Gov. John Hickenlooper must soon decide whether to reappoint a member of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission who very likely violated the state constitution’s ban on accepting gifts worth more than $50, or reshape the powerful PUC with a fresh appointment.
In commissioner Matt Baker’s case, the questionable gift was worth $2,845.10. He took a trip to Spain in November 2010 paid for by a company owned by a regional government even though the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission has clearly indicated such foreign trips do not fall within the exemptions that voters approved in 2006 with Amendment 41.
By way of precedent, the commission once refused to give the green light to a member of the General Assembly who asked if he could accept travel expenses from a Polish city to participate in a trade mission.
It would be startling if the commission, which takes up the case later this month, somehow concluded that Baker abided by the rules.
Baker’s term actually ended Jan. 9, but he continues to serve until the governor’s announcement. Surely Hickenlooper can find someone with better judgment than this former executive director of Environment Colorado who has never seemed willing to fully relinquish his previous vocation as an advocate.
Two years ago, Baker and former PUC chief Ron Binz tarnished the commission’s image and compromised their roles as impartial finders of fact when they helped craft a law that was a gift to Xcel Energy and natural gas producers but indifferent to the potential effect on customer bills.
Even those who supported the law have to admit that its timeline for action was absurdly compressed — so much so that professionals on the PUC staff at one point threw up their hands and declared that they simply didn’t have time to complete the necessary analysis.
Fortunately for consumers, Binz — perhaps seeing the writing on the wall — retired from the PUC last year to become a consultant. Hickenlooper replaced him on the three-member commission with Joshua Epel, who so far appears more balanced. But the PUC, which enjoys broad regulatory authority over electric and gas utilities as well as intrastate telecommunications, could use another member in the same mold.
Utility rates have been rising in recent years and we need regulators who do not see this development as a good thing. Yet Binz was an open advocate of steadily climbing electricity rates — as opposed to large upward spikes, he once explained to me — on the theory that they were needed to speed the transition to a heavier reliance on renewables. And while I’ve never heard Baker extol the benefits of higher electric rates while commissioner, it would be surprising if he didn’t embrace the thesis given his PUC record and his previous career as a green activist.
Besieged consumers can’t even always rely these days on the PUC’s Office of Consumer Counsel, which was created explicitly to protect their interests.
One sign of the office’s spotty commitment: It has taken to making excuses for utilities that want to build and own their own power plants rather than see whether the electricity could be provided more cheaply through a bidding process or by purchases from independent producers.
Granted, the consumer counsel office argues that “customers are likely to be better off if a utility owns its generation,” but the idea that ratepayers are typically served by having utilities spurn competition is hard to reconcile with experience elsewhere in the economy.
We need commissioners who see the possible benefits of competition and, more broadly, who recognize the need for sober, thorough analysis as opposed to hasty justifications for larger political agendas. If Hickenlooper is similarly inclined, he’ll look high and low for the right person to appoint.
E-mail Vincent Carroll at vcarroll@denverpost.com. Follow him on Twitter @vcarrollDP.
