I’m writing in response to a letter in my morning paper (“Vote yes on Question 3 for cheaper, more reliable power,” Oct. 18). The author’s assertions about Pine Tree Power are not based in fact. Maine’s office of the public advocate (OPA), has stated, “It is not possible to predict with certainty whether reliability would improve or deteriorate following the acquisition. The priorities of low-cost and reliability are often in tension.”
Also in the OPA’s fact sheet is a reference to an analysis by LEI, a firm hired by the Maine Public Utilities Commission, which states that the proposal “…was likely to raise rates in the short-term due to the cost of financing the acquisition.” It’s simple math, you can’t borrow upwards of $13 billion (the interest alone at 5% would be over half a billion dollars a year) and promise reduced rates.
Unfortunately, what we continue to see from Pine Tree Power is promises not backed up by facts. Vote no on Question 3.
Peter Haraden
Dresden
Send questions/comments to the editors.
