Pierce Co. utility to spend millions on HQ? Board member sues CEO to share plan
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- PenLight board member sues CEO for alleged lack of transparency on HQ plan.
- PenLight cites aging infrastructure and safety issues at 40-year-old facility.
- Cost details remain unclear as preliminary design phase continues into fall.
A longtime board member of Peninsula Light Company has sued the CEO to release information about a developing plan to renovate the company’s aging headquarters, in hopes that the project be brought to members for a vote.
The utility is a private, not-for-profit member-owned cooperative that serves over 32,000 homes and businesses in the Gig Harbor and Key Peninsula areas as well as Herron Island, Raft Island and Fox Island with water and electricity, according to its website. All customers billed for their utility services are also required to pay a $100 fee to become members and vote in elections for the nine positions on the Board of Directors. This year is PenLight’s 100th anniversary of its founding in 1925.
Board member Paul Alvestad decided to file a lawsuit against PenLight CEO Jafar Taghavi in Pierce County Superior Court on May 29 after becoming convinced that a facilities plan in development could be adopted without giving members a chance to share their input, he told The News Tribune.
“The size of the proposal dwarfs many bond and levy proposals for fire, parks, and schools in the Gig Harbor and Key Peninsulas,” he wrote in a statement that he posted on several Gig Harbor and Key Peninsula community Facebook groups. “In my opinion, it is overpriced by millions — but that should be a member decision.”
Because PenLight is a private, not-for-profit cooperative and not a public agency, it is not subject to public disclosure laws, according to an email from PenLight spokesperson Britni Wickens.
The utility recently posted information about an evaluation of its headquarters in the FAQ section of its website.
.jpg "Building-Goodnough-Aerial-COOP (1).jpg")
In interviews via email and phone, Wickens told The News Tribune that the CEO “is unable to comment on ongoing litigation,” but confirmed that PenLight is in the preliminary draft design phase of a plan to renovate its existing headquarters at 13315 Goodnough Dr. NW in Gig Harbor.
The facility is over 40 years old and has aging infrastructure and a failing septic system, among other issues. No project has been approved by the board yet, and PenLight has a communication plan “to share details if and when a final plan moves forward,” she wrote in an email.
It’s unclear how much the renovation, if approved, could cost ratepayers. Neither Alvestad, who said in a phone interview that he is bound by confidentiality as a board member regarding particular details of the plan, nor Wickens, who wrote in an email that it’s too early in the planning process, shared numbers with The News Tribune. Current member rates and fees are posted online.
In a phone interview, Alvestad said he believes PenLight has “done a good job of providing reliable power at a good cost.” He’s a third-generation board member whose father and grandfather also served on the board, and has served since 2000, according to his bio on the PenLight website.
“We’ve got wonderful community support,and I don’t want to lose that by not affording the membership an opportunity to vote on something that is this big,” Alvestad said.
He said during the company’s annual meeting May 5 that he feels a fiduciary responsibility to tell members about the plan, and encouraged them to provide input to board members.
Alvestad, who is an attorney and has his own legal practice, told The News Tribune that he is representing himself in the case, for now. He is speaking for himself and not the other board members, he told The News Tribune.
.JPG "front of building (1).JPG")
Allegations and goal of lawsuit
In his lawsuit, Alvestad alleged that PenLight didn’t gather enough input from ratepayers and board members while developing the facilities plan.
Information and records held by the CEO were “withheld from board members,” his complaint alleged.
He also alleged in the lawsuit that the facilities plan “is nearing its final stages,” and that its “estimated cost exceeds that of other community facilities (schools, fire, parks) that normally would require a community vote by statute.”
The company isn’t required to conduct a vote among its paying members for such a plan, per its bylaws. Alvestad argues they should have one, anyway.
Letting the board adopt the plan on its own would mean “the membership will only have a meaningless say after the fact,” the complaint continues. The suit “seeks public disclosure of the plan, its costs and elements to the members” to encourage them to petition board members for a vote.
Alvestad formally wrote to the CEO requesting records related to the plan on May 14, such as drafts, related communications and documents from consultants working with PenLight, according to the complaint.
His complaint asks the court for judicial intervention to obtain these records. He told The News Tribune that he isn’t seeking monetary damages.
As of a text message on June 9 to a News Tribune reporter, Alvestad still hadn’t received the information he requested, he wrote.
The News Tribune asked PenLight spokesperson Wickens if members will be given a chance to provide input or to vote prior to a potential plan adoption.
“PenLight’s member-elected Board of Directors is responsible for facility decisions, as part of their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the membership,” she wrote in an emailed statement. “While there is no requirement for a member-wide vote member input is always welcomed and considered.”
Members can provide feedback by emailing boardofdirectors@penlight.org, she wrote.
Discussions of cost are ‘premature,’ PenLight says
Wickens wrote in response to The News Tribune’s questions that the headquarters facility has served “as the operational base for dispatch, line crews, engineering, information technology, accounting, warehouse, fleet, supply storage, administration and member support since the 1980s.”
PenLight decided to renovate the building at its current site after considering other options including rebuilding the headquarters entirely or building a new one elsewhere, she continued. They also considered making no changes and continuing to make “costly repairs” to the existing facility, but an on-site renovation appeared to be “the most cost-effective and least disruptive path forward,” she wrote.
Both consultants and the Board of Directors were involved in exploring these options, according to Wickens.
Following the completion of their preliminary draft design phase, further consideration of the plan is expected this fall, she wrote.
“At this stage, it is premature to comment on a finalized plan or cost,” she continued.
A study requested by the full Board of Directors in 2022 identified several problems with the headquarters’ aging infrastructure. These include a “failing septic system,” “outdated fuel tanks,” issues with the building’s roof condition and seismic stability, and inadequate space for equipment and offices, she wrote.
Staff have had to use the building’s warehouse bays, which normally are where crews park their trucks, for equipment testing and maintenance. They’ve had to convert closets into office space and store technology towers in hallways, she added.
“We’re making do essentially with what we can,” she told The News Tribune in a phone call. The building hasn’t had any major upgrades for the last four decades besides changes such as some movement of offices and a hallway expansion. She noted technological advancements and significant growth in membership over that time: in 1986, the utility served 16,487 meters. Now, they serve over 32,000.
Practically, these limitations — specifically the poor seismic soundness of the building, though she said it isn’t an “immediate safety risk” — could “completely hinder” PenLight’s ability to provide power if the headquarters building and thus operations went down in a major disaster, she said.
Other board members share their perspective
The News Tribune emailed boardofdirectors@penlight.org and reached out to some board members visible on social media for comment.
PenLight Board of Directors President Debra Ross responded to The News Tribune’s request for comment via email.
She declined to comment on an ongoing lawsuit, but said that the Board formed a three-member Facilities Committee in 2022 to evaluate possible options for the headquarters building, and unanimously agreed to move into a preliminary schematic design phase after nearly three years of the committee’s work.
“Since then, the PenLight team has been working with consultants to explore what a future facility might look like to meet the needs of the operations,” she wrote. “The Board has received thorough monthly updates on this process along the way.”
Board member Signo Uddenberg also wrote via email that he believes no board members have been excluded from discussions about the plan.
“Peninsula Light Company has followed a clear and deliberate process in evaluating the need for a new or renovated headquarters, consistent with standard board governance,” he wrote. “All directors and executive staff have been actively involved throughout this process, including leadership of the committee responsible for assessing our facility needs.”
Both wrote in their separate emails that they had concerns about a board member sharing internal disagreements publicly, saying they believe it hinders effective collaboration among board members. They also emphasized that the plan hasn’t been approved yet.
“It is unfortunate that public conversation began prematurely, before we had an approved facilities plan,” Ross wrote.
This story was originally published June 11, 2025 at 10:00 AM.
