NTUA’s rate hike hearing not a total bashfest

By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — Considering the magnitude of Navajo Tribal Utility Authority’s proposed 23.7 percent hike in electric rates, NTUA didn’t get beaten up too badly at Friday’s public hearing.

Customers were sympathetic to NTUA’s argument that it has not raised electric rates in 15 years and that the price of goods and services has gone up. To drive the point home, NTUA pointed to a few price increases nearly everyone could identify with.

In 1992, a sack of Bluebird Flour — a staple in most Navajo homes — cost $2.25. With inflation, in 2007, that same bag of flour now costs around $5.56, an increase of 147 percent. In 1992, a gallon of gasoline cost $1.13; in 2007, as much as $3.49, for an increase of 209 percent.

Out of every dollar the utility takes in, 52 cents goes out to pay NTUA’s own electric bill for the power it purchases and the cost of transmission. Another 28 cents goes for operations and maintenance, 16 cents toward capital improvements and 4 cents to repay loans acquired over the last 20 years.

That is NTUA’s reality. Its customers, however, live in a different world. For example, Jefferson Lee of St. Michael’s Housing area, told the board, “We’re on fixed incomes. We’re just barely making it.

“When we get behind, NTUA don’t give us a chance. Maybe a few days, here comes a past-due notice. In the next few days, our lights are off. Sometimes during the winter, you know, we sit in the dark in a cold room.”

Lee also took issue with NTUA’s suggestion that the average residential customer uses 500 kilowatt hours per month and likely will see an 18.8 percent increase of $6.75 in their bills.

“I don’t think so. The 500 kilowatt is nothing,” he said. “We use more than that. I pay pretty close to $300 and some dollars a month, and I’m on a fixed income. And you’re asking us to pitch in some more money!”

Nelson Becenti, a sheepherder, said he had a heart attack and underwent surgery in Albuquerque. “I can’t work anymore. I can’t afford it, the electricity.”

Julie Watchman complained that when NTUA customers do go to make their utility payments at the first of the month, often there is no cashier up front to take the money.

Navajo Nation Council Speaker Lawrence Morgan said he appreciated that NTUA democratically set meetings and solicited comments from its customers on water and electric rate hikes. “But beyond that, we shouldn’t only talk about the rise in fee.”

Morgan suggested NTUA also think of a way to reward customers – “perhaps during Christmas.”

“Tell us also how you’re going to improve the quality of services under electrification. Explain that to us so we won’t be able to have conflict in paying such bills.”

Patrick Nelson, 58, took time off from work to make comments. Nelson said he has attended a number of public hearings in his lifetime, largely Bureau of Indian Affairs meetings. “I don’t want this to be just another hearing that will go to deaf ears,” he said.

“All they do is they go through the protocol, just to put it on record that they have heard from the people and solicited comments. In the end, they go through with what they already decided two or three years ago down the road, not what they hear at the present time. Some of these decisions that we’re talking about, they’re probably already made. It’s just a protocol. That’s the way I look at it,” he said.

“Yes, there is an upgrade that’s needed. We understand it. Yes, we believe in replacement. We understand it. But some of these things are already done. They’re not going to replace everything at one time. If they have good management, they’re going to phase it in over time.”

He suggested NTUA drop the proposed 18 percent rate down to 16 percent for residents.

Nelson, who lives in the Joint Use Area of Black Mesa, also had a complaint. “You guys here are so lucky because you have benefited from the water, gasoline, electrical power, roads, road improvements. Out there, we’re still about 30 to 50 years behind in development.”

He said that while NTUA is trying to accommodate people that already have these conveniences, and upgrade them, “in reality over there, we have nothing.”

“What’s your motto? ‘Working together to build a brighter future.’ Is that what it means – denying services to these people for 30 to 50 years? To me, you’re lying. You’re also saying in here that the increase will also benefit the community. We’re still part of the community, but we’re not getting any services.”

Faron Morgan said he would agree to an immediate cost increase of 7 percent, but not the 23 percent NTUA is asking. “I think NTUA is trying to say, ‘We need a helping hand.’ As a customer I would say implement 7 percent and let council contribute a certain portion, like $2 million or $3 million.”

Council Delegate Leonard Tsosie said he was listening to Julie Watchman when she said NTUA needs a cashier up front on the first week of the month. “That’s customer relations in my mind.”

He said NTUA should offer extended hours and even have a cup of coffee ready to welcome customers. “Say, ‘Let me help you.’ Those are the customer relations you need to engage in, rather than having a person testify at your rate hearing that you have nobody up front to accept the money. That doesn’t look good on NTUA,” Tsosie said.

He also stressed that the impact to customers on fixed incomes is greater than to working families. “Mrs. Watchman had a good solution, I believe. What she was proposing was an incremental increase. … That seems to be more amenable to what the customers are asking.”

Tsosie said that after doing the math on the proposal and reducing it to per kilowatt of use, “it appears that lower income families are subsidizing the big users,” but added that an NTUA employee told him he just didn’t understand.

Delegate Young Jeff Tom told the NTUA board he hoped they would take into consideration all the comments that were presented to them. “I think you need to stand by your mission statement,” he said.

The NTUA management board will announce its decision within 10 days.