⚡ IS IT TIME TO EXPLORE PUBLIC POWER IN THURSTON COUNTY? ⚡
A PUD — for the people, by the people, accountable to the people.
Before PSE customers are asked to pay even more, I think we should ask a simple question:
Would we be better off with a publicly owned electric utility?
Here are some numbers worth knowing.
According to Washington Attorney General Nick Brown’s office:
🔴 PSE electric rates nearly doubled between 2020 and 2025.
💰 PSE paid shareholders $175.9 million in dividends in 2024 and another $62.9 million in 2025.
💰 PSE’s CEO received $6.4 million in total compensation in 2024.
📈 PSE is seeking to increase its authorized return on equity from 9.9% to 10.8%.
💵 The Attorney General argues customers could save as much as $695 million in 2027 under the state’s alternative recommendations.
The Attorney General’s office also says approximately 12% of customers’ electric bills goes toward investor payments and returns.
According to the Attorney General, PSE’s overall proposal would collect approximately $3.396 BILLION more from customers over three years.
SO WHERE HAS THE MONEY WE’VE ALREADY PAID BEEN GOING?
We’ve paid our electric bills year after year.
If billions more are now needed for infrastructure, reliability, modernization and growing demand, customers deserve a transparent accounting.
Were previous investments sufficient?
Were necessary improvements delayed?
Could better long-term planning have reduced some of today’s costs?
I don’t claim to know those answers. I think we deserve to find out.
PSE says it needs more than $3.2 billion in electric and natural-gas system investment over the next three years, with roughly 70% going toward the electric system. PSE says those investments are needed for reliability, growing demand, aging infrastructure, severe-weather and wildfire resilience, and Washington’s clean-energy requirements.
Those are real costs that should be considered.
But customers also deserve to know whether a different ownership model could provide the same reliable service at a lower long-term cost.
And unlike many other services, most of us can’t simply choose another electric company.
⚡ HERE’S WHAT REALLY GOT MY ATTENTION: THURSTON COUNTY HAS ALREADY STUDIED THIS.
In 2012, Thurston PUD commissioned an electric utility business assessment.
One scenario examined acquiring PSE electric facilities in a limited area along the I-5/Highway 101 corridor, primarily from Tumwater north toward the Port of Olympia.
That study projected approximately $215.7 million in cumulative savings over 10 years for that particular scenario.
Those numbers are now more than a decade old, and the study was not a countywide takeover analysis.
So we should not assume those savings would exist today.
But it tells us something important:
THIS IDEA HAS BEEN STUDIED BEFORE — AND IT DESERVES TO BE STUDIED AGAIN USING TODAY’S NUMBERS.
Instead of starting from scratch, let’s update the feasibility analysis.
Let’s answer:
• What would PSE’s Thurston County electric infrastructure be worth today?
• What would it cost to acquire and separate the system?
• How much would financing cost?
• What wholesale power would be available to a public utility?
• What would our monthly bills actually be?
• What would rates look like over 10, 20 and 30 years?
• How would those costs compare with staying with PSE?
• Could public ownership provide reliable electricity at a lower long-term cost?
A PUD DOES NOT MEAN FREE ELECTRICITY.
We would still have to pay for electricity, employees, maintenance, repairs, upgrades, substations, transformers, transmission and other infrastructure.
Buying or otherwise acquiring PSE’s local system could also be very expensive.
That’s exactly why we need current numbers rather than assumptions from either side.
If an updated independent study shows staying with PSE makes more financial sense, let the public see the numbers.
If it shows public ownership could provide reliable electricity for less over the long term, let the public see those numbers too.
⚡ FOR THE PEOPLE. BY THE PEOPLE. ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE.
I’m not asking people to assume a PUD is automatically better or cheaper.
I’m asking Thurston County to update the study, put the numbers on the table, and let the public make an informed decision.
We studied this in 2012.
A lot has changed since then.
Maybe it’s time to run the numbers again.
👇 If you think Thurston County should update the public-power feasibility study, share this so more people can join the conversation.
SOURCES/CREDIT: Washington State Attorney General’s Office, July 30, 2026; Puget Sound Energy 2026 General Rate Case; Thurston Public Utility District Electric Utility Business Assessment, 2012.
The financial figures concerning dividends, executive compensation, investor payments and potential customer savings above are attributed to the Washington Attorney General’s Office. PSE disputes aspects of the state’s analysis and says its proposed increases are necessary to fund infrastructure, reliability, growing demand and clean-energy requirements. The 2012 Thurston PUD figures are historical projections for a limited service-area scenario and should not be treated as estimates of what a countywide electric PUD would cost or save today.