Support with amendments HB 505 / SB 682 (Utility Transparency and Accountability Act)

Support HB 505 / SB 682 with amendments to require transparency over wireless infrastructure attached to our public utilities.

Two hearings are scheduled for February 22 at 1 PM, one in the House (Economic Matters Committee, sign-ups and written testimony accepted on Tuesday, February 20, 8 AM to 6 PM) and one in the Senate (Education, Energy, and the Environment Committee, sign-ups and written testimony accepted on Wednesday, February 21, 8 AM to 6 PM).

Amendment #1: in paragraph 4-504 (B)(3), the list of costs that are considered political should include utilities promoting companies that lease or occupy the utility’s infrastructure, or the services they offer. For example, utilities should not charge ratepayers to promote wireless services.

Proposed amendment shown in bold (page 3, at line 14)

§ 4-504 (B)(3) unless approved or ordered by the Commission, advertising, marketing, communications, or other related costs identified by the Commission that seek to influence public opinion or create goodwill toward (i) the public service company; (ii) a lessor of such public service company or an occupant of its infrastructure; (iii) such lessor's or occupant's services or business practices.

Amendment #2: §405 (B) should require that the reports filed by utility companies are available to the public. Without this amendment, the public service commission would have this information, but the public could be blocked from accessing it.

Bill summary:

HB 505 / SB 682 increase oversight of the political activities of public utilities. The bill a) expands the list of political activities that public utilities cannot charge to their ratepayers and b) requires utilities to report political expenditures to the public service commission (PSC). Public utilities often rent out space on their infrastructure to telecom companies (for example, renting space to wireless companies for cell tower antennas to be attached to utility poles or water tanks). This infrastructure is paid for by ratepayers, and therefore the bill’s transparency provisions should apply to these activities.