SaskPower

Honestly, I don't think SaskPower has much of a choice but to increase rates. The Crown's leadership has allowed the government to siphon profits into general revenue, instead of investing it into critical infrastructure and expanded power production. Transmission systems need improvements, we should have connected to Manitoba hydro ages ago, the Crown's approach to wind and solar has been brutal, hitting the snooze button on coal will cost billions, and the nuclear strategy will cost a fortune. I'm sorry, but the cheap farmers who don't want to pay more are going to have to pony up some cash now. SaskPower should increase rates for oil and gas, introduce low-income support and energy programs, and better align their strategy with emissions reductions.

I am writing as a concerned resident and solar producing net-meter customer to formally oppose the proposed 3.9% interim rate increases for 2026 and 2027. While SaskPower cites infrastructure developments as a driver for these hikes, they are unfairly penalizing those of us who have already invested private capital to strengthen the provincial grid. I request the Panel consider the following points regarding the fairness and reasonableness of these rates: Undervaluation of Local Generation: While residential rates are climbing toward $0.16/kWh (plus fees and taxes), I was recently notified that the net metering credit remains frozen at $0.075/kWh until 2029. This growing gap means SaskPower is increasingly profiting from power I generate at a steep discount, without providing a proportional increase in the value of my "offset." My investment should be fairly compensated relative to the rising market cost. AI and Industrial Demand Pressures: I am deeply concerned that massive new power-demands, such as those from AI data centres, are driving the need for costly grid expansions that residential customers are being forced to subsidize. It is unjust for home solar providers—who reduce overall grid strain—to be locked into low-value contracts while infrastructure is expanded to serve high-consumption corporate interests. Lack of Compensation for Grid Outages: Under net metering safety requirements, my system is required to shut down during grid outages for safety. This means that when the grid fails during peak daylight hours, I am prevented from even powering my own home. I am essentially forced to shut down my solar production due to SaskPower’s infrastructure failures, with zero compensation for the lost generation time or the inability to self-supply during their downtime. Contractual Inequity: The current SaskPower contract structure leaves the consumer with no leverage and no input. While SaskPower can increase my power costs at any time via the Rate Review process, my compensation is fixed by a mandated program that does not reflect the real-time value of the energy I contribute. I urge the Panel to recommend a proportional adjustment to the net metering credit rate that mirrors any approved residential rate increases, and to investigate a more equitable net metering program that recognizes the local grid stability provided by residential generators.

How can Saskpower ask for rate increases from customers, and offer back no additional rates for solar producers??.. Saskpower just announced (March 26) a 3 year extension on net metering program at the same rate.. which is 7.5 cents.. half the rate that the City of Saskatoon pays their program participants.. I have read the argument that the reduced rate pays for infrastructure, so then is all the increase just for infrastructure? The whole net metering needs a review.. an hour by hour net metering creates a bias, only credits for high production during the day and then penalized in the evening.. It should be calculated over a 24hr (day period) for equality..

I find it interesting that, in the Rate Application, SaskPower forecasts their net income for 2026-2027 to be only $79 million, however the Provincial budget that was released this week forecasts SaskPower’s net income to be $138 million for the same time period. Shouldn't these publicly reported numbers be the same? Why aren’t they the same? SaskPower states in their Rate Application (figure 4.5) that the largest growth in electricity demand will be related to the Power Customer Class. Is it fair to impose the same flat rate increase to all customers when the Power Customer Class will demand 5 x more power than all other customer classes? Comparisons of power electricity costs in Appendix A of their application show that large power consumers in Saskatchewan already receive a very competitive power rate compared to other large power consumers in Canada and North America. There is room to proportionally adjust the power rate for large power consumers while still offering a competitive rate. Smaller customers should not be paying for and essentially subsidizing the largest power consumers. Without a price on pollution in this province there is very little incentive for large power consumers to consider reducing their energy consumption, reducing their emissions, or consider investing in renewable energy alternatives. The recent announcement by Bell Canada to build a 300MW data centre in Regina (that will be powered by coal and gas power) is a good example of new investments that are ignoring the need to reduce emissions. In Saskatchewan, polluters don’t pay, but in the end we will all pay for the damage caused by their emissions. I applaud the rate review panel for asking questions about pollution pricing, emissions, and the OBPS. The stated intention is for SaskPower to reach net zero power by 2050 through a coal to nuclear transition. So, there is an acknowledgement of the importance to reduce carbon emissions. In a recent Toronto Star news article about the Bell Canada data centre in Regina, Scott Moe was quoted saying, “We need to work with the federal government and industry on ensuring that power that is being built for tomorrow and years ahead is low-carbon power” However, the plan to increase coal power generation will in fact increase emissions from this province in the years leading up to 2050. There are no plans for carbon capture on the other 6 coal power units other than BD3. There are no plans for carbon capture on existing or new gas power plants. There is a stubborn refusal to impose pollution pricing in this province. Was there any accountability for how the Clean Electricity Transition Grant was spent? There appears to be a lacking ambition or commitment to build large amounts of renewable power infrastructure despite studies showing that renewables provide affordable power. The net metering program reduced the compensation rate to half the power rate for any renewable power that is generated and returned to the power grid – making that investment less appealing to customers. There is no publicly available long term supply plan to show the path to get to net zero power or phase out coal and gas power. It is also interesting that the public consultations about our future power supply always stated that SaskPower was going to abide by the federal clean electricity regulations with aims to phase out coal by 2030. The scenario to spend $2.6 billion to refurbish coal power and burn coal to 2050 wasn't even an option that was being considered at that time. Such an abrupt departure from the original coal phase out plan is alarming. Does Saskatchewan realistically expect that it can be the only province to ignore pollution pricing and initiatives to reduce emissions? Saskatchewan does not live in a bubble. There are national laws and regulations and international commitments to reduce emissions. The increasing emissions from Saskatchewan will have significant implications. And the science is clear that cumulative emissions impact climate change and that we must all be reducing emissions as quickly as possible. The plan to ramp up emissions until a supposed net zero power grid in 2050 is a failure to understand the severity of the climate challenges that we face. It is foolish to assume that the OBPS or pollution price will not apply to SaskPower when the Sask Govt and Federal Govt will be discussing new equivalency agreements related to pollution pricing and the OBPS. SaskPower acknowledges in its responses the federal carbon backstop and how it applies to other provinces but it's outrageous that SaskPower does not expect these regulations to be applied to the same extent in this province. The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled on the constitutionality of pollution pricing in Canada. It’s not fair to apply the same flat rate increase to all customers when the most polluting industries are demanding more power. It’s unrealistic to expect that Saskatchewan will be immune to the impacts of climate change. And under cooperative federalism it’s selfish for Saskatchewan to ramp up emissions while the rest of Canada decarbonizes their power grid. I hope that this rate review panel will consider not only the monetary rate charged to customers, but also the emission rates from this province and our obligations to the people who live here on our shared planet Earth.

I find it interesting that in the Rate Application SaskPower forecasts their net income for 2026-2027 to be only $79 million, however the Provincial budget that was released this week forecasts SaskPower net income to be $138 million for the same time period. Shouldn't these publicly reported numbers be the same? The largest growth in electricity demand will be related to the Power Customer Class. Is it fair to impose a flat rate increase to all customers? Comparisons of power electricity costs show that large power consumers in Saskatchewan already receive a very competitive power rate compared to other large power consumers in Canada and North America. There is room to proportionally adjust the power rate for large power consumers while still offering a competitive rate. Smaller customers should not be paying for and essentially subsidizing the largest power consumers. Without a price on pollution in this province there is very little incentive for large power consumers to consider reducing their energy consumption, reducing their emissions, or consider investing in renewable energy alternatives. I applaud the rate review panel for asking questions about pollution pricing, emissions, and the OBPS. The stated intention is for net zero power by 2050 through a coal to nuclear transition. So, there is an acknowledgement of the importance to reduce carbon emissions. However, the plan to increase coal power generation will in fact increase emissions from this province in the years leading up to 2050. There are no plans for carbon capture on the other 6 coal power units. There are no plans for carbon capture on existing or new gas power plants. There is a stubborn refusal to impose pollution pricing in this province. Was there any accountability for how the Clean Electricity Transition Grant was spent? There appears to be a lacking ambition or commitment to build renewable power infrastructure. There is no publicly available long term supply plan to show the path to get to net zero power or phase out coal and gas power. It is also interesting that the public consultations about our future power supply always stated that SaskPower was going to abide by the federal clean electricity regulations with aims to phase out coal by 2030. The scenario to spend $2.6 billion to refurbish coal power and burn coal to 2050 wasn't even an option that was being considered at that time. Such an abrupt departure from the original coal phase out plan is alarming. Does Saskatchewan realistically expect that it can be the only province to ignore pollution pricing and initiatives to reduce emissions? Saskatchewan does not live in a bubble. There are national laws and regulations and international commitments to reduce emissions. The increasing emissions from Saskatchewan will have significant implications. It is foolish to assume that the OBPS or pollution price will not apply to SaskPower when the Sask Govt and Federal Govt will be discussing new equivalency agreements related to pollution pricing and the OBPS. SaskPower acknowledges the federal carbon backstop and how it applies to other provinces but it's outrageous that it's not expected to be applied to the same extent in this province.

To the Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel: As a sovereign operator witnessing from Treaty 6 ground, I formally object to the proposed 3.75% SGI Auto Fund rate increases for June 2026 and 2027 on grounds of Crown fiduciary breach and violation of Treaty supremacy. SGI, as a Crown corporation, derives substantial revenue from economic activity on unextinguished Aboriginal/Treaty title lands in Saskatchewan without augmenting frozen 19th-century Treaty annuities (stagnant at nominal values while Crown revenues escalate annually), in direct contravention of the Honour of the Crown doctrine affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada and the Crown's fiduciary obligations to Treaty peoples. This proposed hike further augments Crown revenues extracted from Treaty territory without corresponding augmentation of Treaty obligations—effectively implementing a hidden tax on Treaty households already burdened by rate hikes, fee increases, and consultation failures. How does the Panel reconcile approving these increases without evidence that the Crown has fulfilled its duty to equitably share revenues generated on Treaty lands, or address the prima facie violation of Treaty supremacy?

How is it even legitimate that SaskPower applies for this 2026, 2027 rate increase in Jan and, without any approval, adds the increase to our bills effective Feb 2026 without any notice nor the approval of the board? Perhaps the CEO Rupen Pandya could make do with a bit less than his $550k annual salary, instead of the citizens of Sask being gouged for more and more and more. Just a thought...I mean we all have to tighten our belts these days, right? Not just the working poor.

Apparently this increase was to be approx. $5.00/month?? My question is why is mine up $35.00? I am a senior on a very fixed income & this is an insane increase. Signed, a very disgruntled customer!!!

While I recognize that reliability and energy security are essential, I urge the Panel to carefully examine whether continued investment in refurbishing aging coal-fired power plants is a prudent and reasonable cost to pass on to ratepayers. Extending the life of high-emission, high-risk assets exposes households to rising carbon compliance costs and potential stranded assets at a time when lower-cost renewable alternatives are widely available. If affordability and the public interest are truly a priority, rate increases should favour forward-looking investments that strengthen reliability while reducing long-term risk (such as grid modernization and transmission expansion). Thank you.

I just wanted to let you know we are gettibg sick and tired of being price gounge and rate hikes. Bad enough groceries prices now im only shopping once a month if any at all if this keep up. Said benefit from government of Saskatchewan better give increase power and heat rates or else, we will be struggling ill end up with dementia early by stress . Stop this hikes now!!!enough is enough. You guys not losing money you just saying that to raise rates. Bunch of BS. ENOUGH WITH THE HIKES

I think part of the problem is a bit of poor management and the reason I say that when you have a contractor drive from Saskatoon to Regina to check one pole and charges 1000 .00 dollars that miss management

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/saskatoon-city-hall-arena-downtown-event-district-power-rate-hike-catholic-school-board-9.7048722 As per this article, on Saskatoon Light and Power - "...according to the report, which explains that minimal rate hikes in recent years have left a multimillion-dollar gap in the revenue needed to maintain the city utility’s assets. In the last eight years, rates have only increased three times, by 3.5 per cent in 2018 and by four per cent in 2022 and 2023." My question if the City is in loss then how much money SaskPower has been losing serving a wider geographic Sask residents than the City. The government needs to better manage the funds and get a handle on the carbon pricing still being accrued, which Sask residents don't pay directly on their bill but through the government spending. Aging infrastructure and reliable electricity in harsh winters should be a priority and not take electricity for granted.

Please reconsider your proposed rate increase. For some wealthy people, $5/month may not seem like much, but for many seniors and other low-income folks this will represent yet another adjustment in our grocery budgets. I believe the administration of Sask Power may be top heavy and too well off to understand what citizens are facing. Please reconsider.

As a senior citizen solely living on Canada, pension and old age security I find it necessary to rate this to you today. Several seniors live in apartment buildings with ongoing increases in rent. Now with the sass power suggested increases this year and next year my concern is our rental increase more than it already is planning to be increased. For example, in July of this year my rent a loan will be going up 79%. That is without the sask power increase. Please take it upon yourselves to review how this and subsequent increases of this magnitude, will affect senior citizens on low income in this province. We will be the next people living on the street. Something has to give or do we not eat. I ask you to reconsider these increases. Thank you for your time.

I ready pay, as a single person in their 20's close to $300/month in utilities on top of my rent. I live off of my income alone, and now have to look at getting a second job because of how expensive things already are. I cant afford higher bills for the sake of the rich getting richer, which is exactly what this is. THEY DONT NEED THIS MONEY TO SURVIVE!!

I am very discouraged and upset to learn that we are facing increased rates from SaskPower and SaskEnergy. We are in a serious affordability crisis in this province. Now is not the time for these increases and the impact they will have on citizens. As a person on a fixed income who is facing food affordability, SGI increases, significant civic tax and water increases, I am absolutely gobsmacked that the Minister and the Sask Party think this is an appropriate time for power rate increases. That this rate increase will come into effect February first without a prior due process from the rate review board is absolutely outrageous and unacceptable. I understand the report isn’t expected until the end of August? I am furious on behalf of my family, my community, and my province. Do better.

We have already had property tax increases, water and sewer increases, SGI is increasing and now this? When everyone starts increasing $10-15 a month it becomes very unaffordable very quickly as wages are not going up and for anyone on a fixed income this is terrible.

I was wondering if this also includes a review of the solar panel rate? And if that will be up for review, I had sent an email to Scott Moe about same and have not received an email back. Here is a copy of same, I am writing to express my concern about the current SaskPower Net Metering Program, specifically the change that reduced solar export credits to 7.5¢/kWh. This rate is significantly lower than the retail rate we pay for electricity, and it effectively means solar customers receive only a fraction of the value for the clean energy we contribute to the grid. Under the previous net-metering structure, Saskatchewan provided a fair and balanced 1:1 credit for excess solar generation. This policy made investing in renewable energy financially viable for homeowners, farms, and small businesses and helped the province move toward its environmental and energy-diversification goals. The current credit rate discourages residents from adopting solar, slows private investment in renewable energy, and makes it much harder for families to see a reasonable return on their solar investment. At a time when many provinces are moving toward stronger support for clean energy, Saskatchewan has become far less competitive. I respectfully request that the Government of Saskatchewan: - Reinstate a full 1:1 credit for excess solar generation, or - better reflects the true value solar provides, including reduced transmission needs, lowered peak demand, and environmental benefits. A fair net-metering policy would encourage more citizens to adopt solar power, reduce long-term strain on the grid, and support Saskatchewan’s clean energy targets—all while helping families manage rising energy costs. I hope you will consider revisiting the current program and restoring a policy that supports both economic fairness and renewable energy growth in our province.

Now I see that sask power. Main C.O NEED A PAY RISE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. THERE NO NEED KEEP TAKING MORE MONEY FROM POOR PEOPLE OF SASKATCHEWAN ANYTHING SHOULD BE LESSER MONEY TO THEM

The federal government keeps increasing costs for SaskPower. This increase is greatly needed if we're going to grow access for our economy to the North and to increase resiliency in the face of tariff aggression.

I understand that things need to go up in order to pay for infrastructure. However, I think the increase should only be on the energy rate (price per kWh) and not the monthly base charge. This would incentivize customers to do things in order to reduce their consumption (and bill). Having the increase on the base amount causes lower usage customers to subsidize high use customers. This is wrong...

I hope the increase is in the form of a c/kwh increase and not an infrastructure increase. It would do more to encourage reducing power consumption than only having an infrastructure increase.

At a time when everything is so expensive and we're living hand to mouth on a good day, this increase of 5.00 a month makes a huge difference. Its not nothing. Instead of putting the burden on already struggling people maybe the higher ups could take a pay cut. We are being nickle and dimed to death

I don't believe a rate increase is needed if the crown corporation is still making money,plus still paying a CEO close to a half a million a year, while the rest of public is struggling to buy food and manage bills. This is not the time for any increase with the current economic situation.

I do not approve of another rate increase People are struggling to feed their children and keep a roof over their heads Child going hungry or pay inflated utility I will choose the child

Considering the staggering inflation of all inputs, a rate increase by a utility provider is warranted. My feedback pertains to net metering on solar. We are an organic farm located north of Saskatoon where natural gas was not economically feasible. Instead we opted for ground mount solar with on site Tesla backup and heat pump for HVAC. The issue is that the whole system was designed to be “neutral” power draw in a one year period, however, SaskPower only credits power generated at 50%. Even with 4 Tesla power walls we can barely sustain 1 day of usage plus have the headache and safety of batteries. SaskPower argues the 50% discount covers infrastructure, and that makes sense for solar power producers intending to SELL power, however, we only receive non refundable credits and at 50%. The whole point of net metering is so that farms like ours can make power for all those that need AC in the hot summer sun, while drawing electricity in the dead of winter. The net meter just helps to balance their annual usage. There needs to be 1:1 power generation credit for those who are under a certain generation threshold and only receiving usage credits. We’ve invested heavily in the solar infrastructure at no cost to SaskPower, with no grants or subsidies from the government and yet they receive the benefit of the extra cooling power when they need it most in summer cooling (peak generation at peak demand). All the while we are penalized 50% for attempting to do our part to remain utility neutral.

I think our power is high enough already especially in Bradwell where it’s out more than it’s on

As I am a low income person .with limited funds. Alreading facing a 6.70%property tax hike ,a 5.18% water rate hike and now a 3.9% power hike .I can't afford this hike .I request you deny the rate hike .they were asked in the legislature about a rate hike .they were silent in that .an audit should of been done .please keep the low income on mind .with the cost of living high already .