kavips said…
This (HCR50 which recommends that the Public Service deny any request by Delmarva Power to recover from or pass-through to its ratepayers the costs it has incurred opposing the Power Purchase Agreement negotiated between Delmarva Power and Bluewater Wind) was tabled. Who has the vote count?
John Kowalko responds:
Kavips,
I had no choice but to table the Resolution since it wouldn’t have gotten the votes out of committee.
There was a critical absentee and some language changes suggested and ( most importantly, I feel) failure to invite the Public Service Commission.
I agree wholeheartedly with the PSC being present next time so that they might shed some light on the fact that the Delmarva lobbyist (Farley) expressed total confidence in their (the PSC’s) decisions and ability to fairly determine qualifying expenditures yet his client continues to wage and abet a campaign which contradicts that thought.
Farley (at the hearing) and Delmarva and its agents have consistently resisted the fact that the PSC has responsibly and “honestly” met its responsibilities in crafting an RFP process as mandated by HB 6 resulting in the December 18, 2007 Power Purchase Agreement. Since then, Delmarva (Farley and other “agents”) have objected to, worked against, and misrepresented to the ratepayers (at the ratepayers expense) the reality and truth of cost comparisons which clearly favor the BWW project. Mr.Farley, at Representative Thornburgs behest, testified at the hearing and soon strayed off point (of the resolution) and tried to debate the Delmarva/BWW proposal from his biased point of view while referring to me as the “gentleman from Newark, who is obviously a BWW supporter”. I quickly asked the chair to correct this obviously hostile witness and refer to me as “the Repesentative from Newark” with all due respect. The point being that Mr. Farley was never enjoined (by the chair) from straying significantly off-topic with a Delmarva promo while Tom Noyes (my invitee) was interrupted and told by the chair that he should “wrap it up”. Mr. Noyes stayed on point and concluded but the bias was exposed. Representatives Hocker, Thornburg and Booth were the most vocal participants of the committee and Representative Schwartzkopf (co-sponsor of the resolution) was eloquent in his attempt to keep the discussion in perspective. I offered the table and will be back with some changes and, hopefully, a PSC rep. next time and an open-mindedness for an objective discussion specific to the resolution.
John Kowalko