Former Board Member, Mayor Raise Concerns at PenLight Co.

We can’t pay for that building with reserves. ... Financing would be required.”

A facilities evaluation underway at Peninsula Light Company is raising questions about cost and transparency, and potential impacts to customer rates, as a former board member and a former Gig Harbor mayor call for more information to be shared with customers.

At the same time, PenLight said no new headquarters project has been approved and that any future proposal would follow a more detailed public communication process.

The issue centers on when and how much information a member-owned utility should share with customers as it evaluates potential large-scale capital investments.

Paul Alvestad, who served on the PenLight board for 26 years before being removed earlier this year, said the scale of the headquarters project points to financing challenges and limited communication with members.

According to Alvestad, the proposal includes tearing down and replacing the administrative portion of the existing facility in Purdy. He supports a more limited approach focused on upgrades and targeted expansion rather than a full replacement of the building.

Alvestad said PenLight would likely need to finance the project, which could have downstream impacts for ratepayers.

“We can’t pay for that building with reserves. It would wipe out a big portion of the savings the utility has developed,” he said. “Financing would be required, and somebody would have to pay that back. That means a significant increase to members’ bills.”

He added that, unlike past capital investments, the project does not appear to generate offsetting efficiencies.

“Nothing with this new building indicates this will result in noticeable savings,” Alvestad said.

The estimated cost of the project, according to Alvestad, had been discussed internally and was disclosed during a 2025 annual meeting, but he said it was not directly presented to members by leadership. Alvestad said there was pushback from current and former board members about sharing cost details more broadly.

“I was advocating for this to be brought to the members for a vote before anything is adopted. There’s no plans to do that. I feel one of the board’s primary responsibilities is to communicate with the members who elect them.”

PenLight, however, said no headquarters plan has been approved. Britni Wickens, PenLight’s director of communications, said its board authorized a facilities evaluation in 2021, which remains ongoing, and that information about the process has been available publicly through its website and updates since June 2025.

“PenLight understands that transparency is most meaningful when information is both accurate and complete,” Wickens told the KP News in an email. “For that reason, the board and leadership prioritize developing fully vetted, well-thought-out plans before sharing details publicly.”

She said major capital projects are evaluated over several years, and that detailed information is typically shared once plans are reviewed to ensure accuracy and avoid confusion.

According to Wickens, if a headquarters or facilities project is formally approved, it will implement a comprehensive communication plan to inform members.

Regarding potential rate impacts, PenLight said any changes would be approached gradually within its broader financial strategy, to maintain affordability while supporting long-term system needs.

Alvestad emphasized that his concerns are not about the utility’s past service performance or its employees.

He also pointed to operational changes at the utility, noting that staffing levels have declined from roughly 120 employees to about 90 as manual processes have been digitized, which he described as effective management. The shift, he noted, should reduce — not increase — the need for additional administrative space. Alvestad said he supports prior capital improvement projects that produced savings, but believes the current proposal represents a different type of investment, one that has not been fully explained to members.

In prior public statements, PenLight leadership has said Alvestad was removed following an investigation that found he violated confidentiality and created internal challenges.

Alvestad disputes that characterization, saying his actions were intended to inform members about financial decisions that weren’t addressed directly by PenLight CEO Jafar Taghavi. Alvestad said the board has discussed the project with other public utilities, including Chelan PUD, Mason 3 PUD, and Tanner Electric Co-op, but not directly with PenLight members.

Support for his position about transparency has been strong, according to Alvestad, and a grassroots write-in effort emerged seeking to return him to the board ahead of the utility’s April 27 election. Alvestad said he was removed without any restriction on running again, but now believes board members are taking the position that he cannot.

“If I were elected, I would go on and make the same arguments,” Alvestad said.

Kit Kuhn, former Gig Harbor mayor and a small business owner, said the issue extends beyond a single project and speaks to broader governance practices. Kuhn said most residents are not closely engaged in utility decision-making but still expect access to information.

“It doesn’t necessarily matter how engaged they are; it has to be out there for members to see, so when issues like this come up, they have the resources to understand it and weigh in,” Kuhn said.

He said organizations that serve the public, particularly member-owned entities, typically provide direct ways for customers to contact board members and understand major decisions.

“If you call PenLight, they will not give any board members’ email (addresses). That’s very unusual, and if they don’t have to inform the public, then they don’t have to be accountable, and that’s wrong,” Kuhn said.

Drawing on his experience as mayor, Kuhn said city leaders were required to justify even routine building expenses to ensure they were not excessive.

“PenLight should be doing the same thing.”

Wickens pointed out that PenLight members “have multiple ways to stay informed and engaged,” including “social media outreach, direct communication channels, and the recently launched SmartHub app.” She also encouraged customers to contact PenLight when they have questions and to participate in elections.

Kuhn said increased transparency could include recorded meetings, clearer communication about major costs, and more direct access to board members.

“If there’s nothing to hide, then why not be transparent?” he said.