Camacho: Electricity is not a luxury in the CNMI

by Bruce Camacho

I want to make clear that I am speaking in my personal capacity and not on behalf of the Commonwealth Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)

My decision to oppose increasing the Fuel Adjustment Charge cap from 24.5 cents per kWh to 44 cents per kWh was rooted in my belief that utility rates must remain just, reasonable, transparent, and mindful of the real-life impact on our people. I am also deeply concerned that before customers have even received the full impact of the latest billing increases, CUC is now petitioning for an increase up to 60 cents per kWh.

As a 13-year Army veteran, I have been taught throughout my service to make decisions grounded in integrity, accountability, ethics, and responsibility to the people we serve. Those values continue to guide me today. I believe public officials have a duty to ask difficult questions, demand transparency, and ensure decisions are made in the best interest of the community, especially when those decisions directly affect the financial wellbeing of our people.

I also want to clear the air that I am not running for political office, nor am I making decisions based on popularity or politics. My position on this issue is based solely on what I believe is the right and responsible direction forward for ratepayers.

Electricity is not a luxury in the CNMI. It is a necessity for families, seniors, small businesses, and working households already struggling with inflation and the rising cost of living. In an island community where utility costs affect nearly every aspect of daily life, increases of this magnitude can create serious financial hardship for our people.

At the same time, I also recognize the very serious financial challenges facing CUC, especially in the aftermath of typhoon recovery efforts and ongoing operational demands. As discussed during CUC’s special board meeting, if the concerns raised by CFO Mrs Betty Terlaje Mr Allen Perez and Mr. Simon Sanchez are accurate, the financial condition of the utility may be more severe than many realize.

For that reason, I support the CUC Board’s suggestion to petition Judge Carter for authorization to utilize certain restricted funds for typhoon-related expenses, but only under the condition that there are guaranteed FEMA reimbursements that would restore those funds back to the purposes originally intended under the stipulated orders (just not security deposits). In my view, this could provide temporary financial relief while helping preserve essential utility operations without immediately placing the full burden onto ratepayers. By unanimous vote, the CPUC also voted in favor to allow CUC to tap into the Genset Reserve account. Money in which is intended to phase out the reliance on Agrekko WITH the condition of being reimbursed back from fema.

As part of our due diligence, our former chairman & then-commissioner Jim Sirok requested supporting documents related to fuel procurement, agreements, and pricing as it pertained to the 44 cents petition. Many of the documents provided were heavily redacted, limiting my ability to independently review information directly tied to the costs being passed on to ratepayers. In my opinion, when the public is being asked to shoulder substantial increases in utility costs, transparency should not be limited.

I understand the sensitivity in these documents but the CPUC should be allowed to see Mobil’s invoices. I am no legal expert but CPUC should be consulted before engaging with any ‘Confidential Agreements’ as it relates to ratepayers. With this said, I intend to do a follow up on our former chairman’s financial information request to the CUC.

For several reasons, I agree there should be a comprehensive financial and desk audit of CUC and its related procurement and fuel practices. However, I also recognize the current financial pressures facing CUC. Because of these realities, I believe the government should assist in funding these audits, PREFERABLY through available federal grants or other external funding opportunities, so the financial burden DOES NOT further strain ratepayers or interfere with critical recovery priorities. I intend to follow through with the most recent house resolution to call for an audit but I also plea for the assistance to fund this obligation so it doesn’t hamper with CUC’s recovery operational needs.

I also believe any audit should be conducted by a reputable and qualified energy industry firm with the expertise necessary to independently review fuel procurement, operational efficiencies, contracting practices, and overall financial management.

In addition, I believe the next step forward should involve collaboration between all relevant stakeholders. I recommend a meeting between the Governor and his financial team, the Congressional Delegate, CUC & their financial team and the CPUC to explore alternatives to current fuel purchasing practices and identify solutions that can reduce both short & long-term costs for ratepayers while maintaining reliable utility service. I believe our community deserves a unified effort focused not only on immediate financial survival, but also on sustainable and affordable energy solutions for the future.

Let me be clear, my vote was not against reliable power generation or against the hardworking employees of CUC. It was a vote for responsible oversight, fairness, transparency, and protecting consumers from sudden and severe financial burdens without sufficient review and accountability.

Reasonable and perhaps much smarter people may disagree, and I respect my fellow commissioners and the difficult decisions before us. However, I could not in good conscience support raising the cap under these circumstances without stronger assurances that every possible safeguard for the public has been fully examined. I am no financial wizard but like I said in the meeting, I feel we are greatly underestimating the default rate (bad debt) rate of the calculation..Keep in mind, our ratepayers haven’t yet felt the 45 cents increase and they are being told of the possibility of seeing 60 cents (Which of course excludes the base rates and service fee).

I remain committed to supporting long-term solutions that strengthen our utility infrastructure while also protecting the people of the Commonwealth from unsustainable utility costs.