Ambitious electric service affordability legislation faced dozens of recommendations for improvement Tuesday — from lawmakers and lobbyists alike — across a two-hour hearing.

House Bill 1002, a House Republican priority proposal, would reshape utility providers’ low-income customer assistance programs, block service shut-offs to such customers on dangerously hot days, put all ratepayers on predictable billing plans and refashion ratemaking into three-year plans outfitted with performance-based incentives.

“The goal … is to prioritize affordability for Hoosier ratepayers and ensure our utilities are maintaining transparent, cost-effective practices,” the bill’s author, Rep. Alaina Shonkwiler, R-Noblesville, said in a statement after Tuesday’s committee meeting.

“Any potential changes to the bill will align with those goals,” she continued.

Only testimony was taken in in the House’s utilities committee on Tuesday, with amendments and a vote expected next week.

Advocates like Delaney Barber Kwon of Indiana Conservation Voters thanked Shonkwiler for her work but suggested “further clarification in order for intent to match implementation.”

The legislation would require electricity suppliers under Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission jurisdiction that don’t already offer low-income customer help programs to do so by July. The companies would fund those offerings to at least half the amount they recovered from ratepayers under their IURC-approved energy efficiency programs in the most recent year.

Luke Wilson, the chief policy officer of the Indiana Office of Energy Development, estimated that could direct up to $30 million annually to low-income Hoosier households.

“That is a cost shift that is already in bills,” he added, “so ratepayers are not feeling additional impact.”

The provision encountered mixed testimony.

Danielle McGrath, president of the Indiana Energy Association, said lawmakers shouldn’t use that funding mechanism because the revenue varies by utility and by year, while Kerwin Olson, executive director of Citizens Action Coalition, said it’s “more than adequate funding.”

Committee Chair Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, noted the money has to come from somewhere, lest the bill be caught up in the finance-focused Ways and Means Committee.

Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, and others pushed for greater regulator oversight of the program requirements instead of leaving it largely up to the utilities themselves.

The legislation would require providers to notify customers of assistance programs on their websites. Rep. Cherrish Pryor, D-Indianapolis, asked that the text also go directly on bills to better reach elderly ratepayers.

“My daughter is my parents’ IT support, so I appreciate your point,” Shonkwiler joked.

Another provision intended to ease the burden on low-income Hoosiers would mimic current policy banning winter electricity service shut-offs — from Dec. 1 to March 15 — to the summertime. A key difference, however, is that the pause would be triggered by federal extreme heat warnings instead of taking effect across the hottest months of the year.

Pierce and customer advocates argued a month-based approach would be simpler to administer and benefit customers more.

“We need to be really careful (that) we just don’t pile up four months of debt on these people, and now they’re looking at trying to get reconnected, and the price is so high they can’t do it,” Soliday replied.

Debt fears also arose in detailed discussion over so-called budget billing plans, which promote predictability for customers by holding monthly bill amounts steady despite changes in usage. But when utilities settle up, shocked customers may find themselves on the hook for large sums.

“Families think they’re being on a program to help stabilize their finances, and they feel like they’re being preyed upon,” said Rep. Alex Burton, D-Evansville.

Pryor suggested a name change.

“I think part of what’s confusing the people is they hear ‘budget billing,’ and they think … there is a savings,” she said. “So, maybe, the word ‘budget’ needs to be changed to something that’s more reflective of what it really is.”

“It is confusing,” Soliday agreed. “… It doesn’t save you money. It saves you from spikes, is what it does. And some folks can endure spikes, and (for) others, it’s really painful.”

House Bill 1002 would require that every customer be put on such plans, but be given the ability to opt out. Utilities would settle up with participants at least twice a year, in an effort to avoid the sticker shock of a once-annual true-up.

Several witnesses recommended removing “at least” from the legislation to ensure true-ups don’t occur so often they erode the predictability budget billing is supposed to bring. Other suggestions included limiting implementation to just low-income customers, adding more detail on when the debt is due and pushing the effective day back from July.

Bill explores longer rate cycles, incentives

The measure would also switch up Indiana’s traditional ratemaking process by requiring utilities to pursue IURC approval of multi-year rate plans. The first year would be done “in the same manner” as now, while the second and third years would be based on projections.

Although Soliday said the intent was to make utilities file the same detailed information as is currently required, some warned the language may not be explicit enough.

Joe Rompala, representing the Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, also testified there’s no mechanism to settle the difference between the projected data and what actually transpires.

“This helps ensure that customers are only paying for assets which have actually been put into service, and which are actually being used to serve them when rates go into effect,” Rompala said. “This upholds a longstanding legal principle which helps shield ratepayers from excessive investment, which generates no direct benefits to them.”

Pierce and several witnesses objected to language specifying that the multi-year rate plans operate “independently” of trackers — requiring that regulators consider them “separately.”

Trackers allow utilities to increase rates based on certain expenses they have.

Sam Carpenter, the executive director of the Hoosier Environmental Council, feared that could “undermine some of the cost-containment goals.” He asked for lawmakers to clarify the “interaction” between those mechanisms.

Soliday previously said some trackers may “disappear” if multi-year ratemaking is adopted, telling the committee, “I’ve had some (utilities) say to me, they may just drop (the Transmission, Distribution, Storage Improvement Charge) completely, because it works into the plan.”

The multi-year rate plans would be paired with new performance metrics and incentives tied to customer affordability and service restoration.

Several witnesses suggested incentivizing additional priorities, like reducing peak load demand or promoting environmental sustainability. Others asked that the incentives be tailored to specific utilities or said the proposed incentive range is too small to drive utility decision-making.

It’s unclear which chunks of the bill could get the biggest revisions.

“I appreciate everyone who testified in the committee today and expect any amendments put forth to reflect the valuable insights and feedback we continue to receive from experts, stakeholders and residential ratepayers,” Shonkwiler said.

* * *

The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to giving Hoosiers a comprehensive look inside state government, policy and elections. The site combines daily coverage with in-depth scrutiny, political awareness and insightful commentary.

You can read the original version of the story here.

The post No shortage of suggestions offered to improve electric service affordability measure appeared first on News Now Warsaw.

About 40 witnesses from across the state — including more than a dozen embroiled in contentious Hamilton County elections — weighed in Wednesday on legislation upending Indiana’s nonpartisan school board system.

Amendments are possible before a vote, per the House election panel’s leader.

Senate Bill 287 would require school board candidates to declare a political party and run in primary elections. They’re currently nonpartisan.

Author Sen. Gary Byrne said he aimed to boost transparency for voters.

“It’s already a partisan position, but it’s just hidden,” Byrne, R-Byrneville, said. “… The people that I believe is opposed to this, they want to keep it hidden so they can get their votes in easier.”

Numerous witnesses said board members and candidates conceal their political leanings from constituents, including Dina Ferchmin, who campaigned as a conservative in a recent, unsuccessful bid for Carmel Clay Schools’ board.

“Right now, school board candidates can hide their true beliefs, erase their online history and present themselves as neutral figures with no political leanings,” Ferchmin said.

She accused her opponents of doing just that — but said their campaign materials listed them alongside Democratic candidates and were distributed by Democratic volunteers.

She dismissed calls to “keep politics out of schools,” adding, “That ship has sailed. Politics are already embedded in the curriculum, and they lean left.”

Others from the community rejected such arguments.

“I think you’re getting a false narrative,” Kristina Wheeler, a new member of the Carmel Clay School board said. “And that is that if people had only known what was happening … that the outcomes would have been different.”

“I assure you that the voters in Carmel and throughout Hamilton County know exactly who they voted for. … A lot of this, I think, frankly, comes off as sour grapes,” Wheeler said. She highlighted endorsements from both sides of the aisle.

Jennifer Cashin leads the nonpartisan political action committee Support CCS that backed Wheeler and another candidate over Ferchmin and another opponent. She pushed back when witnesses Wednesday referred to the group as Democrat-aligned.

Cashin said she’s a lifelong Republican and argued that school-related disagreements among Carmel Republicans show how letters behind candidate names won’t “tell you how that person is going to support our school districts.”

Several witnesses said they don’t subscribe to any party.

The legislation “will crush the hopes of people … who want to help but don’t want to get tangled in partisan politics,” said Washington Township Schools board member Steven Thompson. “… I don’t even know what my political party is, to be honest.”

Several working for the judiciary or for federal employers – like the military – said Indiana’s Code of Judicial Conduct and the Hatch Act would bar them from taking partisan elected office, ending their school board service.

Byrne, the bill’s author, said his other goal was to give voters more information and thereby boost turnout.

“They get in (the voting booth), they just may have not seen that information, and they don’t know what to do. It’s best if it’s on the ballot,” Byrne said.

“It’s just one more piece of information,” agreed Rep. Kyle Pierce, R-Anderson. He noted that other specialized elected roles like coroner or surveyor are partisan.

Democratic lawmakers and some witnesses feared Hoosiers would research candidates less, with Carmel resident Jim May accusing supporters of targeting the votes of “wholly uninformed” Hoosiers.

Cecilia Poynter with MadVoters suggested lawmakers address transparency concerns by banning school board candidates from putting partisan indicators on their materials, and help voters by requiring school district websites to include links to candidate information.

Senate Bill 287 would also raise board member pay from the current $2,000 maximum by tying compensation to 10% of starting teacher salaries. The state has a $40,000 minimum — which would double school board pay — but new Gov. Mike Braun wants to land at $45,000.

Wesco, R-Osceola, told reporters the group would revisit Senate Bill 287.

He expected several amendments to be offered, saying it’s “down to a discussion” between this version of the legislation and a simpler, House-originated take that the chamber killed in a deadline last month. Wesco indicated a preference for that draft.

Asked if the idea would get to the House floor for a vote, Wesco said, “I think it’s possible. We’ll have to see.”

Previous attempts to make school boards partisan have failed.

* * *

The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to giving Hoosiers a comprehensive look inside state government, policy and elections. The site combines daily coverage with in-depth scrutiny, political awareness and insightful commentary.

You can read the original version of the story here.

The post Partisan school board policy debated by state lawmakers appeared first on News Now Warsaw.