Utilities / water / power
Ted Neitzke: The no-cost statement and the later utility-rate decision
Misleading / missing context
Exact statement
“We knew there was no costing to the city or our residents.” [1]
Ted Neitzke, Port Washington Common Council meeting, official City replay, November 4, 2025
Neitzke made the statement after We Energies executives presented on power for new data centers, the regional power grid, customer protections, the Very Large Customer tariff, and payment and cancellation agreements.[2] He said the utility representatives had not been brought in during April and thanked them for bringing the information to the council.[1]
What the record shows
The Commission found that non-participating customers begin paying costs for facilities built to serve a very large customer before those facilities are energized and the customer receives service.[3] It also found that unrealized demand posed a risk to non-participating customers and that early termination was not comprehensively accounted for once facilities were in service.[4][5] To protect non-participating customers, the Commission required a minimum billing demand equal to 100 percent of forecasted load or actual demand during the billing period, whichever is higher.[6]
“Non-participating customers begin paying costs for the facilities constructed to serve a VLC prior to the facilities being energized and the VLC receiving service.” [3]
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs, May 21, 2026
Context
The final decision approved the Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources tariffs subject to conditions and modifications.[7] Vantage requested intervention and was granted intervenor status in the proceeding.[8]
Analysis
Neitzke’s statement described the absence of cost to the city or residents as something the council knew.[1] The later PSC decision found that the proposed transmission-cost recovery approach needed a minimum demand charge to prevent harm to non-participating customers.[9] That decision undercuts the statement’s categorical framing by finding tariff protections necessary to protect non-participating customers from harm associated with transmission cost shifts.[10][11]
Sources
Statement source
2025-11-04 City of Port Washington Common Council Meeting — City of Port Washington, Wisconsin
Pinpoint: Official replay at 00:23:45–00:23:51.
Record source
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Pinpoint: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, pp. 26–27, “Minimum Billing Demand”.
Every source on this page
Each numbered mark in the text links here. Every excerpt is quoted word for word from the source.
2025-11-04 City of Port Washington Common Council Meeting — City of Port Washington, Wisconsin
Where: Official City replay at 00:23:47–00:23:52
“We didn't bring you in in April to kind of inform us of this, but we, I mean, we knew there was no costing to the city or our residents, but this has been great for you to bring that to us and make sure that we knew that.”
November 4, 2025 Common Council Meeting Minutes — City of Port Washington, Wisconsin
Where: Common Council Meeting Minutes, November 4, 2025, p. 1, item 5.A, paragraph beginning “Mayor’s Updates”
“We Energies Executive Vice President of External Affairs Bert Garvin and Vice President of State Regulatory Affairs Rich Stasik provided a presentation on power for new data centers, the regional power grid, We Energies regular customer protection plans and their Very Large Customer (VLC) Tariff, and payment and cancellation agreements for those VLC’s.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 26, “Minimum Billing Demand”
“Non-participating customers begin paying costs for the facilities constructed to serve a VLC prior to the facilities being energized and the VLC receiving service.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 26, “Minimum Billing Demand”
“Unrealized demand also poses a risk to non-participating customers, as the analysis in the record shows that even modest reductions in a VLC’s forecasted load substantially shift the time period required before a VLC has paid sufficient revenues to offset the incremental cost of the facilities required to serve it.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 26, “Minimum Billing Demand”
“early termination is not comprehensively accounted for once the facilities are fully constructed and in service.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 27, “Minimum Billing Demand”
“Therefore, the Commission finds the applicant shall revise the VLC tariff and accompanying service agreement to include a minimum billing demand charge equal to 100 percent of a VLC’s initially forecasted load or actual demand during the billing period, whichever is higher.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 1, opening disposition
“The VLC and Bespoke Resources tariffs are APPROVED, subject to conditions and as modified by this Final Decision.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 2, “Procedural Background”
“Vantage Data Centers Wisco Acquisition Company LLC (Vantage) (PSC REF#: 552691), Walnut Way Conservation Corp (Walnut Way) (PSC REF#: 551708), and Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group (WIEG) (PSC REF#: 549324). On August 6, 2025, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Michael E. Newmark issued an Order on Requests to Intervene granting intervention to all of the aforementioned parties.”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 25, “Transmission Service Charge”
“the Transmission Service Charge to recover transmission costs associated with serving a VLC based on a load ratio share methodology as proposed by the applicant but modified to include a minimum demand charge as discussed below, which the Commission finds to be a necessary component of the VLC tariff in order to prevent harm to non-participating customers.”
2025-11-04 City of Port Washington Common Council Meeting — City of Port Washington, Wisconsin
Where: Official City replay at 00:23:47–00:23:52
“we knew there was no costing to the city or our residents”
Final Decision: Application of Wisconsin Electric Power Company for Approval of its Very Large Customer and Bespoke Resources Tariffs — Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
Where: Final Decision, docket 6630-TE-113, p. 27, “Minimum Billing Demand”
“The Commission therefore finds that the inclusion of a minimum billing demand, and the associated deferral accounting treatment discussed below, is the best solution clearly within its jurisdictional authority to protect non-participating customers from harm associated with transmission cost shifts.”
Correction or added context
See an error or a fuller primary source? Both options below open a pre-addressed draft identifying this entry; this site does not collect or send form data.