Anti-ROFR Group Misses the Mark
MADISON — A recent press release from an out of state, anti-Wisconsin utility group paints a deeply distorted picture of the costs, benefits and economic importance of Wisconsin’s transmission grid.
First, it compares short-term increases in transmission rates against the CPI, an incredibly misleading move. Transmission infrastructure is a capital-intensive investment with long-term benefits, unlike consumer goods tracked by CPI.
The release also ignores the benefits of investing in grid modernization. These critical upgrades support jobs, economic expansion and reliability – a fundamental element of the regulatory compact by which Wisconsin’s utilities are bound. Utilities, by law, are required to provide energy to meet their customers’ needs. The growth in infrastructure is a direct reflection of customer demand and economic growth.
Next, the coalition’s release parrots the repeatedly disproven canard that Wisconsin transmission projects lack competition, yet the Wisconsin ROFR bills specifically require competitively bid engineering, labor & materials.
Wisconsin utilities support ROFR for a simple policy reason– it will save Wisconsin ratepayers on future energy bills. It also preserves the successful structure that the Wisconsin Legislature enacted over 25 years ago that led to a streamlined and more reliable transmission system.
Its passage will enable Wisconsin’s existing transmission providers to spread out more of their costs associated with new transmission lines among the states that benefit from the construction of the transmission lines. Developers without existing Wisconsin customers cannot spread costs across the region at the same scale that Wisconsin utilities can. ROFR laws, far from being anti-competitive, reduce project risk, streamline execution, and ensure accountability by relying on experienced incumbents.
The coalition uses misleading data to support their flawed claims. They ignore that rising transmission costs stem from numerous factors, including fuel volatility, decarbonization mandates, and infrastructure upgrades. Blaming transmission alone oversimplifies the issue and is grossly misleading.
Their claim on Wisconsin’s rates also badly misses the mark. Rates vary based on generation mix, geography, and investment levels. Wisconsin’s rates reflect its commitment to reliability and a diverse generation mix, not just transmission costs.
If this group was interested in the facts, they would note that average customer bills, what people actually pay, are significantly below the regional and national averages, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Clearly, passage of ROFR would lead to lower costs for ratepayers and greater energy security tomorrow.
