Transcript Highlights:

• , essentially, ease of delivering these credits to customers.
• It's much easier for customers.
• So that inflates customer acquisition and customer retention costs.”
• So that inflates customer acquisition and customer retention costs, right? right?
• So that inflates customer acquisition and customer retention costs, right?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on ways Massachusetts can accelerate solar deployment, lower costs, and preserve reliability as electricity demand rises and federal support for solar and other renewables changes. Chair Creem opened by emphasizing solar’s role in meeting climate mandates and peak demand, citing June heat-wave data showing behind-the-meter solar reduced wholesale prices and saved ratepayers money. Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney of DOER said Massachusetts has grown from 3 MW of solar in 2008 to 3.5 GW today, highlighted SMART 3.0 as a flexible, evergreen incentive program, and said DOER is working on updated rates, interconnection reforms, flexible interconnection, net crediting, and a petition to the DPU to speed implementation. She also said Massachusetts joined the lawsuit over canceled federal Solar for All funding. Committee members and witnesses discussed several policy changes to speed projects before federal tax credits expire, including automated permitting, remote inspections, faster interconnection, and changes to caps on municipal and regional solar development. Senator Barrett pressed Mahoney on whether the 10 MW municipal cap and regional caps should be lifted, and on whether the state should increase its solar tax credit to offset the loss of the federal residential credit. Mahoney said the municipal cap should be revisited and that interconnection cost allocation and other market issues need to be worked out before lifting broader caps. She also said DOER is open to automated permitting and is already developing a permitting portal under the 2024 climate law. Industry and advocacy witnesses largely supported streamlining measures. Sunrun’s Bronte Payne urged removal of a proposed requirement that all net-metered facilities enroll in SMART, and recommended automated permitting, remote inspections, flexible interconnection, better hosting-capacity information, consumer protections, and continued support for Connected Solutions and virtual power plants. Permit Power’s Hannah Bernbaum and Solar App’s Matthew McAllister argued that smart permitting and remote inspections can significantly reduce soft costs and delays, with McAllister saying Solar App now operates in over 320 jurisdictions and saves about three weeks on average. They said remote inspections are already common and can be done safely with photos, video, and qualified third parties. Community solar and clean energy advocates, including CCSA’s Kate Daniel and Vote Solar’s Lindsay Griffin, supported a 10 GW solar target by 2035, a higher refundable state tax credit for low-income households, interconnection reforms, flexible interconnection, and preserving the option to build outside SMART so projects can retain renewable energy certificates. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and members requested follow-up materials and draft language from witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• That savings is passed on to their customers.
• Otherwise, I don't want to lose customers.
• None of it goes back to customers? No, that's not true.
• Some customers also like to do flat monthly bills.
• We contract with customers.

Summary: The committee first handled several bills in executive session. H.J.R. 153 and H.J.R. 119 were postponed and laid over at the request of the handlers. HB 2904 was amended to restore language on false reports that had been omitted by drafting error, then adopted as a House committee substitute and passed unanimously, 13-0. HB 2933 was also amended into a committee substitute and passed 11-3. In regular session, the committee heard HB 2266, which would add the Attorney General and staff to the list of officials authorized to concealed carry while performing duties. The sponsor and an assistant attorney general said the bill is meant to align the Attorney General’s office with prosecutors who travel, work in courthouses, and sometimes face safety risks. Witnesses and members raised concerns about the bill’s wording, especially whether it should cover all staff or instead be limited to assistant attorney generals, and whether courthouse identification or other safeguards should be required. No vote was taken on HB 2266 during the hearing. The committee then heard HB 2207 and HB 2233 together, both aimed at restructuring Missouri’s electric market to allow competitive generation while keeping transmission and distribution regulated. The sponsors argued that competition would lower costs, improve reliability, and encourage innovation, while preserving PSC oversight and consumer protections during a phased transition. Supporters from market-oriented groups said competition shifts investment risk away from ratepayers and can spur new generation. Opponents, including Evergy and Ameren Missouri, argued Missouri already has relatively low rates under the current regulated system, warned that deregulation would raise residential prices and reduce protections, and said it would force divestment of generation assets and benefit large customers more than households. The hearing ended without committee action on the electric bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• It had 6 customers that that bought and use the software.
• Oftentimes tell my customers and most of my best customers also my best friend that we're at the same
• for that customer.
• We bought it just like a customer could. So we've had that.
• We have the customers that say work with me. Help me do it.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's now serving those customers at record levels.
• Mass Save, though, benefits all customers.
• Focused on the incentives that are getting delivered to the customers.
• The customer resource center, The customer resource center, that there's now one phone number everybody
• The average propane customer would save $344, and the average gas customer would save $268.

Summary: The hearing focused on the value of Mass Save, with committee members and witnesses largely emphasizing that the program lowers energy bills, reduces peak demand, supports climate goals, and delivers benefits beyond direct participants. The chair opened by noting Mass Save’s long-term savings, its role in weatherization and heat pump deployment, and recent statutory changes directing the program toward emissions reductions, low- and moderate-income households, and fossil-fuel restrictions. Elizabeth Mahoney of the Department of Energy Resources said the program has evolved to broaden access and control costs, citing large weatherization totals, heat pump installations, avoided emissions, and budget controls that removed $500 million from the approved plan. She also said the governor’s proposal to have only electric utilities administer Mass Save was intended to reduce administrative and procurement costs, and she explained that outreach to low- and moderate-income communities is counted within marketing spending. Several witnesses addressed the program’s workforce and business impacts. Dave Betcher of Abode Energy Management and Rick Taglienti of Rogers Insulation said Mass Save sustains small businesses, contractors, and thousands of jobs by creating stable demand for energy-efficiency work, while warning that sharp budget cuts would lead to layoffs and discourage investment in training, equipment, and hiring. Committee members pressed them on who administers the program, and both said the program administrators and utilities collaborate, with day-to-day contractor oversight and customer work largely delegated to private vendors and community partners. Other witnesses, including Brian Biot and James Collins of the low-income network, described the “quarterbacking” model used for income-eligible customers, where community action agencies provide full project management, technical support, and wraparound services to help households access fuel assistance, discount rates, weatherization, and electrification measures. A major theme was cost-effectiveness and system-wide savings. Anna Johnson of ACEEE and Kyle Murray of Acadia Center said Mass Save returns more than it costs, reduces peak demand, and lowers prices for all ratepayers, including those who do not participate directly. They cited avoided costs in the billions, strong state rankings, and examples of peak-hour savings that avoid expensive generation and infrastructure. Amy Boyd-Rabin of the Environmental League of Massachusetts argued that energy efficiency is the cheapest way to achieve greenhouse gas reductions and that cutting the program would force more expensive power plants to run. Bronte Payne of Sunrun and Ben Sondaga of Highland Electric Fleets highlighted Connected Solutions, a Mass Save-funded virtual power plant program, saying it saves ratepayers money and can use home batteries and electric school buses to reduce peak demand and support grid reliability. Equity and affordable housing witnesses, including Mary Wampo and Barney Heath, said Mass Save has become more responsive to renters, low-income households, and designated equity communities, while also helping affordable housing projects meet passive house and electrification standards; no votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, it updates the statutory definition of customer to more clearly distinguish between a customer
• <00:01:50.960><c> a</c><00:01:51.200><c> customer</c> clearly distinguish between a customer clearly
• </c><00:02:23.520><c> by</c> individual is considered a customer by individual is considered a customer
• customer.
• </c> are a customer. are a customer. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:04:14.000><c> you.</c> &gt;&gt; Thank you.

Bills: HB0002, HB0022

Keywords: building permits, local government, residential construction, permit timelines, code compliance, municipal officers, recall election, petition requirements, local governance, voter participation, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I manage the customer service and outreach at the Public Disclosure Commission.
• But training is far from the only thing we do to assist our customers.
• When a customer reports a challenge with our reporting application to our customer service specialists
• And it has been a bit of a struggle for our customers.
• And it has been a bit of a struggle for our customer.

Summary: The House State Government & Tribal Relations Committee held a work session with the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) focused on campaign and candidate disclosure, customer support, training, and technology improvements. PDC staff described the agency’s mission, its citizen-initiative origins, and efforts to make filing and public access easier through a redesigned website, virtual trainings, recorded tutorials, newsletters, and outreach to filers, auditors, parties, and local jurisdictions. They reported heavy customer-service activity in fiscal year 2025, including thousands of email and phone inquiries, and emphasized same-day assistance, proactive reminders, and hands-on help for first-time and complex filers. The CIO outlined the agency’s technology approach, including guided filing workflows, accessibility features, mobile-friendly applications, built-in help prompts, and continuous improvement timed to filing cycles. He highlighted recent changes such as warnings when a contribution may affect reporting periods, improved mini-reporting guidance, and the transition from Secure Access Washington to login.gov/WA.gov, which the agency is working on early to avoid disrupting filers. He also noted that system changes go through controlled review and that the agency is beginning to use AI agents in code review. Members asked about whether the PDC’s requirements discourage candidates, accessibility issues, treasurer support, donation limits for entities, and the role of AI. PDC staff said candidate numbers have grown, especially in local election years, and that the agency tries to keep filing manageable through direct assistance, discontinuation options, and mini-reporting for small campaigns. They said treasurer training is an important and growing part of their work, with more online and lunch-and-learn offerings, and that they are considering a treasurer-specific class. No votes or formal committee actions were taken; the meeting adjourned after questions due to floor action.

Transcript Highlights:

• This would be a specific demand customer.
• That water district can still charge back to the customer the cost of that customer receiving service
• That water district can still charge back to the customer, the cost of that customer receiving service
• customer. They cannot provide what that customer needs.
• The existing customers, not the current customer, not the customers that were detaching.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Utilities Committee first took up House Bill 2807, a renewable energy/nuclear-related measure. Representative Herbert explained a substitute that aligned the bill with the Senate version, added battery energy storage to the renewable standard, clarified that the nuclear provisions apply to new, not existing, nuclear generation, and created nuclear energy credits to help utilities and the PSC track generation. Members asked about how the credits would work, whether they could be used across company sectors or traded, and whether the bill would still preserve the existing solar requirement. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted the House Committee Substitute for House Bill 2807 do pass by a roll call vote of 18 ayes and 1 no. The committee then heard House Bills 3351 and 3371, presented by Representatives Koslow and Taylor, which would create a statewide process for “specific demand customers” seeking to detach from public water supply districts when a district cannot meet their quantity or quality needs. The bill would require districts to respond within 60 days, allow customers to seek service elsewhere if the district cannot or will not serve them, and prevent districts from taking on new federal loans that would block detachment. It would also require acceptance of gifts offered specifically to pay off such debt. Members raised concerns about the use of the word “may” in the customer definition, the scope of the loan restriction, whether emergency repairs could be affected, and whether the bill should also address municipal utilities. The sponsors said the bill was intended to prevent debt-hoarding and to streamline detachment while preserving court review of reasonableness and harm. During informational testimony, Missouri American Water described a related but separate issue involving the City of DeKalb, where USDA loan and grant requirements were delaying a partial system sale that would lower rates and allow investment in infrastructure. Committee members discussed how federal loan rules can complicate water-system transactions, especially for small rural systems, and several noted that future legislative changes may be needed. No vote was taken on House Bills 3351 and 3371 before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our customers remain our priority and will always be.
• support, which is dedicated to ensuring our customers dedicated to ensuring our customers receive the
• So, most of the customers are in Jefferson County.
• That was satellite reading for 95% of the customers. Today they have digital. They customers.
• I'm a customer.

Bills: SB330

Keywords: water management, regional boards, municipal governance, ethics compliance, public utility, 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's now serving those customers at record levels.
• Mass Save, though, benefits all customers.
• Focused on the incentives that are getting delivered to the customers.
• The average propane customer would save $344, and the average gas customer would save $268.
• We provide 100% incentive for customers and 100% project management.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on the value of Mass Save, with opening remarks emphasizing that despite past criticisms, the program has delivered major energy, cost, and emissions benefits. The chair cited billions in avoided electricity and gas system costs, strong benefit-cost ratios, and recent legislative changes that expanded emissions targets, restricted fossil-fuel incentives, and increased focus on low- and moderate-income households. Department of Energy Resources Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney testified that Mass Save has weatherized hundreds of thousands of homes, delivered substantial lifetime electric savings, reduced peak demand, and is now serving underserved customers at record levels, while also operating under tighter budget controls after a $500 million reduction. Senators asked about administrative and marketing costs, the rationale for shifting program administration toward electric utilities, and whether outreach to low- and moderate-income communities is counted as marketing; Mahoney said administrative/marketing costs are under 5% and that outreach is part of that category. A large portion of the hearing focused on workforce, contractor, and business impacts. Dave Bacher of Abode Energy Management and Rick Taglienti of Rogers Insulation described Mass Save as the engine for a statewide ecosystem of contractors, suppliers, and small businesses, arguing that stable funding supports jobs, training, and long-term investment. They said cuts or uncertainty would reduce hiring, training, and demand, and could ripple through many related industries. Committee members pressed them on who actually administers the program; they responded that the program administrators and utilities set the framework, while vendors and contractors handle day-to-day implementation, customer service, quality control, and payments. Several witnesses addressed cost-effectiveness, affordability, and emissions. Anna Johnson of ACEEE and Kyle Murray of Acadia Center said Mass Save consistently returns more benefits than it costs, lowers peak demand, avoids expensive infrastructure and supply costs, and keeps Massachusetts’ total energy expenditures lower than would be expected given high per-unit prices. Amy Rabin of the Environmental League of Massachusetts argued that efficiency is the cheapest way to achieve greenhouse gas reductions and that cutting budgets would force more expensive supply-side investments. They also said the program remains cost-effective even without counting climate benefits, though those benefits are substantial. The hearing also highlighted equity, low-income access, housing, and grid programs. Mary Wampo described historical under-service in renter-heavy and lower-income communities and said recent reforms, including equity targets, designated equity communities, and a performance incentive mechanism, are helping redirect benefits to those areas. Brian Biot and James Collins of LEAN/ABCD described low-income weatherization, fuel assistance, and “quarterbacking” services that fully manage projects for eligible households. Barney Heath and John Nannari testified that Mass Save incentives are essential to making passive-house and other high-performance affordable housing projects financially feasible. Bronte Payne of Sunrun and Ben Sondaga of Highland Electric Fleets described Connected Solutions as a pay-for-performance virtual power plant program that lowers peak demand and ratepayer costs through home batteries and electric school buses. The committee did not take any vote or formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• All customers, all customer classes deserve this opportunity.
• And since every customer, including commercial industrial customers, have a smart meter, so we just look
• What if it doesn't work for that segment of customers as in a customer class?
• I mean, it's 2028 for commercial and industrial customers and 2030 for residential customers.
• I mean, it's 2028 for commercial and industrial customers and 2030 for residential customers.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard several bills focused on grid reliability, affordability, clean energy infrastructure, and industrial decarbonization. AB 222, by Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, would require more data reporting on data centers and aim to prevent ratepayers from bearing related grid costs; supporters said better information is needed to plan for rapidly growing electricity demand from AI and data centers, while opponents warned about privacy, security, trade-secret, and cost-shifting concerns. The bill passed the committee on a 13-4 vote, with the roll left open for absent members. AB 941, by Assemblymember Bonta, would impose a 270-day timeline for CPUC review of priority transmission projects to speed clean-energy infrastructure buildout. Supporters argued that transmission delays are slowing California’s climate goals and raising costs, while opponents raised concerns about CEQA process, staffing, and prioritization. The bill passed 15-0. AB 1191, by Assemblymember Tangipa, would make existing large hydroelectric facilities eligible for the Renewable Portfolio Standard; supporters framed it as a way to lower rates and ease affordability pressures, while opponents said it would undermine the purpose of the RPS by substituting existing resources for new renewable development. That bill failed on a 4-11 vote. AB 1280, by Assemblymember Garcia, would expand state grant programs to support thermal energy storage projects for industrial decarbonization. Supporters said it would help modernize manufacturing, cut pollution in disadvantaged communities, and preserve jobs, with broad support from environmental and clean manufacturing groups and no opposition testimony. The bill passed 17-0. AB 1117, by Assemblymember Schultz, would require the CPUC to offer optional dynamic electricity rate tariffs for customers to shift usage away from peak periods; supporters said it could lower bills and improve grid efficiency, while utilities said they were not opposed to the concept but wanted more flexibility and time in the regulatory process. That bill passed 14-0. The committee also approved its consent calendar and other noncontroversial items, with several measures moving forward unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• 12 million customers.
• If I can achieve a fair result for customers, If I can achieve a fair result for customers that matches
• Customer voices—this is big for me.
• In terms of customer, you said you get the customer data on their experience and that's calculated.
• In terms of customer, you said you get the customer data on their experience and that's calculated.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Counsel Oversight met to receive an overview from Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler on the work of his office. He described the office’s role in representing Florida utility customers in rate and service cases, including investor-owned electric, water, and wastewater matters, storm cost recovery, fuel clauses, storm protection plans, and specialized dockets. He emphasized the office’s use of depositions, expert witnesses, customer correspondence, and service-hearing testimony to challenge unsupported utility costs and seek “fair, just, reasonable, and affordable” outcomes for customers. Trierweiler highlighted several current issues, including affordability, data centers, and the growing use of AI in reviewing large utility filings. He said the office has begun using affordability experts and data center witnesses, and that data center-related utility proposals raise concerns about energy demand, water use, and community impacts. He also expressed caution about AI and machine learning because of confidential utility information, while acknowledging that utilities, regulators, and his office are increasingly using such tools. Members asked questions about how customer input is gathered, how profit is evaluated in rate cases, the role of settlement agreements, and whether the office is considering water consumption impacts from data centers. Trierweiler said customer feedback largely comes in through hearings, correspondence, and direct calls rather than office-led canvassing, and that his office seeks to limit imprudent costs while allowing utilities a fair return. He also explained that the office may file motions for reconsideration and appeals after PSC orders, and that it sometimes submits alternative settlement proposals even when approval is unlikely, to present a different option for the commission’s consideration. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after concluding its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• For customers and policymakers and streamlines aspects of the rate-setting process.
• You may have 1,500 customers all served by one line.
• It can minimize the impact on customers by having intelligence to actually open and close.
• Its customers have no choice. They have to use Delmarva and they have to pay Delmarva.
• There's longer restoration times, and higher costs for customers in the future.

Bills: SB287

Keywords: solid waste, recycling, universal recycling, single-stream recycling, multifamily housing, apartment recycling, commercial recycling, waste diversion, recycling grants, low-interest loans, Delaware Recycling Fund, Delaware Solid Waste Authority, DNREC, waste hauler, curbside recycling, yard waste, source-separated recycling, pay-as-you-throw, extended producer responsibility, waste bans

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and considered three Senate bills. SB 287 with Senate Amendment 2, a DNREC cleanup bill on recycling, would tighten recycling collection rules for haulers and commercial generators, require multifamily recycling education, repurpose the Delaware Recycling Fund, and add annual reporting; after brief questions and no public comment, the committee motion to release did not initially receive enough votes, so the bill was circulated for signatures. SB 346, which would speed Environmental Appeals Board hearing and decision timelines so DNREC secretary decisions become final if deadlines are missed, drew support from the Nature Conservancy and also failed to get enough votes at the meeting, so it too was circulated for signatures. The committee then took up SB 326, a major utility-regulation bill sponsored by Senator Hanson and Representative Heffernan that would cap certain non-mandatory utility spending, limit interim rates, increase oversight and transparency, and streamline rate-setting. SB 326 generated extensive testimony and debate. Supporters, including the Public Advocate, Sierra Club, PSC staff, and some legislators, argued that Delmarva Power’s spending on non-mandatory infrastructure has risen far faster than inflation, that the company is a regulated monopoly, and that the bill would help restrain future delivery-rate increases without harming reliability because mandatory reliability, storm response, and vegetation management spending would remain allowed. Opponents, including Delmarva Power, business groups, contractors, labor representatives, and the Delaware Contractors Association, argued the cap would delay needed reliability and capacity projects, hurt economic development, reduce jobs, and interfere with utility planning; they also said supply costs, not distribution spending, are the main driver of recent bill increases. After public comment and additional questioning, the committee voted to release SB 326 on a split roll call, but because several members were absent the bill was also walked for additional signatures. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• In total, the cost shifts onto non-solar customers is roughly one quarter of a non-solar customers energy
• The bill only applies to IOU customers and exempts school and agricultural solar customers from this
• Customers do not get paid.
• So customers on the NEM tariff get to avoid And so when NEM customers avoid paying the retail rate for
• The reality is 10 million non-solar customers are subsidizing 2 million solar customers.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . customers. customers.
• </c> customers cost. customers cost.
• . customers. customers.
• </c> power customers. power customers.
• </c> state and to customers. state and to customers.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:01:28 Introduction of Guests 00:02:08 American Electric Power and Kentucky Power Presentation 00:03:31 SB 89 Discussion 00:53:55 SB 89 Roll Call Vote 01:07:46, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for an initial natural resources hearing with a quorum present and introductory housekeeping, including prayer, roll call, and recognition of guests. Chair Smith outlined ground rules for questions and then invited Kentucky Power and American Electric Power representatives to the table to discuss a proposed plan involving the Mitchell Power Plant and future generation needs in Eastern Kentucky. Witnesses Cindy Wiseman, Alex Vaughn, and AEP CEO Bill Fehrman said the company’s goals are to stabilize and lower rates, reduce rate volatility, and expand generation in the Commonwealth. They explained that Kentucky Power seeks legislative authority to securitize its 50% interest in the Mitchell coal plant, describing securitization as a refinancing mechanism that would lower annual plant costs by about $34 million and help offset roughly one-third of the expected cost of adding new generation in Kentucky. They emphasized that the proposal is not intended to close Mitchell, and said Kentucky Power currently has no plan to divest its interest; the company still needs the plant to serve customers while it pursues additional dispatchable generation in Kentucky. Members pressed the witnesses on the plant’s book value versus fair market value, whether the Mitchell interest had ever been assigned a nominal value, how any divestiture proceeds would be handled, whether Kentucky Power owns Wheeling Power, and how long Mitchell can continue operating. The company said it values Mitchell at net book value for accounting purposes, not fair market value, and explained that Wheeling Power is a separate AEP affiliate and that West Virginia affiliates have already proposed securitization of their share. Witnesses said Kentucky Power’s interest cannot technically operate past 2028 without additional environmental control investment, while the West Virginia side is depreciating through 2040. They also described the financing timeline, saying securitization would require enactment of legislation, a PSC financing order, bond issuance, and then parallel work to acquire or build new generation, with any reinvestment terms to be addressed through the regulatory process.

Transcript Highlights:

• our side to enable that customer.
• The benefit of talking with large customers is that our customers as a whole share in that, and it's
• The benefit of talking with large customers is that our customers as a whole share in that, and it's
• Um, if a utility builds capacity to serve a large customer, that customer is actually going to show up
• </c> the total cost to serve these customers the total cost to serve these customers and<00:21:08.120

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Customers must also be protected from excessive returns.
• To maintain reliability and financial stability while protecting customers.
• Customers will only pay for that $700 million of recovery.
• Customers will only pay for that $700 million of recovery.
• Pressure on customers' rates and bills.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications held an oversight hearing focused on electric rates, utility regulation, affordability, wildfire costs, and the California Public Utilities Commission’s role. Chair and members framed the discussion around the challenge of transitioning to a cleaner grid while maintaining reliability and keeping bills affordable. The hearing also served as the annual update from the CPUC and the Public Advocates Office, with testimony from Professor Severin Borenstein and CPUC President-designate Alice Reynolds. Borenstein gave a primer on utility regulation, explaining that generation is largely deregulated while transmission and distribution remain regulated, and that most rate-setting follows cost-of-service regulation. He emphasized that the hardest issue is setting the allowed return on equity: too high can raise bills and encourage capital-heavy spending, while too low can deter investment and harm reliability. He argued there is no silver bullet, said performance-based regulation and price caps have limits, and suggested some costs now charged through electric bills—such as climate programs, low-income subsidies, and wildfire-related public policy costs—might more appropriately be paid through the state budget. Reynolds described the CPUC’s oversight role, saying the commission reviews utility spending through general rate cases, balancing accounts, and other proceedings, and that affordability is addressed through front-end scrutiny, post-spend accountability, and legislative direction. She highlighted wildfire mitigation as a major driver of rate increases, noted recent progress on clean energy procurement and battery storage, and said the CPUC is working on return-on-equity decisions, FERC advocacy on transmission costs, and implementation of SB 254 and other statutes. Members pressed on a range of issues, including wildfire securitization, load growth from EVs and data centers, gas-system stranded assets, balancing accounts, and a water-service dispute in Keene involving Union Pacific. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with several follow-up commitments from the CPUC to provide data and updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• 12 million customers.
• If I can achieve a fair result for customers...'
• Customer voices—this is big for me.
• In terms of customer, you said you get the customer data on their experience and that's calculated.
• You are growing much faster than your customer base can even be... ...growing much faster than your customer

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Counsel Oversight met with a quorum present and heard an update from Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler on the work of the Office of Public Counsel. Trierweiler described the office’s role in representing Florida utility customers in rate cases and related proceedings, including investor-owned electric, water, and wastewater matters. He emphasized the office’s use of depositions, expert witnesses, customer correspondence, and service hearings to challenge unsupported utility costs while seeking outcomes that are “fair, just, reasonable, and affordable.” A major focus of the presentation was the office’s work on large utility dockets, especially the Florida Power & Light rate case, as well as other recent cases involving Duke, TECO, Sunshine, and St. Joe. Trierweiler said the office had settled some cases but not others, had two appeals pending, and had filed motions for reconsideration where required. He also discussed storm cost recovery, affordability concerns, and the new challenge of data center tariffs and related energy and water demands. He said the office brought in new experts on affordability and data centers and was trying to get ahead of those issues through workshops and settlement efforts. Members asked questions about how customer input is gathered, how the office evaluates a fair profit for utilities, the role of settlements and counterproposals, and the impact of data centers on energy and water use. Trierweiler said customer voices come in through hearings and correspondence, that utilities are entitled to a fair return but not imprudent costs, and that the office is concerned about data center growth and its resource demands. No votes were taken, and the committee concluded its agenda and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> through to customers utility rates. through to customers utility rates.
• </c> customers for those categories of costs. customers for those categories of costs.
• Uh that has never been the customers.
• </c> make a determination whether customers make a determination whether customers receive<00:25:36.960
• </c><00:51:56.800><c> They</c> they control the customer data. They they control the customer data.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Obviously, our customer information system, with 1.2 million customers, any information that we have
• Obviously, our customer information system, with 1.2 million customers, any information that we have
• So our customers, our North Dakota customers, So our customers, our North Dakota customers, should those
• When the customer comes to us, how long? When the customer comes to us, how long?
• the customers when you come with a new large load customer?

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That savings is passed on to their customers.
• Otherwise, I don't want to lose customers.
• None of it goes back to customers? No, that's not true.
• We contract with customers.
• You can let them gouge customers. You can regulate them.

Keywords: 959, house, all