By Hannah Grover
People who receive electricity from the Public Service Company of New Mexico will see an increase in rates in July followed by another increase in April 2026.
The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission approved an agreement between the utility and various intervening parties about the rates PNM customers will pay in the future.
The agreement will result in a smaller increase than PNM initially proposed.
Under the agreement, the average residential customer will see an increase of $6.23 on their monthly bill in July and another $6.23 increase in April 2026, for a total increase of $12.46.
PNM’s initial proposal would have resulted in a total increase of $23.60 for the average residential customer.
The increased rates will bring in $105 million in revenue for the utility. This will allow PNM to replace aging infrastructure, maintain and upgrade its system and address increases in operating costs due to inflation and wildfire mitigation.
Commission Chairman Pat O’Connell spoke about how customers might benefit from the increase.
“How does it benefit me to raise my rates? Where I land on that is the fact that we need electricity and the fact of life that things are getting more expensive,” he said.
O’Connell said he doesn’t take the decision to approve rate increases lightly.
PNM agreed to contribute $1.5 million of shareholder funds to its Good Neighbor Fund, which assists low-income customers who are struggling to pay their utility bills. The fund benefits between 3,000 and 4,000 customers annually.
Customers needing assistance have been eligible for up to $120 over the course of a year. The increased funds PNM will provide as part of the agreement will increase the cap to $170 that customers can receive in assistance annually.
Commissioner Greg Nibert expressed some concerns about that requirement in the settlement, though he still supported the agreement.
“Gifts that are forced are really not gifts. They’re just another cost of doing business,” he said.
He expressed concern that including contributions to a charitable cause in a settlement could lead to opportunistic behavior.
Commissioner Gabriel Aguilera disagreed with Nibert’s assessment.
“I don’t know that there’s any evidence that anything was coerced,” he said. “I think these are sophisticated parties who know what they’re doing. And with respect to the Good Neighbor Fund, I would just note that it is directly related to the customers, so I did not share the same concerns that Commissioner Nibert expressed.”
All three commissioners praised PNM and the other intervening parties for working to reach an agreement.
“We should encourage parties to settle matters,” Nibert said. “It saves a lot of time, a lot of effort, and frankly, for the ratepayers, it saves a lot of expenses that would otherwise be passed on to the ratepayers.”
