Odds are, most Nevadans have no idea who Joe Reynolds is, but few other individuals play a bigger role in determining something that affects everyday residents — the price of their power bills.

Reynolds is the chairman of the three-member Public Utilities Commission, the body charged with regulating utility services, everything from telephone services to the state’s primary electric provider, NV Energy.

Reynolds’ decisions can have a major impact on the lives of Nevadans — his draft order in NV Energy’s general rate case, released last Friday, orders a slight decrease in the rates the utility company can charge for general electric service.

His path to the PUC wasn’t typical — he was first appointed to the commission in October 2016, following nearly two years spent under Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval as the deputy and then general counsel.

He previously served under former Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, a Democrat, as the chief deputy attorney general for agency’s Bureau of Litigation. His resume also includes stints as a prosecutor and as a deputy district attorney in tiny Lyon County, but he initially studied to become an English teacher while in college.

Reynolds said his legal background helped prepare him for the PUC’s work in various ways, but primarily in helping him draft opinions and publicly communicate decisions made by the commission in clearer way.

“When you’re talking about folks’ monthly bills, what they’re paying, I think it’s really important to communicate what the reasoning is, what the rationale is and to honestly frame that conversation so that I think an honest conversation can occur,” he said.

2018 promises to be a pivotal year for Reynolds and the commission — a major decision to make on NV Energy’s general rate case, which will affect power bills in the immediate future, as well as an important docket studying the effects of a retail choice ballot question.

While declining to comment on cases still pending before the commission, Reynolds sat down with The Nevada Independent earlier in December and spoke about the commission’s past decisions, why he uses literary and pop music quotes in commission decisions and how the Legislature’s 2017 session will have an impact on energy policy for years to come.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length

Q: For most normal people, when you think of the PUC, they think of the net metering debate and all the things that happened sort of throughout the end of 2015 and 2016, you came in after a lot of those decisions were made. Can you give me a sense of what you think the commission learned and what your approach has been to both leadership and in leading the commission after all of that and all of those, you know, protests and people showing up and screaming at commissioners and bringing wheelbarrows full of petitions to you guys? What have been the main takeaways from that?

A: That’s a good question. Seeing some of the debate around net energy metering unfold, you know, I was at the governor’s office for a good part of it, working as the governor’s general counsel or deputy general counsel. And I think take a step back from that and put a larger context is we’re, I think, on the cusp of some really important change in energy, and the regulatory history of the commission started off as the railroad commission back in 1907, 1908, and came – had different variations over the past 100 years or so and the world was changing, technology was changing.

With Tesla coming to Nevada, the landscape of Nevada was changing, and regulatory perspectives needed to change as well. And I think some of the conflict came to make sure that the technology was in step with a regulatory paradigm.

Q: It’s not every day Mark Ruffalo comes and testifies before a PUC hearing, so do you think that it’s been more politicized and more public? Is that good for the process to have more people, you know, involved and paying attention? Does that make your job harder at all?

A: Part of my job is listening, and I went out and spoke with the renewable energy advocates, Renew Nevada were out there. And I didn’t take it so much as protesting as wanting to be heard, and part of the consumer session today is for the commission to listen to the public, and that’s part of my job. That’s part of the role, at the end of the day I’m a public servant. This used to be the Public Service Commission, and it’s to listen to Nevadans, what they want, what they’re looking for, and so that’s why I had an additional consumer session.

And that’s I think what needs to be done in going back to even the net metering debate is to listen to what Nevadans want.

Q: Do you think there’s generally more awareness and they think more about where energy comes from, how their power bill’s sort of structured? In light of some of the things that happened with the net metering debate, do you think that’s helpful for them?

A: Over the past, with respect to energy issues, boy, yeah, I think – I mean I think there is a tremendous amount of education. I mean I grew up in Nevada. I lived in Nevada most of my life, and I didn’t talk about those issues, raising young kids, raising a family, working. It wasn’t always on the forefront of a dinner table conversation, but I think with the changes in technology, climate change that’s going on, those issues are important. They’re more relevant than ever. And so certain observations that I think most people have, but it might also be because of my new job here, I hear it more and see it more than I did before as well.  

Q: In terms of the governor’s Energy Choice Commission, you know, you’re one of 25 members. Is that proceeding how you thought it would proceed so far? It’s been in existence for about a year now. Are you happy with the progress the commission has made?

A: It’s my role in the committee and the role of the Public Utilities Commission to help and to provide information that can assist the committee in doing its job. In saying that, you know, we’re an independent regulatory entity, and I have a separate duty and a separate mission that may be distinct from the committee on Energy Choice.

Q: Is there anything you’ve learned that’s new that you didn’t expect or in terms of wondering how retail states and retail energy states operate that was eye-opening to you in the past year?

A: I’m learning something new every day. And one thing with the docket that I look forward to is there are a lot of unanswered questions, and one of the reasons that the commission, the Public Utilities Commission, has opened the docket is to look for answers to that and to hear from interested stakeholders in what answers they can provide and to take a hard look at the facts, to take an objective look, to cut the politics out of it and really look at the evidence and the facts of this question.

Q: Are you going to have enough time to do that in this docket?

A: We’re going to do it best that we can in the amount of time that we have. You know, I think this docket is the start of a conversation, it’s the start of a process, and so we have a short timeframe, but we’ll work as hard as we can to do the best work product that we can within those constraints.

Q: What’s in store for 2018 for the commission and yourself? The PUC hired several additional attorneys, you approved a mill increase right to help pay for those hires. The Legislature passed like 13 or 15 energy bills during the last session. Do you foresee the commission and, you know, the staff and everyone else having a bigger role over the next year?

A: I think some of the work that we’re doing right now is at a pretty unprecedented level with not only the ballot question, with our general rate case and with the energy legislation that was passed this session.

And so it’s kind of all hands on deck right now to work through these issues and to sort them out, to make sure that good decisions are being made, that the law is being implemented and the policies are being implemented the way that the governor and the Legislature intended. That’s what I look at as our primary role, is we’ve been given a responsibility and want to make sure that we are fulfilling that as faithfully and diligently as we can.

Q: For many states that adopt a retail choice model, is that it takes a lot of time, like a larger state apparatus to successfully regulate all these new retail companies whether they’re sellers, whether they’re generators. Have you put any thought into what the PUC might look like if and when Question 3 does pass again?

A: I don’t want to speculate too much on that in what the kind of the investigatory process does to play out. But with that being said, I don’t think any state agency or entity should be afraid to change, should be afraid to grow, should be afraid to reimagine itself. It’s part of the job. You know, at the end of the day, I think government needs to be responsive to the needs of the people and sometimes that means adapting and growing, as the world grows and changes.

So I guess the short answer is I don’t know, and ultimately it’s up to the legislature to make those decisions.

Q: I’m curious to get your opinion, like do you think things like energy storage, like this expanded sort of dependence on renewable energy, what sort of, you know, changes does this have to – or will it do to, you know, rates for consumers, will it do to the state’s energy market, will it have for NV Energy? How much of that stuff are you thinking about?

A: I think about it all the time. With respect, if I could take a step back. So where the commission is and one of the commission’s roles is we’re creatures of statute. And so – and we also wear some different hats. And so we have a judicial hat, a legislative hat and an executive hat in respects to that we enforce laws, we have enforcement actions. We have a rail safety and a natural gas pipeline safety division.

And within the legislative hat, we issue regulations and do investigations, and so we do have a policy component to what we do. And then the judicial hat is we’re fact finders, and I have contested cases, administrative proceedings with lawyers, admit evidence, hear legal arguments, and so it’s really unique agency with respect to those different roles.

But when it comes to implementing the law, you know, the Legislature had a historic session I think with energy and we have investigations into storage and renewable energy and electric vehicle infrastructure, and a whole host of issues and our job is to take that direction, take those laws implement them and try to get either the information that the legislature’s looking for, that the governor’s looking for, that the policymakers are looking for, and to make it happen, where the rubber hits the road, so to speak. And that’s I think the job of the commission.

You know, again, my background is as a lawyer, and also coming from (a law clerk position with) the Nevada Supreme Court, that’s kind of where the foundation of my legal experience and to look at the law, analyze the law, look at evidence, look at facts, due process and to listen to the concerns of anyone who appears before the commission. That’s number one priority for me is to make sure that it’s being responsive and faithfully implementing the law the best of our ability.

Q: In terms of, you know, your background, you talked about this a little bit earlier, but I always enjoyed the fact that you, you know, make your opinions readable and you have a bunch of quotes. You initially studied to become an English teacher, right?

A: So Las Vegas is my hometown. Grew up here, lived here my whole, or most all of my whole life before I went to law school, and so my undergrad is in secondary education from UNLV. And so I did the teaching practicums, and then for my student teaching went over to Scotland and Glasgow and taught over there, and then went into law school.

And I think something that’s important to me with these discussions and these conversations about energy is to actually have conversations, and to be able to communicate and explain why decisions are being made, you know, what’s the reason, what’s the evidence in a way that at least makes sense to me.

My wife and I, we have five kids, and you know, and I want to be able to explain to my kids why is this decision being made and put it into a context that makes sense. And I’ve found some of the terminology used in the energy ‘world’ just seemed very distant, and some of the concepts though aren’t – some of it’s very complicated in one respect, some of it’s not complicated as it may appear in other respects.

And when you’re talking about folks’ monthly bills, what they’re paying, I think it’s really important to communicate what the reasoning is, what the rationale is and to honestly frame that conversation so that I think an honest conversation can occur.

You know, it’s the way democracy’s supposed to work, and we need good information to make good decisions. And so coming into the commission, some things I looked at previously didn’t always make sense to me, and that’s not a criticism of anyone, but I wanted to write it in a way that at least made sense to me in my mind, and some of that is using points of reference.

I mean we have lots of books in our house, and I guess I look sometimes to literature and authors and even music for points of reference sometimes when I’m trying to understand issues. I mean I look to the law as well, but when we get into areas of philosophy and things of that sort, I look to sometimes what I think are wise authors.

Q: Well you quoted the Beatles, right, in one of your opinions?

A: I did. I consider Lennon and McCartney. I’ve put them in my own mind in that category. I’ll put Bob Dylan up there too.

But also trying to communicate to people and wanted to communicate, you know, a sentiment, an idea, a decision in a way that was understandable, and that was something that’s important to me and I think it’s important for the commission to be able to do.

I’m a fan of U2. They just came out with a new album, and there’s a quote that Bono has in one of their new songs that’s talking to each other as opposed to at each other. And I think we need more of talking to each other or with each other just in general whether it’s between the government and people of the public or so forth. And so, that was at least what I was trying to do was at least make it make sense to me and hopefully make sense to others who could read it.

Q: There’s a lot of like big energy wonky people who just study this stuff and get really into the weeds, and you seem to sort of approach this from a very different background. Why is that an advantage? Why is that good for, you know, the public and the people reading these opinions?

A: The background, you know, that I hope that Governor Sandoval saw that put me in this position is to approach it with the best interests of Nevada. I like to think just bringing some common sense, and again, I don’t mean that as a criticism, but it should make sense that when decisions are being made, I don’t have this deep energy background. My background is as a legal background, but also a background of growing up in Nevada, raising a family here and it should make sense. I want to make it make sense to me, and I hope when it makes sense to me it makes sense to others.

Sometimes in law school, when you’re in there, there’s fancy Latin phrases that are used that can sound very smart and intimidating, but when you peel away some of those, they’re not too complicated concepts, and I just believe the more that people can understand the reasoning behind decisions, the less animosity, the less negativity in that we can have just a good, a dialogue of the goals to make Nevada the best state we can possibly be. We need to be able to have that kind of a conversation. So at least that’s at least my intent.

Q: I think a lot of people don’t really think about energy beyond paying their monthly NV Energy bill. What are good things individuals can do to be smart energy consumers? Is there something to do with the PUC? Is there anything they can do with NV Energy in terms of, you know, trying to figure out their rates or what might be ecologically efficient?

A: Part of that is when we’re looking into that right now, and again, with some of the investigatory dockets into renewable energy policies, incentive programs. NV Energy has their website that has outreach programs. The Public Utilities Commission, we have, you know, our website that also directs residents to those measures as well.

At the end of the day, I mean, you know, we want our lights to turn on and we want low monthly bills, and that’s what I want. And if bills are being raised for any reasons, I want to make sure that’s a good reason, you know, whether I worked here or not.

That accountability is important when you’re impacting what people pay every month for what I think is a necessity. And so that’s one way I think why electricity and energy is different than other commodities. It’s important to our modern world in a way that other things aren’t necessarily – I think it’s crossed that threshold. It’s not a luxury. It’s very important I think to a healthy quality of life.

Q: I do have a question about your time as general counsel (to Sandoval). I don’t want to ambush you with anything, but I know you were involved with the decision when Attorney General Laxalt recorded the conversation with the Gaming Control Board Chairman AG Burnett, you put a recommendation forward. Can you talk a little bit about your role in that or, you know, why you made that decision?

A: I can’t – I mean I can’t talk about it right now. I mean I’m sorry. I just can’t talk about it right now.

Q: Just in your role at the PUC or is it anything ongoing?

A: Just as any role, I don’t have any comment right now.

Q: All right, well when you write your tell-all, I’m sure it will be in there somewhere.

A: Other than what’s most important to me is always to do what’s right, and that I don’t have any comment right now.