NEW YORK – As of Friday, Dec. 5, 2025, the fight over Con Edison’s latest electric and gas rate hikes has turned into a full‑blown political drama, stretching from Westchester town halls to the Oval Office and City Hall in New York City.
Westchester County Democrats are now looking to New York City mayor‑elect Zohran Mamdani as a key ally in their campaign to blunt the impact of the utility’s newly approved three‑year rate plan, which will raise bills for millions of customers starting in 2026.
Their push comes after months of record public opposition, a revised settlement that dramatically shrank Con Ed’s original double‑digit hikes, and growing alarm about how rising utility bills are deepening New York’s affordability crisis.
What’s New on December 5, 2025
The freshest development in the Con Edison rate saga is political, not regulatory.
On Dec. 5, Westchester County Democrats and local officials intensified their efforts to “beat” the rate hikes by appealing directly to Mamdani, the incoming mayor of New York City. They see him as a “natural ally” because he campaigned on affordability, has proposed a rent freeze on stabilized apartments, and is now one of the most visible elected officials pressing for lower utility costs. lohud.com+1
The strategy is simple:
- Leverage Mamdani’s bully pulpit as incoming mayor of the city that makes up the bulk of Con Edison’s customer base.
- Build on his new working relationship with President Donald Trump, who publicly called on Con Ed to lower its rates during a White House meeting with Mamdani in November.
- Amplify Westchester’s long‑running campaign against the rate case, led by state Sen. Shelley B. Mayer, the Westchester Municipal Consortium (a coalition of 40 municipalities), and county leaders.
In other words, the rate case is no longer just a dry regulatory proceeding. It’s becoming a high‑stakes political test of whether New York’s leaders can translate campaign rhetoric about affordability into concrete relief on monthly utility bills.
From Double‑Digit Hikes to a Three‑Year Rate Plan
To understand why Dec. 5 matters, it helps to rewind to the start of 2025.
The original ask: big, fast, and deeply unpopular
In January, Con Edison filed a major rate case with the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC), proposing sharp increases in electric and gas delivery revenues — roughly $1.6 billion more for electricity and $349 million more for gas in a single year. That translated into total revenue increases of about 11.3% for electric service and 10.5% for gas.
When those proposals were converted into customer bills, the numbers were even more jarring. Depending on how they were calculated, Con Ed’s initial plans would have raised typical household bills by double‑digit percentages, up to nearly 20% in some cases, adding tens of dollars per month for both gas and electricity.
As the rate case moved forward, the PSC held a series of public statement hearings across New York City and Westchester. Thousands of residents described struggling to keep up with existing bills, with some saying they were already choosing between heat, food, and medicine.
The backlash: 20,000 comments and a political coalition
The response was unlike anything regulators had seen in years:
- More than 20,000 public comments were submitted, the vast majority opposing the hikes.
- AARP, climate and housing advocates, local governments, and state legislators — including Mayer — organized rallies, press conferences, and petition drives across Westchester and New York City.
- The Westchester Municipal Consortium, representing 40 municipalities, formally intervened in the case, arguing that the increases would be devastating for seniors, renters, and small businesses.
Governor Kathy Hochul called Con Edison’s initial double‑digit request “shocking” and directed state regulators to push for lower increases, adding further pressure on the utility and PSC staff. NY1+1
The settlement: big cuts to the original hikes
By mid‑November, Con Ed and PSC staff had negotiated a Joint Proposal that dramatically scaled back the size of the increases:
- Under the settlement, the originally proposed electric bill hike of around 13–13.4% was trimmed to about 2.8%, while a gas hike of roughly 19% was reduced to about 2% on the average customer bill.
- The plan covered a three‑year period from Jan. 1, 2026, through Dec. 31, 2028, with similar modest increases in years two and three.
Even that compromise, however, wasn’t the final word.
The Final Numbers: What the PSC Approved
By late November, state regulators went a step further and approved a version of the plan that reshaped how the increases are phased in, but still kept them well below the utility’s original request.
According to PSC documents and a detailed breakdown reported by Gothamist and other outlets, the current rate plan taking effect in 2026 looks roughly like this:
- Electricity (average residential customer):
- 2026: bills rise about 3.5%
- 2027: about 3.2%
- 2028: about 3.1%
- For a typical New York City household, that works out to roughly $4 more per month in 2026, with additional but smaller increases in subsequent years.
- Gas (typical household using 100 therms):
- 2026: bills rise about 4.4%
- 2027: about 5.7%
- 2028: about 5.6%
- That translates into increases of roughly $10–11 more per month in 2026, then about $14 more in 2027 and $15 more in 2028.
The PSC’s own analysis notes that the Joint Proposal significantly cuts Con Ed’s revenue ask — shrinking the request for additional gas revenue by around 60% and for electricity by roughly a third.
For Con Edison, this is a compromise: less money than it initially wanted, but still enough, the company argues, to maintain reliability, harden infrastructure against extreme weather, and comply with the state’s climate law.
For many customers and local officials, it’s still too much.
Why Westchester Leaders Aren’t Celebrating
If you live in Westchester, you’re already paying some of the highest utility bills in the state — and local leaders haven’t forgotten.
County officials, including Westchester’s executive and board of legislators, have repeatedly blasted the rate plan as unaffordable for residents who are already stretched by high housing costs, taxes, and everyday expenses.
In earlier projections based on Con Ed filings, a typical Westchester household’s monthly electric bill was forecast to rise from about $146 to more than $161 over the next few years, while gas heating bills for some customers could jump by hundreds of dollars annually.
The Westchester Municipal Consortium has framed the final settlement as a partial victory — a meaningful reduction from the original shock increases — but still a plan that leaves too many residents “on the brink” of energy poverty. El-Balad.com+1
That’s why, on Dec. 5, the county’s Democrats are turning to Mamdani. By aligning Westchester suburbs with the incoming mayor and his citywide affordability agenda, they hope to sustain political pressure for further relief, whether through:
- additional state or federal assistance,
- stronger low‑income discount programs, or
- future rate cases that shift more costs off residential customers.
Zohran Mamdani’s Rising Role in the Rate Fight
Mamdani seized the spotlight on utility costs during a highly publicized White House meeting with President Trump in November. Both men, despite being ideological opposites on most issues, agreed that Con Edison “has to start lowering the rates,” and the president vowed to press the utility. Reuters+1
That moment did several things at once:
- It elevated Con Ed’s rate plan from a local regulatory issue to a national talking point about inflation and cost of living.
- It cemented Mamdani’s image as a politician willing to confront powerful utilities, in line with his campaign pledges to freeze rents and tackle affordability.
- It showed that pressure on Con Edison is now coming from both City Hall and the White House, even as the PSC has already approved the broad outlines of the new rate plan.
Westchester officials appear determined to tap into that momentum. Their Dec. 5 outreach effectively asks Mamdani to lend his political capital — and media megaphone — to a suburban fight that mirrors the concerns of many New York City residents.
The Affordability Crisis Behind the Rate Hikes
The Con Edison case is landing in a city where basic utility service is already out of reach for a stunning share of households.
A recent analysis from the New York City comptroller’s office found that nearly one in three New Yorkers is “energy insecure” — struggling to pay for basic utilities like heat and electricity. NY1+1
Additional figures cited by advocates and reported by Gothamist and NY1 paint an even bleaker picture:
- Roughly 30% of city residents are unable to afford their energy bills.
- Over the past five years, about 3.5 million households have fallen behind on payments.
- Nearly one‑quarter of households have had their power shut off at least once.
Advocates point out that utility service is not optional: it’s needed to keep the lights on, refrigerate food, run medical devices, and stay safe during extreme heat or cold. Climate and housing organizers featured in recent coverage describe energy as a basic human right, arguing that any increase — even a few dollars a month — can be catastrophic for families living paycheck to paycheck.
That context helps explain why public anger at Con Edison’s rate case went viral, and why Westchester and city activists alike remain dissatisfied even after the hikes were greatly reduced.
Con Edison and Regulators: Why They Say the Increases Are Necessary
Con Edison and the PSC offer a very different narrative.
The utility argues that the new rate plan reflects a careful balance between affordability and the need to invest billions in the grid — upgrading aging infrastructure, adding transmission, and preparing for more electric vehicles, building electrification, and severe weather linked to climate change.
Key points from the company and supportive regulators include:
- The revised rates are far lower than the original proposal and were shaped through an “inclusive process” with a record number of stakeholders.
- Con Edison provided over $300 million in bill discounts last year for income‑eligible customers and maintains energy‑assistance programs designed to shield the most vulnerable from the full impact of increases.
- New York’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) requires a massive overhaul of how energy is generated and delivered — work that inevitably costs money in the short term, even if it promises benefits later.
At the same time, a new report from the Democratic‑leaning Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), highlighted this week by the New York Post, blasts the state’s green‑energy strategy as unrealistic and partially blames it for New Yorkers’ rising utility costs. The report warns that, by 2028, typical electric and gas bills could be hundreds of dollars higher per year if current policies and investment plans stay on track.
That critique underscores a broader tension: even some Democrats now worry that New York’s aggressive climate goals risk outpacing what ratepayers can afford, while climate advocates counter that the real problem is continued investment in fossil‑fuel infrastructure rather than a faster transition away from gas.
How Much Will New Yorkers Actually Pay?
For individual customers, the numbers can feel abstract until they hit the monthly bill.
Based on current filings and independent analyses:
- A typical New York City electric bill of around $100 per month could rise to the low‑to‑mid $110s by 2028 under the combined effect of the new rate plan and other cost pressures.
- In Westchester, where average electric bills are higher, some households could see monthly charges climb from about $146 to more than $160 over the three‑year period.
- Gas‑heating customers using around 100 therms per month may see annual costs rise by several hundred dollars by 2028 compared with 2025 levels.
Those numbers are smaller than what Con Ed first sought — but still significant for families already squeezed by rent, groceries, and transportation.
What Happens Next
Although the PSC has approved the core structure of Con Edison’s new three‑year rate plan, the political and policy fight is far from over.
In the coming months, expect:
- More pressure from City Hall and the White House. Trump and Mamdani have both publicly said Con Ed should lower rates, and they may push for additional federal or state interventions, such as targeted bill credits or new regulatory scrutiny.
- Legislative responses in Albany. Lawmakers are already revisiting rules that shape utility investments, including policies around gas hookups and cost‑sharing, with an eye toward both climate goals and affordability.
- Local campaigns in Westchester and NYC. Municipal coalitions, tenant groups, and climate advocates are gearing up to use the new rates as a rallying point — not just to oppose this plan, but to demand a different long‑term model for how energy is financed and governed.
For now, though, one fact is locked in: Con Edison customers will pay more starting in 2026. The open question — and the story driving today’s headline — is whether a rare alliance of suburban Democrats, a democratic socialist mayor‑elect, and a Republican president can turn public anger into further changes before those bills fully hit home.
