Minnesota Senate Bill SF1433

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/17/25
• Refer: 2/17/25

Caption

Electric utilities obtaining of consent from utility customers prior to implementing a time-of-use rate program requirement provision

Summary

SF 1433 would require electric utilities to obtain a customer’s consent before placing that customer on a time-of-use rate program. A time-of-use rate is an electric pricing structure in which charges vary depending on the time of day. The bill defines the term and applies the requirement to utilities implementing such programs in Minnesota. The bill also requires utilities to provide a written opt-in form signed by the person who owns the home or business receiving electric service. That form must be in 12-point bold type and must clearly explain that participation is voluntary, that service will not be affected if the customer declines, and that written consent is required before the utility can install the equipment needed for the program.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would add a new section to Minnesota Statutes chapter 216B governing time-of-use rate programs. It would impose a customer-consent and disclosure requirement on electric utilities, affecting how utilities enroll residential and business customers and how they deploy related metering or other equipment. The practical effect would be to limit automatic or default enrollment and strengthen customer control over participation in variable-rate electricity pricing.

Sentiment

The available record shows the bill was introduced and referred to the Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate Committee, but there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears consumer-protective and focused on informed consent rather than opposition to time-of-use pricing itself. No formal sentiment from debate or voting history is available in the supplied context.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is whether utilities should be allowed to implement time-of-use pricing without affirmative customer opt-in, especially where equipment installation is required. Supporters would likely emphasize transparency, consumer choice, and protection against unintended rate changes, while critics might argue that the consent requirement could slow deployment of pricing programs, reduce utility flexibility, or limit broader energy-management and demand-response efforts. No specific stakeholder positions are provided in the available discussion materials.