’ve been here, is that every matter that comes before PURA, we are evaluating based on the facts and the record that is developed in that specific case, and that is what I am committed to doing moving forward.”

Further addressing the op-ed communications, Gillett said that she would be more than willing to comply with any future law passed that would limit the level of communication she is allowed to have with legislators, but pushed back on the idea that any of her communications represented an undue exertion of influence on the state’s legislative process.

“If it is the will of this legislature that its experts at the PURA not be available to the co-chairs or any other member of that committee, I would say that I think that that is your policy call to make,” said Gillett. “Respectfully, the correspondence that I have disclosed, that you know, provides opinions and advice on either pending legislation or other matters, I don’t personally view anything unusual or inappropriate about myself.”

Gillett was also questioned on her opinions on the provisions of the deal to get her renominated, such as the decision to change PURA from having three commissioners to five. The restructuring of PURA to its five commissioner limit has long been a request of Republican lawmakers, who have accused Lamont of withholding his nominations in an effort to let Gillett run PURA with little opposition.

“Frankly, the composition of PURA, the structure of PURA, I defer to the legislature and the governor, and I don’t have an opinion beyond that,” said Gillett. Gillett also said that she believes that the chair should not be given undue power, and welcomes diversity of opinion on the committee.

“I do not support the concentration of power in the role of the chair,” said Gillett. “I think whether it’s three or five or seven or nine [commissioners], I think it’s important to make sure that there’s a diversity of opinions on the board that come from different backgrounds and have different qualifications.”

Gillett also repeatedly warded off any attempt by lawmakers to legitimize accusations made by utilities that she has been adversarial to her staff.

“I want to recognize the 78 hard working staff of PURA,” said Gillett. “We have gas engineers, we have lawyers, we have finance specialists, we have rate specialists, all of those folks are experts in what they do, and it is incumbent on me as the manager to make sure that they have the resources that they need to do their job.”

Sen. Joan Hartley (D-Waterbury) questioned Gillett on a letter published by CTMirror on Feb. 10, in which 18 PURA staff defended Gillett against the accusations levied against her by public utilities. Gillett said she had no advanced knowledge that the letter would be published.

“It was a surprise,” said Gillett. “It is the type of sentiment that I strive in my management to see, and it was such a privilege to hear them in their own words say that.”

House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora (R-Durham) criticized Gillett for public comments she had made in the past about her fellow commissioners, in which she shared her belief that they had been serving for too long. Rep. Dave Yaccarino (R-North Haven) asked her whether she thought the comments to be appropriate.

“It was in poor taste,” admitted Gillett. “I had apologized almost immediately to the Vice Chairman, who has since retired from PURA, but I have not done that since and I certainly regret airing that.”

Gillett also denied the accusations levied against her in the suit filed against PURA by Eversource and Avangrid, which purported that PURA has failed to maintain records of votes on rulings and that several rulings were essentially approved by her alone, without the vote of fellow commissioners.

“That is not accurate,” said Gillett. “When we went through the entirety of our records in the number of years that I’ve been here, I could only locate one decision in which a single commissioner has voted, and that was not a docket resolved by me.”

Gillett said that the suit takes issues not with final rulings, but with interim rulings, which are rulings that determine whether or not a utility has been in compliance with a past issued PURA ruling. Gillett stated that all commissioners have access to these interim rulings and that she has “taken the proactive step of consulting and conferring” with other commissioners prior to making rulings herself.

“So the reporting about there not being votes recorded, we have votes recorded on every final decision of the agency in accordance with law,” said Gillett. This matter has yet to be resolved in court.

In addition to the plethora of questions prying into Gillett’s more public-facing controversies, she was also grilled on PURA’s inability to stop Connecticut from becoming the state with second-highest electric rate in the country, her ability to work with utilities despite the uniquely open hostility displayed between the companies and the agency, and whether or not her conduct is in line with that of an impartial regulatory committee or citizen’s advocate.

Regarding the state’s high electric rate, Gillett broke down the “four buckets” through which state electric rates are determined; the price charged by power generators, the transmission rates, which are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the public benefits charge, which PURA is able “to audit to ensure the utility is passing no more or less than authorized by law,” and the distribution rates, which Gillett said PURA has “the most direct control over.”

Gillett essentially assured lawmakers that under her leadership, PURA has effectively worked towards lowering or holding steady the state’s transmission rates, and pointed out that it is on lawmakers to determine what provision gets added to the public benefits charge. Gillett said she was unsure of her opinion regarding the future of the public benefits charge, but that she would be happy to discuss with legislators to the purpose and origin of each, as well as the budgetary implications of transferring them to the general fund.

Regarding concerns that her adverse relationship with utilities may drive them out of the state, Gillett firmly asserted that that it is not a possibility.

“I want to be very clear that that is not an option,” said Gillett. “They have agreed in exchange for the franchise, which is the right to provide monopoly service to this specific footprint, they have agreed to maintain a safe and reliable grid and to conform to all of the statutes that are duly passed by this body.”

Regarding whether she viewed PURA’s role as being that of a neutral arbiter or that of a ratepayer advocate, Gillett did not mince words. Rep. Bob Godfrey (D-Danbury) asserted that it was always his view that PURA “was not to be a neutral arbitrator” but to serve “on the side of ratepayers,” and said that he thought this mission fits, “very well with your description of PURA’s mission.”

“I would agree,” said Gillett. “One thing that’s been really interesting and difficult for me is that the overwhelming majority of comments that PURA has received and what this body has received are folks that are looking for PURA to not be a neutral arbitrator, and I think it’s interesting to grapple with.”

Ultimately, after approximately seven hours of deliberation, the committee voted in favor of Gillett’s nomination. Her nomination will now require the majority vote of both chambers of the state legislature to be approved. In response to the vote, several Republican senators signed off on a release criticizing the deal brokered to secure the committee’s approval, saying “the sheer arrogance of it is beyond the pale.”

“Senate Republicans voted ‘no’ today to call out the hypocrisy, the lack of transparency, and the disrespect shown to every CT citizen by this back room deal,” read the statement. “Senate Republicans won’t be accomplices in the creation of the higher and higher electric bills that await already angry CT ratepayers.”

Republish This Story

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