NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — Local officials say the proposed rate hike by Berkshire Gas could cost the city more than $40,000 extra just in heating its three schools, and be a burden to its residents, many of whom already rely on fuel assistance. 

 

"This proposed rate hike would have a major impact on our residents, our government and our businesses," Councilor Lillian Zavastky read from a letter to be submitted to the state Department of Public Utilities. "Please consider the real human cost this would have on residents who already depend on benefits to make ends meet."

 

The City Council on Tuesday unanimously endorsed the letter [published below] written by the Public Services Committee, joining officials from Greenfield and Pittsfield, as well as the Berkshire delegation, attorney general and governor in opposing the increase. 

 

The utility is asking the DPU for a base distribution increase to generate some $22.2 million in additional revenue because it says the current rates don't cover the annual operating costs for gas distribution service or for capital expenditures.

 

This will result in about a 22 percent increase expected to cost the average consumer who heats their home with natural gas another $54 a month. 

 

The three members of the Public Services Committee testified against the increase at a public hearing held earlier this month in Pittsfield.

 

"I myself got up and spoke and talked about the effects that it would have on our population and our school district," said Councilor Marie McCarron. "I was listening to a lot of people talk about how it affects them personally. ... [one woman] doesn't know how she's going to make ends meet because of the utility. Just listening to just regular people trying to make ends meet, was heartbreaking in itself."

 

Councilor Peter Breen, chair of the committee, noted that he's on a fixed income as a retiree, and his cost-of-living increase was $32 — the rate increase will be nearly twice that. 

 

His biggest concern was that Berkshire Gas is no longer a local company, it's now a subsidiary of energy giant Iberdrola Group that is headquartered in Spain and took in $1.1 billion in profits last year. 

 

"So our only recourse is to go to the Public Utilities Commission and say, 'we cannot afford this,'" he said. "We're 4,000 miles away from where the cash is going. Any support that we could get would be greatly appreciated."

 

Zavastky said some of her readings, and hearing from the Berkshire delegation, was that some of the capital spending wasn't "necessary or prudent," but rather "shooting for the moon" with costly replacements over judicious repairs. 

 

Councilor Bryan Sapienza said he could see more than a 3 or 4 percent increase to keep pace with costs. 

 

"We are a poor community, and there's no there's no doubt we don't have resources that a lot of the larger, more successful communities do and and 20 percent, 18 percent would be devastating, in my opinion," he said. "If we can keep it to 3 or 4 percent, even a level of 5 or 6 percent may mean the difference between somebody going without a meal or going without certain other necessities to be able to stay warm. And as we all know, it's cold nine months out of the year in this area." 

 

Breen said it was a smart move by President Ashley Shade to fold utilities into the Public Services Committee's purview. The committee held two workshops, testified at the hearing and developed the letter. Shade said she was glad they'd taken those actions and provided the letter to start the conversation. 

 

"This is so important for us to talk about because this affects everybody. It affects our businesses. It affects our residents, it affects our schools. It affects everything," she said. "The Department of Public Utilities can absolutely tell them no, and the Department of Public Utilities should absolutely tell them no, because this is not a proposal to raise raise money for an infrastructure project. 

 

"This is specifically a proposal to raise revenue. That means profits."

 

Councilor Lisa Blackmer asked it be clarified that the council as a body was affirming the letter and signing it. Breen said they would modify the letter and extend it to members to put their names on it. 

 

The motion passed unanimously with the intent to submit the letter prior to the Feb. 27 deadline. Shade noted that the councilors could file letters of their own, as she had. Her letter is also posted as a letter to the editor. 

 

All comments and the utilities' filings can be found here.