NYSEG, Con Ed rate increases spark pushback

By JEFF MORRIS

Rising electric rates, both actual and proposed, continue to raise the ire of people in northern Westchester and their representatives in Albany.

Back on Feb. 14, state Sen. Shelley Mayer, D-SD37, was joined by over 100 Westchester residents at a “No Love for Con Ed” press conference and rally in White Plains. They were there to call out Con Ed and the New York Public Service Commission for unaffordable delivery rates, and to urge rejection of Con Ed’s rate application for another major rate hike. Mayer and the attendees demanded changes to the way rates are approved and for the PSC to put ratepayers first when setting rates. 

Con Ed’s last rate hike, in 2023, was for a $457.5 million electric rate increase over three years. On Jan. 31, Con Ed filed another $2 billion request to increase rates. If approved, the proposal would increase electric bills by an average of 11.4% and gas bills by 13.3% starting in 2026. 

Con Ed supplies electricity to Mount Kisco and a small portion of Bedford. Electricity for the rest of Bedford, Lewisboro and Pound Ridge is supplied by NYSEG, and on June 30, NYSEG filed its own rate increase proposal with the PSC. The utility proposes to increase delivery rates 35% for electricity customers and 39.4% for natural gas customers. If approved, the new rates would take effect on May 1, 2026.

That immediately spurred a response from state Assemblymember Chris Burdick, D-AD93, who called the request for what he said was a 23.7% rate hike on residential customers’ average monthly electric bills “shocking” and “unconscionable,” and called upon the PSC to “reject it in its entirety.”

“At a time when New Yorkers are struggling to make ends meet,” Burdick said, “NYSEG’s request to hike its delivery rates demonstrates its complete disconnect from the plight of ratepayers.” 

Burdick said constituents, who are already overburdened and reeling from NYSEG’s existing rates, frequently contact him about the sharp increases in their bills.

“Senior citizens are being forced to choose between paying their rent and paying their utilities,” he said. “In contrast to the breathtaking proposed increases, seniors on Social Security received a meager 1.5% cost-of-living increase in their monthly payment.”

Burdick had already become an “intervenor” — an interested party with the ability to obtain detailed filings, submit questions, evidence and testimony, and participate in confidential settlement discussions — in the Con Ed case, and has also become one in the NYSEG case.

While Con Ed’s rate increase is the subject of a lawsuit brought by the county and multiple municipalities, NYSEG’s request is ongoing in the public comment period before the PSC. On July 23, state Sen. Pete Harckham, D-SD40, urged residents to join him in opposing the proposed rate hikes during that period.

“I am strongly opposed to these outrageous rate increases that come at a time when families throughout Westchester, Putnam and Rockland counties are struggling to make ends meet,” Harckham said. “I urge NYSEG customers to submit their written comments in opposition to the rate hikes. The PSC needs to hear our voices loud and clear, speaking out against a serious financial burden for working families, seniors and the poor.”

Harckham noted that the rate hike proposals come after a winter in which NYSEG customers were slammed with huge utility bills, some exceeding the thousand-dollar mark. Harckham said his offices in Peekskill and Albany were jammed with telephone calls and emails from residents who could not afford to pay such bills. He said that NYSEG has also requested a 10% rate of return on equity as part of its proposal. 

“Utilities are the only part of our economy where monopoly is guaranteed a rate of return,” he said. “This has got to stop. Shareholders have to feel some of the pain as well.” 

The rate increase, if approved, Harckham said, would generate an expected total of $557.4 billion in additional annual revenues that the company has said will mostly go to replacing aging equipment and infrastructure.

“It is unacceptable to place the expense of underinvestment solely on the backs of those who can least afford it,” Harckham said.

That echoed comments made by Burdick in March, when he said in response to the utilities stating that a lot of these rates are for hardening their existing infrastructure, “It’s time for the shareholders to make these investments; it can’t all be on the backs of the ratepayers. People are really suffering.”

Mayer has encouraged constituents to call the governor’s office at 518-474-8390 and to file a complaint with the PSC at dps.ny.gov or by calling 800-342-3377. 

Harckham said comments on the NYSEG increase can be submitted to the PSC by visiting the agency’s website, clicking on the “post comments” link and entering 25-E-0375 for electric and 25-G-0378 for gas in the search box.

Burdick urged constituents whose electricity or gas is delivered by NYSEG and who have not already done so, to complete an online utility feedback form at bit.ly/UtilityFeedback2025, which has been created for residents of the 92nd, 93rd, and 95th Assembly Districts.

“This feedback will be incorporated into the testimony I submit in the NYSEG rate cases,” he said.