Donations used to fund a South Dakota Public Utilities Commission conference in Sioux Falls have been questioned as being inappropriate.

Last week, the Associated Press reported the state PUC had accepted sponsorships totaling $44,500 for a $48,000 PUC energy conference - Crisis or Renaissance? The State of America's Energy - in Sioux Falls.

The problem being sponsorships were accepted from utilities - the very group the PUC regulates in the interests of South Dakotans.

While the donations did comply with state law, they shouldn't have been solicited nor accepted. Other states have banned the practice, South Dakota should, too.

"The simple answer is they should never have done this. I question the motive, the conflict of interest is there," said David Schultz, a business professor at St. Paul's Hamline University.

Customers, he said, may now wonder if their next rate increase is based on merit or the conference sponsorship "as the utilities came through for these commissioners when they needed it."

We agree. Regulators taking money from those they regulate only creates questions.

The PUC is a three-member elected board of commissioners that regulates rates and services of public utilities - phone, gas and electric. It's a powerful body. Their work impacts every South Dakotan and that's the only place their interests should lie.

Maybe it is the only place their interests lie, of course, but after accepting money from Otter Tail Power Co. - which has a 15.3 percent rate increase request before the PUC - we're left with an uneasy feeling.

Commissioner Gary Hanson said he was "extremely disappointed this was even an issue."

So are we. We're disappointed the PUC didn't see the problem in the first place and take simple steps to avoid then appearance of impropriety and conflict of interest.

The PUC should realize it's a clear conflict of interest to accept money from the very groups they regulate and end the practice. State law doesn't prohibit the practice, but it should.