Supporters of a ballot initiative this November — that would require the government to seize Maine’s two largest electric utility companies — make a lot of promises about what the multi-billion-dollar gamble will accomplish.

But they have no plan to actually deliver lower costs, better reliability or speed our state’s transition to clean, renewable energy.

Buried deep on page 13 of this 15-page proposal to create “Pine Tree Power” is a feeble reference to the creation of a five-year plan that wouldn’t be required until 18 months after Maine people are on the hook for this costly acquisition.

“Within 18 months of the date in which the company and the operations team fully take ownership and control of all utility facilities in the State owned or operated or held for future use by any investor-owned transmission and distribution utility, the company shall submit to the commission for approval a 5-year plan to meet initial affordability, reliability, decarbonization and connectivity goals.”

How do we know what that means?

Because Pine Tree Power’s board members would be elected and appointed, we have no way of knowing who will design this five-year plan. Further, because Pine Tree Power’s board will require only one of 13 board members to possess any background in utility management or operations, we should question whether or not that five-year plan will actually benefit us as customers.

Improved reliability, affordability and decarbonization are all goals worthy of supporting, but Maine people should be afforded the courtesy of seeing an actual plan to achieve them before they are asked to approve a multi-year legal process to seize the assets of these two private companies with a price tag in the billions of dollars.

After all, Maine electric customers will be the ones ultimately responsible for these costs whether it succeeds or fails.

As a former member of the Legislature’s Energy Committee, I know that our energy future is too critical — to our wallets, to our safety and to our environment — to approach without a plan. Gov. Janet Mills knew this, and that is why she proposed and signed LD 1959, An Act Regarding Utility Accountability and Grid Planning for Maine’s Clean Energy Future, into law just last year.

In addition to imposing stronger oversight on Maine’s electric utilities, LD 1959 requires that our existing utilities, interested parties and the Public Utilities Commission undergo a comprehensive integrated grid-planning process with the goal of improving grid reliability and resiliency and achieving our carbon reduction goals in a cost-effective manner.

Before we roll the dice on the enormous costs and risks associated with Pine Tree Power, we should evaluate the outcomes of that planning process and decide if it will achieve our desired goals at a much lower price tag.

Operating an electric grid and delivering electricity to our homes, businesses, schools and hospitals is complex and requires a tremendous amount of planning and technical expertise. Maintenance and investment of substations, distribution lines and transformers, and activities like tree trimming and outage restorations, are critical to the success of our electric grid.

Mistakes can be costly — and dangerous.

Just like a bank would want to see a business plan before approving a loan, or a contractor would want to see a plan before building a home, we should demand to see a plan before we make the choice to support or oppose Pine Tree Power.

Unfortunately, that plan will not exist before November, leaving voters without the details of how Pine Tree Power would actually achieve its stated goals in a cost-effective manner, or if it can even achieve them at all.

Wishful thinking isn’t a plan, but right now that’s all Pine Tree Power has to offer.

Chris Caiazzo, a former member of the Maine House of Representatives, served on the Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee. He lives in Scarborough.

Copy the Story Link