Eversource Texts Complicate Lamont Storm-Cost Fight

The newly published texts show Eversource chief executive Joe Nolan pressing Lamont to “intervene” in the company’s storm-cost case with regulators, while Nolan told investors the company’s public sparring with politicians was mostly political theater. The comments undercut Lamont’s election-year message that he has been “tough” on utilities and raise fresh questions about how Connecticut’s largest power company works behind the scenes with state officials.

They also highlight the financial stakes for Eversource. The utility spent years seeking to recover costs from severe storms between 2018 and 2023, and analysts had already flagged the dispute as a drag on the company’s credit profile. Eversource said the delay helped trigger a downgrade last year, and Nolan told investors the outcome of the storm case and the $2.4 billion sale of Aquarion improved the company’s outlook.

The eventual resolution was largely favorable to Eversource. PURA allowed the company to recover $861 million of deferred storm costs, more than 90% of its request, though it rejected nearly $400 million in interest. The ruling eased pressure on the balance sheet, but the public release of the texts now threatens to keep the issue politically toxic and could complicate future rate cases and regulatory negotiations.

Lamont says his contacts with utility executives are routine for a governor and that his administration has pushed reforms that helped cut Connecticut electricity rates by more than 10% over the past year. But the optics are awkward in a state where utility bills are front and center, especially after Nolan’s investors call, in which he said Eversource had “shut the faucet off” on Connecticut investment until the storm costs were paid.

For investors, the story is less about the political embarrassment than about regulatory risk. Eversource’s Connecticut franchise remains exposed to the state’s politics, PURA appointments and the next round of rate decisions, while the company’s comments have revived scrutiny of its use of former Lamont aides and its relationship with the administration.

The next catalyst is likely to be political rather than operational: the governor’s race, more document requests and renewed debate over whether Connecticut’s utility rules are protecting customers or simply stretching out a costly fight for both sides.