Recent public sentiment has compelled Con Edison to significantly revise its utility rate increase proposals. After receiving an unprecedented 20,000 comments, the company and the Public Service Commission (PSC) have amended their gas and electricity rate requests.
Reduced Rate Hike Proposals
Con Edison’s request for additional gas revenue has been reduced by approximately 60%, while electricity rates saw a decrease of about 34%. This agreement, termed a Joint Proposal, still requires full PSC approval before implementation.
New Rate Increases
Under the new plan, electricity rates will rise by:
- 3.5% in 2026
- 3.2% in 2027
- 3.1% in 2028
This adjustment results in a projected monthly increase of around $4 for New York City households in the first year.
For gas rates, the following increases are expected:
- 4.4% in 2026
- 5.7% in 2027
- 5.6% in 2028
Consequently, gas bills will increase by an average of $10.67 next year, followed by $14.38 in 2027, and $15.08 in 2028.
Historical Context of Rate Requests
Originally, Con Edison proposed a more drastic one-time increase aimed at addressing financial needs. This proposal included a 13% increase in gas bills, translating to an average of about $46.42 more per month, and a 19% hike in electricity costs, adding roughly $26.60 monthly.
Community Response
The proposed rate hikes faced strong opposition, particularly from the Westchester Municipal Consortium (WMC), which consists of 40 municipalities. Joel Dichter, the consortium’s counsel, commented on the necessity of affordable rates. He noted, “While the reductions do not go as far as we had proposed, they are a substantial move in the name of affordability.”
Con Edison representative Jamie McShane praised the process, emphasizing the balance between immediate affordability and the necessary investments for system reliability.
Concerns from Local Leaders
However, not all stakeholders are satisfied. State Senator Shelley Mayer expressed discontent, stating that the changes do not sufficiently address the affordability issues troubling many constituents. She mentioned, “This proposal is an improvement on Con Edison’s original filing, but it does not go far enough for members of our community.”
