@Normal:$21 million riddle

I’m finding very confusing the debate about Green Mountain Power repaying $21 million.

The first thing I don’t understand is why we’re having the debate. GMP accepted money on the understanding they would repay it when certain conditions were met. Those conditions are being met, so the money needs to be repaid. That’s that. The second thing I don’t understand is why Gaz Metro isn’t being laughed off the planet for their proposal on how to return the money. They want to send their customers a bill for the money they’re giving back to them.

Wish I could do that with my mortgage: “I’ll pay back the loan, so long as the bank gives me the money to pay it.” The third thing I don’t understand is all the talk about why the Legislature shouldn’t get involved in “an open regulatory docket.” The provision of electricity is clearly of public concern. When the public has such concerns, their remedy is their representatives: the Legislature. Given that Gaz Metro has made it clear they do not intend to honor the agreement, it is no wonder people want action.

If it isn’t the right time to intervene when the “docket is open,” when is? After the deal is done? I don’t think so. Finally, I’m wondering if all this fuss about what should be a closed issue is to keep people from looking at the real issue: do we want this deal or not? It is supposed to save money, but it’s going to put the state at the mercy of a huge corporation, which could cause many and expensive problems. Gaz Metro’s efforts to get around their obligation to ratepayers is a warning of things to come. They want to bully their way out of paying on monies promised even before they own GMP.

If we give them control of the majority of power in the state, they are going to control a lot of power in the state. And I don’t mean electricity. Brian Wightman Barre