From WXXI news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour was made in your bill.

Have you ever had trouble with your utility bill?

Either with our geni or maybe nice egg?

Have you ever tried to call the company?

Get things straightened out?

Thousands of people have.

And a new independent audit of RGA and Nyseg does not paint a flattering portrait of how the utility's treat their customers.

I'll read from Sky News is Brian Sharp and his reporting this morning, quote an independent audit of RGA and Nyseg paints a picture of ineffective governance that prioritizes parent company oven grids corporate earnings over the interest of New York ratepayers.

While not surprising to critics, auditors detailed a surprising dearth of local planning and controls, including when it comes to compliance with state regulations and a near-total absence of local decision making.

At one point, auditors inquired about New York regulatory matters and were told by Avangrid that those are discussed by the utility's leadership via the monthly regulatory, planning, operations and customer council meetings for New York.

In fact, the auditors determined this committee does not exist.

End quote.

For their part, the utilities contend that staffing shortages and lingering disruption from the pandemic are to blame, but they say they have made a lot of progress.

The audit, conducted by Northstar Consulting Group, contends otherwise.

As Brian Sharp notes, the two companies now must file a plan for implementing auditors 128 separate recommendations, and they must respond to a list of alleged violations, ranging from billing procedures to the reliability and safety of its electric and gas operations.

Both require responses to the state Public Service Commission within the next month.

Meanwhile, some members of local government are pushing to move forward with plans to study what would happen if things changed if there was a local or publicly owned utility.

A feasibility study has been hung up, as elected leaders at the city and county levels have debated who should pay for it.

One year ago, the Monroe County Legislature voted 1613 against a plan to commit money for such a study.

Our guest this hour will discuss why they do want to move ahead with the study, and why they are optimistic about a public utility.

Welcome back to the program, Mary Lucien, a member of Rochester City Council.

Thank you for being with us.

Glad to be here and with us.

As well as Michi Wunderlich, Michi is a campaign and policy coordinator for Metro Justice.

Welcome.

Thank you for being here.

Thanks.

Thanks for you.

And a little bit of, a little bit of background, just to make sure everyone, is kind of caught up.

So I saw Brian's report, and our e did send us a statement.

They are invited to join us whenever.

Really, they can make that work.

And that's been true for many years.

We did have a conversation last year on this program, but they are certainly welcome on an ongoing basis.

I think the public would love to continue to have access to chance and the chance to talk to and local leadership, so that that continues to be an invitation.

I will read the statement that they sent for this hour, quote, Metro Justice's repeated claims against our genie and calls for government controlled power, which is not in the best interest of our customers or our employees, the women and men who do the work on behalf of our customers day in and day out, in blue sky and storms, and which would also put Rochester taxpayers on the hook for over $10 billion, have failed to gain support in the mainstream.

The community doesn't need a study or the socialism it calls for.

It deserves facts.

The group's allegations about failing infrastructure, profits and customer service are outdated and unfounded.

Our genie has invested millions in infrastructure in the last three years, including new substations in Sodus and around, to quote circuit upgrades in Webster and millions of dollars in the natural gas infrastructure.

They use inaccurate profit numbers to negatively portray our genie at their whim.

When the most volatile portion of customers bills is unregulated supply price, which the company does not control nor profit from.

They also completely ignore the significant customer service improvements the company has made since the pandemic.

Choosing instead to highlight the efforts made to collect on arrears.

When a portion of customers do not pay their bills for whatever reason, it costs all customers more money.

And that's why collections are so vital to any utility.

In 2024 alone, RGA made more than $375 million in capital investments, including customer service, leading to dramatic improvements in call center operations and customer satisfaction.

And our Genie, our future does not hinge on an unnecessary study or negative claims from years past.

It depends on our commitment to keep moving forward and serving this community with the facts in hand.

End quote.

That's the statement from our genie.

They mentioned Metro Justice first.

So both of our guests will have plenty to say.

But I'll start with Michi, who is campaign and policy coordinator for Metro Justice.

Go ahead.

Exactly.

So, I mean, I think the audit speaks for itself and the audit confirms what we already know.

And what, our community experiences every day, that our genie is failing and that they're lying to us, that our genie may say that they're getting better, but this audit proves that's not true.

they're inflating costs.

they don't even have operational plans at the utility level versus at their nationwide holding company.

Avangrid.

that they're not up keeping the grid.

They don't even know what's happening.

And there are many subcontractors.

their billing and customer service continues to be inaccurate.

The customer service that they just quoted as improving part of this audit says that those numbers are inaccurate.

they're putting us all in danger with lacking physical and cyber security planning and not reporting on gas leaks and emergencies, just some of these things.

so they're absent at the wheel.

and in the face of such glaring evidence, Metro Justice continues to ask, will our leaders continue to refuse to act?

So will they just continue to take our Jeannie's word for it, rather than getting an independent analysis of what a public utility could mean for our community?

and who's going to stand up for and defend our people and our communities?

and how could we possibly dispute that local ownership that's focused on meeting local goals and needs could potentially, at least provide better service at lower costs?

rather than inflating costs and executive compensation without regard to performance, as has been shown by this audit.

and we see this across the country as well.

Utility companies that are owned by foreign multinationals exist for the express purpose of inflating and extracting as much, profit as possible.

And we want to ask, can't we do better?

and don't we at least deserve answers?

Okay.

And before I turn to council member looping Doctor Wunderlich, when you think about, the idea that a study would be not only a waste of money in our genie's terms, but a move toward socialism, that this whole thing is socialistic in nature.

what do you make of that?

I mean, so public utilities are proven that they are cheaper, more reliable, address, a green transition, better and faster.

and, our across the board, serve and invest more in their communities than for private, than investor owned utilities.

So we have over 2000 public utilities across the country.

We have three in Monroe County already, Fairport, Churchville and Spencer Port.

We have 50 in New York State.

they, they are popular because they work.

and so some of the largest, it's five of the, largest 20 cities have public utilities.

So that includes places like L.A. and Seattle, Sacramento, San Antonio, Austin, Texas, and the entire the entire state of Nebraska has abolished investor owned utilities.

so they have only public utilities.

And, this is a proven common sense thing that we can do.

And we're asking, don't we deserve to get an independent analysis and at least have answers for how a public utility could meet our needs better and save, save costs better.

And when you look at the studies that are being done across the country, they show almost across the board that we'd save considerable amounts of money even while paying off the buyout costs over rates over 30 years.

So, Council Member Lucien, let me ask you first what you made of the audit, and then I'll ask you if you want to weigh in on the statement from Jamie.

The I've got last to say.

So the audit first.

Any surprises for you there?

I mean, I think it's surprising just how bad they are.

We knew they were bad, but this is this is incredible.

It talks about how, you know, they were we knew there were, issues with estimated meeting meter readings that they were just going on for months and months and months without reading.

That happened to me.

And I got an $800 bill all of a sudden, you know, which, you know, is a financial strain.

Yes, I owe it.

But because I didn't know and couldn't budget for that cost all along, that is really been, an issue with the constituents that come to us with these, problems with billing and the rates, but they also say they have inadequate responses to gas leaks and that they don't meet the electricity reliability standards for six consecutive years.

That came as a surprise to me.

you know, it's we know the customer service is is terrible and that billing is inaccurate.

But to say that they don't even know how to tell if the charges are based on actual usage, that blows my mind.

It's severe mismanagement.

Now, the the companies, the utilities responded to the audit findings.

So beyond the statement that I read in full from our Jeannie just a moment ago, I should say that part of what our genie said to, filing with the Public Service Commission about this audit is that, number one, they thought a lot of the data requests were excessively broad or vague and hard to answer, that the tone of the audit was, from the jump, excessively negative toward utilities that they kind of felt like this was a this was cooked up to make them look bad.

Well, it makes sense that they would say that because these allegations, in the audit are really damning and it goes completely counter to what they've been telling us, what they told us in that statement, they are lying.

They say they want facts.

All we want is information.

They're preventing us from learning the facts about how we could, replace our guard with a public utility.

And, you know, they talk about it's not fair to our, you know, our hard workers.

We're not talking about replacing workers.

We're talking about replacing the corporate governance that is now showing us is completely, unable to run this company and replacing it with, a governance structure.

That sole purpose is to provide a good service for the people.

There's no profit motive.

There are.

You know, we do earn revenue.

but it can be reinvested into the system to lower rates.

you know, we don't have shareholders that we're trying to make rich.

So the process, as I understand it and please correct here, and that's what we want to do, is make sure our listeners have a complete picture of where we are and where this could go.

You number one, the study is going to cost around a million.

I keep hitting around a million, 500,000, 500,000.

So yes, there's been our original ask was for a comprehensive study of 1.5 million, where the city would spend 500,000 and the county would spend 1 million to give us all of the answers to how much this would cost, and a blueprint for a new utility that looks at also how we can meet our climate goals over the next 20 to 30 years.

What are the questions on governance and, social costs are and now the current ask.

So twice two years in a row, in 2023 and 2024, the city council has set aside 500,000 that can be used for a public utility study.

Last year, as you already mentioned, the county, in the face of Adam Bellows opposition, which we can talk about more, voted down county funding by one vote when two Democrats sided with the Republican caucus to block it.

What we're now asking, is for the city in the face of the county's refusal to act, to stand up and lead, and to use that 500,000 that they've already reserved for a phase one feasibility study that can be done, by the city alone, that looks at transition possibilities and how much it would cost in both the city and the county.

That doesn't cost more money than what the city has already said it would pay.

and that really gets the ball moving.

if, you know, if they really want this to happen, I think the city needs to take the first step.

So that's what we're I think you highlighted the issue.

If they really wanted this to happen, it's, it's a phase one study to give us the initial information we would need if we want to go forward, on a in-depth study, but to, you know, ultimately, we would want the public utility on the ballot, but we really think that the community should be well informed of what that would look like.

And that's what we're asking for.

And it has taken it took two years to get them to allocate funding.

Now it's been two years that we've allocated it.

And someone might ask because we throw $500,000 away all the time in the city.

on studies on, you know, different things that aren't really making a difference in our community.

So why would this 500,000 be so hard to spend?

But when you look at why some things don't move, it has to do with who your friends are and who are the powerful in this community.

And Bob Duffy, you know, former mayor, former police chief, CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, is still a very influential, influential player in this city.

And he sits on the board of Avangrid and gets $250,000 a year to do it.

Joe Morelli is our congressman.

He is, can he has a lot of political loyalists in this city.

His son is a is a lobbyist for our Jeannie.

So when you start to see the connections between the powerful people in the city, you start to see why it's not moving.

And I'm really tired of hearing, well, you we really need the county.

It's not fair that the city should have to burden the whole study when we're part of the county.

That is just a red herring that is to say, well, I want to look like I'm supporting it without actually using my political capital to get the study done.

We're going to get to that point a second.

Let me just ask a separate question, though.

The idea of a study, as you say, it's to paint the picture for voters.

If you want to go to the voters and say, we want to put this on the ballot, we want to show you via the study exactly what what this would look like.

But if you have colleagues who are maybe on the fence and they hear the way you're talking about a public utility, they might think, well, in Councilmember Lucien's mind, this is a done deal.

We don't need a study.

She wants this.

She wants a public utility.

So we're going to be spending money on something that the people are supporting it.

They're going to support it no matter what the study says.

So what's the point?

no.

We need facts.

We need to understand what this looks like.

I support the concept of a public utility.

I know it works in other places.

We don't know what the cost of the infrastructure is, what that will mean, how to bond for it.

We need the information.

Yes, of course, I'm a supporter of a public utility, but I would not, try to misrepresent something that will hurt our community just because I want it.

Like I want it to help our community.

That's why we need the study.

So if a study comes back and says, this just doesn't work here for XYZ, you change your mind.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

I mean, I don't think that's what's going to come back because we have all of this data on all of these other places.

But if there was something that I didn't anticipate, no, I wouldn't.

So Council Member Lucien is bringing up the the to the ostensible debate that is happening between city and county layers about who pays for a study.

I want to listen to some of what Mayor Evans said on this program last week.

Now, he was responding to our questions, and then a listener named William called in and pressed the mayor on supporting money for a study and supporting the idea of a public utility itself.

And I want to listen to what the mayor said.

I didn't say I'm not sure what he's saying.

I oppose a public utility.

All I said was, is that, city council passed dollars for a study in order to do a study.

It should not just include Rochester.

It has included the entire region.

And I've said this multiple times.

Rochester has the smallest budget.

The Rochester City School District just passed the budget.

It was $1.1 billion.

My budget is $27 million less than it was last year because we lost Arpa funding.

Monroe County has a $1.2 billion budget.

My point along this was that any study or any conversation about this has to be done region wide.

It just can't be burned.

It just can't be borne by the one of the poorest cities in upstate.

And New York state or and in the country.

we should shouldn't have to pay for something like that by ourself.

That's been my point.

I've been consistent on that.

I've said that before.

Five top four zip codes in New York State, top three are in the city of Rochester.

All we're saying is that if you're going to spend $1 million on a study and that involves something that is a regional wide thing, it just can't be borne by the city of Rochester.

But you're still open to the notion of a public utility.

Yeah, I think you'd have to have you you'd have to have a broad conversation about it.

I mean, it's, it's a massive, massive undertaking and something like that would happen long after any of us are here.

But the bottom line is you have to have a study first for that.

And, you know, I think we've seen enough to say in a study what a study would cost money.

Well, I mean, the proposal is that what folks want is they want to study and, and the and the argument has been, oh, the city should just pay for pay for the study, even though the agreement was in any tax, in any type of study like that would have to be paid.

Regionwide I think William thinks you're being obstructionist that.

Well, yeah.

No, I'm dodging because you don't want it.

No, no, I mean and again, city council could pass it tomorrow if they want it to.

That's Mayor Evans on the program last week.

What do what do you hear there.

That's a lot of words to say.

No.

That he does not support it.

Well again I asked him that directly.

Sure because that is not what he is saying.

You know, he stuttered and said a lot of words and ultimately he's saying, no.

I think it's ridiculous to draw a hard line that the city shouldn't spend $500,000 where the poorest city, when he's spending $500,000 to build one house in his by the block program, we wasted $13 million of Covid recovery money that he says is now gone, building 37 houses.

So it is very disingenuous for him to put that on a $500,000 study to potentially save our residents money and give us better service than we know our gene is not giving us just not to get too far afield.

About by the block, I asked the mayor, given the fact that, there is a campaign going on and, that not only yourself but also the other can in the ratio she sent her have said that they think she thinks that's the biggest, the the best example of waste in the city budget is by the block.

The mayor said he will never apologize for supporting neighborhoods that have been redlined and historically been been, basically treated in racist and, discriminatory fashion.

All of that is true.

But who is getting the money for these 37 houses, the construction companies and the developers who are supporting his campaign?

There are many other ways to build much more housing.

The 37 houses does not make a dent in the housing crisis.

It might look good on some campaign literature, but it's not helping our city and I would like to see us sprinkle like just put tons of homes out there.

And I mentioned this before on the other episode of Strong Towns.

They're recommending this concept of a starter home, which is a small footprint home that is very cheap to build and you add on to it as your your family and your income grow.

We have to think outside of the box.

And I know we are way off topic and I want to bring us back to public power.

but $500,000 is a drop in the bucket.

We waste that every day.

A local developer, a small scale developer, told me, Mary, I think it would be a better use of $1 million to throw it out of an airplane than to build two houses with it.

Well, the mayor also said, look, the council could fund this tomorrow.

You set aside the money that he doesn't have the power to snap his fingers and make you do what you said you were going to do with, and he said, that's up to council.

Well, that's technically true, but council has allocated money for things before and the mayor has just not entered into a contract.

He's subverted the will of council.

the there was a vote in 2021 right before he became mayor.

That was $13 million to build the city's sustainability Institute, which would have been a reentry program doing urban farming, taking over that tops on Lake Ave that is still vacant, and spinning off worker cooperatives.

These are all things that I think are, amazing for our community.

and he didn't want to spent that way.

So, this, this, this act, this one vote is actually the genesis of the issues the mayor and I have had since.

Since then.

but he didn't he didn't want to pass it because he wanted to be able to control that money.

And so council passed it 6 to 3, and he never gave the, the money and the effort died.

So, sure, we could pass the money and he could we did the vacancy survey is a perfect example.

The vacancy survey is to, to show whether or not there's a vacancy emergency in Rochester, which I'm pretty sure we all know there is.

but right now that is required, to do before you opt into rent control, you need to have 5% vacancy.

or less to qualify.

we authorized the money for that study, and it has been a year, and he has not contracted with someone to do the study.

So he's shown that, yes, council can allocate money, and if he doesn't want it, we're not going to get it.

we're talking about a possible study for a public utility in Rochester.

And I think it would be useful to have our guest also explain a separate part of this, which is you heard the, regarding the audit audit with our Jeannie, that for our Jeannie, that's a nine county company and for a public utility, people might assume.

Well, you just replace our Jeannie.

It's going to be nine counties.

And I think Doctor Wunderlich was saying not necessarily true.

So what would the footprint of a possible public utility be here?

Exactly.

So there is a lot of conflation of these issues, finger pointing obviously between the city and the county and then sometimes drawing in this entire nine country region, no one, is suggesting an entire nine county region, transition.

And in fact, the there is a law in New York State that specifically outlines the process and that gives communities a right to own and control their own energy systems.

Under that law, a city, a town, a village or a county, maximum size a county can go through this process.

and the process has three steps to it.

So first step is a study.

The study, as we've been talking about, tells us how much it would cost and give us a blueprint for that transition.

Everything we need to know, everything we need to set up a new charter, things like that.

Transition plan.

the second step is a referendum.

And we're saying that that study should happen.

Rochester should lead and take the first step with a phase one feasibility study.

These studies are often done in multiple phases.

it can be done for $500,000 or less.

and the second step is a referendum.

So that referendum after we have a study could happen at either the city or the county level.

And in fact, that's why we're saying that Rochester should lead and have a study that covers both the city and the county level.

So they have all of the options moving forward, especially if they want the county to lead.

Eventually, the city needs to take leadership and take the first step.

So the second step, again is a referendum.

And all of us would then go, basically either the city council or the county legislature would have to vote to put it on the ballot.

Then all of us, either in the city or the county, would vote.

If a majority, says that we want to replace our E, then they are actually, forced to sell.

So most people don't know that that we can actually vote our genie out.

And the only thing that's stopping us is local elected officials.

The third step is a buyout.

And that happens in a court process where a judge determines the buyout price and, important things to know.

There is a point of misinformation that happened in our Genie statement.

It has nothing to do with taxes.

we don't pay for that upfront.

It has nothing to do with taxes.

We pay for that buyout over 30 years through the rates that we all collectively pay and other studies across the country, show that, basically across the board, public utilities save money because obviously we're already paying for all of our genies, operating costs.

so they're saying they are investing this money.

You know, it's not we are investing that money.

and then they get guaranteed profits on top of that.

where do we take their profit numbers from their own financial filings and their profits just a few years ago.

We're $89 million a year.

Last year, they were, in 2023, they were $107 million this year.

This past year, they're now $122 million.

so their profits are increasing and we at the moment are in.

And our genie crisis, we continue to be in an energy crisis.

We're also in a shut off crisis.

Shut offs tripled last year over 13,000.

Rochester has the third highest energy burden in the country.

so this these are things that we really can address by a study.

and so that's the process.

I don't know if you want me to address also why the city should lead.

Just make sure I understand this correctly, because if what you're describing happens and there is let's say it's a county referendum.

So that's one out of the nine counties that our genie serves.

So it's not like our genie ceases to exist.

RG and E would have to legally what you're describing cede its Monroe County operations to a new public entity.

And the price of that would be determined by a judge.

Yep.

Paid out over 30 years.

Not a lump sum like a mortgage, like a more so when our genie in their statement says, you know, you're going to bankrupt taxpayers, you're saying the process is quite different than the process is different.

Okay.

and it actually, there's another point of misinformation going around that the that our local governments can't bond for this money.

That's actually also not how the process works.

The new utility would actually issue its own revenue bonds that are not tied to the general municipal bonds of either the city or the county.

And those revenue bonds have very low interest rates.

and that is what pays the upfront cost.

And then we pay that off over rates over 30 years.

Okay.

Anything to add, Council member Lappin.

No, I just I add all of these points, can be refuted.

And they're just trying to make us, I think that this is a terrible idea, you know, to give us the idea that, you know, our constituents don't want this.

This is the single most popular, plan in the city and in the suburbs.

I held a, there were a couple of us that held, forums back in 22, and the response was incredible, 100 over 100 people there, which it's hard to get people out to public meetings and story after story of the disruptions in their lives due to this utility company.

people are ready for this.

It's politically popular for the people who we are supposed to represent.

It is not politically popular with the people who are, politically powerful.

We have to take our only break and then going to get your feedback in.

If you want to call the program at 844295 talk, it's toll free.

84429582552636I call from Rochester 2639994.

You can email the program as some of you have done.

We'll read some of your emails.

On the other side, it's connections at KCI dawg.

If you're watching on the Sky news YouTube channel, you can join the YouTube chat there.

And we'll try to work in a lot of different feedback.

and I want to stress again, RGA did send us a statement.

We read it at the outset of the program.

We'll post it right with our show notes so you can read it in full because they're, they don't have a representative on this program, but they are invited to join us for a future program whenever they like.

I would, would very much like the chance to sit down with them and talk about this.

some of what our genie is saying is that, hey, this was asked and answered a year ago when Monroe County decided not to fund a study, that the city of Rochester has not done its study.

And our genie says they are trying to emerge from a difficult few years around the pandemic and do better for everyone.

A new audit just out this week really says otherwise.

And you ought to read Brian Sharp's reporting on that for Sky news.

The details, what the audit says about that.

We're talking to Rochester City Council member Mary Lucien.

We're talking to Doctor Michi Wunderlich, who is a campaign and policy coordinator for Metro Justice.

And we're coming right back with your feedback on connections.

Coming up in our second hour, a conversation about how the arts might be able to help veterans heal.

There's a program called music for veterans, and it's all about helping veterans get through anxiety, depression, even PTSD.

So how does it work?

We'll talk about it next hour.

There are lots of ways to support outside your old car, truck, RV, or boat can be turned into support for independent journalism and great music.

When you donate a vehicle to work sexy, you're directly helping to fund the programing you love.

For more information, call 1-877-308-2408 or go to WXXI Dawgs Car.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson, Blue in Rochester first.

Hello blue.

Go ahead.

Hello, can you hear me?

Hey, blue.

Go ahead.

Hey, blue seats, Rochester Contemporary Arts center.

we're a small nonprofit, arts organization.

Many of your listeners, you know, our also our visitors and supporters, and, like WXXI, you know, we're members supported.

So we try to be really careful with our budget and all of our expenses.

Our experiences with our Jeannie in recent years are, are representative of a lot of other small businesses are experiencing, the list goes on and on, but I'll just recount one, situation.

We're on auto bill, auto pay, and our Jeannie walks in our front door to read our meter.

December 26th, the day after Christmas, our Jeannie showed up to read our meter.

We were not here.

We were closed.

so in this case, they estimated our, bill.

And that bill was, six x the kilowatt hours of the previous year during the same exact 30 day period.

So, we were overbuild, by $2,000.

the by the time I got to customer service and spent, you know, many hours, probably ten hours trying to get this resolved, they had already taken the $2,000 from our account, if anyone.

I'm sure other, listeners have, experienced this once.

Our journey over bills.

You they hold your money.

you then have the you know, only the only opportunity you have is to, count that towards future bills.

So, that was our experience.

And we, you know, earned off that $2,000 credit.

but, you know, my big questions here, my big concerns are like, what if we didn't have that money in our bank account?

what would have happened then?

Not to mention, is our earning interest off of our $2,000 during that intervening, say, three months that it took to, earn that off of the previous, the subsequent bills?

has anyone looked into whether our Jeannie is earning interest off of the money they take from you on those errant bills?

and I just got to say that, like, you know, so many small businesses, our, our, our our sharing their stories of how our genie is harming them.

we're not alone in this, for sure.

I just have the privilege to speak up on it.

I've heard of a couple businesses, even, you know, thinking about closing down because of our Jeannie.

I gotta say, I'm really disappointed that the Chamber of Commerce is not taking, a more correct position, representing the numerous small businesses on this issue and how we're all being harmed by our.

Jeannie.

yeah.

So those are my comments, and I really would love to hear if our Jeannie's earning interest off of our money.

Blue, I don't have a.

First of all, thank you for the phone call.

I don't know the answer to that.

I don't even know if they know the answer to that.

Looking at this audit, I do want to comment, though, you know, having been married to someone who owned a small business, $2,000 out of your bank account really affects your cash flow.

And there could be things that you purchased or that you needed to purchase that.

Now you can't because you don't have the money.

It's crazy that they make you basically earn pay, you know, earn it back over months and could really kill a small business.

anything you want to add there, Doctor Wunderlich?

Yeah, I mean, it's not even the worst story.

So we hear, you know, Matt had our restaurant, had a shut off for a mistake, $23,000 bill.

That's right.

rock cinema had $11,000 auto deducted from their account also, which.

Wow, basically impeded their ability to, upgrade their roof that they were planning to do.

so it's stopping investments from happening.

our Jeannie is a major driver of poverty in our region.

So over 1000 small businesses were shut off last year, over 12,000 residents.

so and the people of Rochester are really, really struggling.

So it's 29% of homes that are paying between 6 and 25% of their income to this company, but that raises to 44% of Black and Latino households that are paying that much.

And the poorest quarter of low income folks are paying an average of 21% or more of their income.

To our Jeannie, I think that's what makes it particularly disgusting to then blame, blame our statistics that you just read for the reason not to do this study.

Now, we need to do this study so that we can help the people, because we are one of the poorest, cities in the entire country.

Let me get back to your phone calls.

Patty in Rochester next.

Hi, Patty.

Go ahead.

thanks for taking my call.

And I'm calling with a comment.

not a question.

A really.

I'm just blown away by all the information that I've, heard today on the show from your panel.

I've never really understood how public utilities work.

I, supported them in theory, but this makes so much sense.

And, so I'm just very grateful for all the work, Mary Lucien, that you're doing on the city council to keep attention on this matter.

And this show is very valuable.

And once again, oven, I appreciate all that you do for our community.

So thank you, Patty.

Thank you.

I mean, I do want to say, boy, look at that phone line.

I guess we could be here all day.

I know that talking about utilities fires people up.

And as the audit says, there are a lot of people who've had some rough billing experiences.

it's been discussed this hour.

I want to sit down with our Jeannie to.

I mean, I want to sit down with Ivan.

I want to talk to everybody involved here.

they are welcome.

And, so I encourage you to at least read our Jeannie's statement if you want.

we'll post it in our show notes.

They're essentially saying that, that they are doing a lot better in the last couple of years, that they have worked on a lot of customer service issues.

They've added customer service support, that only a small percentage of bills have to get readjusted.

and, and that they're working on it and that they are proud of the work they do, and they don't trust the public model now.

Well, why would they just, you know, that's the person writing that statement would lose their job.

Well, so I likely but I appreciate that, Patty.

Thank you.

and let me just continue right on down the line here.

Andrew, in around two.

Quick.

Next.

Hey, Andrew.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

Okay.

Poor people pay the same rates that all of us pay you.

Social was jokers who couldn't even get your PAB board going.

I just want us to pay the poor people's bills, too.

That's all you guys are.

You just want free stuff.

You want us to pay other people's bills?

It works out for Cuba.

Really?

Well, what the hell are you guys talking about here?

So?

So you don't you don't trust you.

You don't trust a public utility, okay?

And and $6 million to get an office going to take police complaints.

And now you guys think you're going to run RG and E?

No way.

I'm actually really glad that you aired this because that's a really common pushback, that I get from people who likely don't live in the city.

this idea that while we couldn't run the PAB, so how are we going to be able to run, public utility?

So legitimate question.

Okay.

And I'm going to answer it, that I can't help.

Yeah, but but just just to separate out the PAB.

That's that's not even part of this.

That's something that's run by city council.

And I will say, you know, it had some speed bumps.

City council does not create organizations.

Right.

It was a new thing.

We learned a lot and it took a few years, but they were really catching their stride before the Locust Club sued this most recent time and won their judgment, which we are appealing, and hope to be successful.

So that has absolutely nothing to do with, a collaborative board, cooperative.

I'm saying, see where it's about.

So, I mean, government control is really a fear mongering point to deflect from the fact that with our genie, we have absolutely no say or no control over our heat and our electricity and also our climate future or our bills, they can just charge us whatever they want and expect us to pay it.

And even even this, even that audit shows there is no local control.

This, you know, huge corporation is the one that's calling the shots and has no regard for Rochester or its citizens or its workers.

Yes.

So really, the model that we want is to have a locally controlled community.

controlled public utility that's owned by either the city or the county, but is operated independently.

So it continues to be run by its current employees.

There would be a job and benefit guarantee for current employees.

and then it would be overseen by a board that we would elect.

and the that board would appoint new leadership as necessary.

So it would be basically the same utility running the same assets, you know, owning the same assets with the same people.

We would just have the say and how to run it.

But we do need a study to have that model be clear.

And that's what we're asking for.

when this audit is so glaringly clear that our genius lying to us and gaslighting us, for lack of a better word, we are really asking our leaders, when are you going to stand up and act?

And will you take our Jeannie at your word in the face of irrefutable evidence?

Andrew is simply saying he does not trust government to run complicated entities and to do it well and to do it efficiently.

Yeah.

So we're saying the model that we want, that it's done in larger cities across the country is not actually the the department of the city or the county running the utility company.

It is owned by the city or the county, but it's run by the same people who currently run it, and it's run independently by an elected board.

I think this is actually a really good comparison now that you say that.

Right.

so this is no more socialist than the post office or public schools.

The city actually owns all the public school buildings.

We approve.

We approve their budget, even though it's symbolic.

We give them the funding and they run it.

The city does not run the public school.

This sounds like it would be very similar.

I just think Andrew would say the post office is a good example of something he does not think is run well.

He would say Fedex is run better.

So I, I don't have enough information about the post office to be able to say anything about that other than the federal government is been on attack.

Yeah.

So we can look at Fairport, for example, and how fiercely people in Fairport defend their utility.

If airports rates are literally 70% cheaper than our genies, people live there locally.

you know, to repair lines, right when something happens.

So the reliability is incredible.

You can call someone directly on the phone whose number you have and they will call you back.

and so if we're looking for examples, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District or Smud is a great example of the opportunities a public utility brings, for community control.

So it's one of the ten largest public owned utilities in the United States.

As a 77 member elected board, each member represents a ward of the city.

The board establishes policies and values, sets long term direction, monitors performance, and hires and fires a general manager.

So there is extensive provisions for transparency and participation in the board meetings, including.

Be able to make presentations to the board with two weeks notice.

There's public workshops, public hearings, public annual reporting on mental topics.

the utilities also used referenda to take strategic questions directly to ratepayers.

It also prefers local businesses and competitive bidding, has an advisory board for minority businesses, invests in educating its users on energy issues, innovative energy efficiency programs, and has specialized services and rates for seniors and low income customers.

So that's just one example.

There's examples all over the country of public utilities that are really leading the way.

And so many things in, you know, yes, avoiding shutoffs for our most vulnerable residents and, you know, having a transition to fully renewable.

There's seven utilities in the country that are fully renewable and they're all public.

That makes sense.

You did bring up a point about jobs.

So, since our Jeannie was sold to Iberdrola, they have shipped hundreds of jobs that used to be Rochester out to other parts of the state in the region.

So, you know, having workers that you can call to repair your line, that would be something that we don't have here.

yeah.

All right.

So let me just keep working through your feedback.

Kevin wants to know.

He says, I'm curious about what the proponents of a public utility believe it would save the average ratepayer using 600kW of energy per month on a monthly basis.

So on average, public utilities save about 13%.

but up to, like Fairport, which is 70%.

So if we look at recent studies in San Diego, Decorah, Pueblo, Long Island, Maine, Winter Park, and most recently Tucson, Arizona, they all found that public utilities would result in significant cost savings, from the very beginning and increasingly over time, even after factoring the cost of the, buying the grid to the rates.

So the Tucson one, I just looked at, it's brand new.

It says that, you know, by year 16 it would save between 700 and $1000 a year per household.

you know, but, a lot of these are around, you know, between 10 and 30% of your current bill.

and that's what we see in practice.

And Winter Park, Florida, and missing in New York, they're 30% cheaper than the utilities that they separated from.

All right.

Lisa, next.

the line.

Go ahead, Lisa.

hello?

yeah, I just, you know, I, I'm really glad for the show, and I'm glad that I'm hearing Mary speak more this time.

I don't understand why this seems so radical.

I grew up near Lansing, Michigan, and had a public utility since forever.

Big manufacturing town, Oldsmobile motor wheel GM was there.

Michigan State University and the unions run with union represented help.

The study is necessary in order to fight the inevitable lawsuit that will come when the city tries to break away and make it a public utility.

So to block this study means you're really not serious about solving poverty in the county, in the city.

And I wonder, can your program even find out which city and county officials met with our G and E last month?

I don't know offhand.

Council Member Lipton, you these city officials or county officials, I don't know when the day that Hohman came to town, there was.

Oh, hang on, I got a little alarm going off here.

When Homan came to town, there was a big rally, by Metro Justice, I understand.

And there was a big meeting.

And the Metro Justice people tried going in.

They said they wanted to.

That since there were other city and county officials there.

Can Stanley Martin, Councilwoman Stanley Martin attend?

And the PR people came out and said, well, she didn't say that she wanted to come.

So no, she would have had to have pre-registered.

Well, I would like to know which city and county officials met with some.

Yeah.

Lisa, offhand, I, I don't know about that.

I, I guess we can look into that.

I know a few.

I did see, Michael Olson going in.

but that was a closed door meeting that our Jeannie invited all area, representatives, and specifically, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Empire Development Corporation.

So basically, only elected officials and organizations that specifically exist to funnel taxpayer money to corporations, which we see all the time.

Again, we are, you know, paying for all of our costs.

And then there's additional corporate welfare taxpayer money going to our Jeannie, for example, and the Henrietta substation that we're paying for on top of it.

I would I would like to get to the question of why why, shouldn't why should the city, act when the county is not yet?

Well, sure.

And maybe that's a good place to wrap it up here, because we've had some questions about, hey, couldn't council just act on this?

Why?

Why wait for either the mayor's office or why not just move forward?

I think Councilmember Loopy, and try to answer that by saying, you feel like you've tried to act on this.

No, you need to.

The money's been allocated.

I gave two examples of when council has allocated money and the mayor hasn't acted on it, and we still need a majority of council to vote for this study, which we do not yet have.

You don't have a majority on council?

No.

Do you know how many votes you have on council for this?

I know at least three.

four.

Yeah.

So Metro Justice recently put out a report card asking, all, current representatives at the city level and candidates, where they stood on city leadership.

and we were really surprised that while the Progressive Bloc all supported it and almost all challengers in the city primary, the mayor, the council president Melendez, Mitch Gruber, Bridget Monroe, Michael Patterson, and Shay Harris would not commit.

and so those are the five votes that we need, and we need the mayor's leadership as well.

and, you know, I agree it would be ideal if the county lead.

But the truth is that we need to act from the reality of the situation that we're in.

and the county has abandoned city residents.

but that doesn't mean that city representatives have to.

They can use the money that they've already reserved, for a public utility study and get the ball rolling on a phase one studying, get real answers about feasibility that they continually bring up.

and if we ultimately want the county to act, the city needs to have a spine and take the first step.

Otherwise, it's just using the inaction of the county as an excuse.

And it's one that's actually hurting, city constituents the most also.

So the fact that we've had to fight for this really points out that that there's more in play here.

There's never this much hand-wringing around something that doesn't involve, this type of power structure.

20s final thoughts from you, Council member.

We need a public utility.

We need it yesterday.

And I'm calling on my colleagues to pass the funding that we've already set aside from last year's budget.

Okay.

well, that is an update.

And again, I want to invite listeners to read Brian Sharp's reporting on Sky news this week on the new audit that has come out regarding Nyseg and RGA.

Our Jeannie's invited on this program.

I hope we can make that work to talk about those issues from the audit, from the audit and some of the criticism you heard today.

Thank you both for being here.

Thank you for making the time.

We appreciate you being here.

Council Member Mary Looping and Doctor Michi Wunderlich from Metro Justice.

More connections coming up in just a moment.

This program is a production of Sky Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station, its staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience, any rebroadcast or use in another medium, without express written consent of Sky is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the connections link at WXXI news.org.