This story originally appeared in the Oregon Capital Chronicle and is used with permission.
Legislators are considering at least six bills this session aimed at curbing spending from private, investor-owned monopoly utilities and limiting how and when those utilities can recover costs from customers.
The slate of bills, largely supported by environmental and social justice groups and the watchdog Citizens’ Utility Board, and largely opposed by the state’s three monopoly electric and three monopoly gas utilities, are currently sitting in legislative revenue and rules committees that are exempt from traditional deadlines for decision-making.
The proposals follow five years of residential rate increases that have led to record power and gas shut offs for Oregonians. In 2024, Oregon’s private investor-owned utilities collectively cut off gas and power to nearly 70,000 households, according to data from the Citizens’ Utility Board. They also come as most Oregonians pay far more for electricity and gas than they did five years ago: Electricity rates are 50% higher and natural gas rates are nearly 40% higher than they were five years ago.
Gov. Tina Kotek has expressed support for several of the bills lawmakers are proposing to rein in the private utilities.
“What I want to see for the end of this session is a renewed commitment to keeping utility rates low, giving the Public Utility Commission additional tools to do that, and more opportunities to put more of the burden on folks who are using the energy,” Kotek said at a news conference Monday. “Some of the large users, like data centers, should be doing more of their fair share.”
Senate Bill 688
What it does: The bill would give the Oregon Public Utility Commission, which regulates the monopoly utilities operating in the state, the power to require those utilities meet certain performance targets in order to raise rates. Those targets include reducing capital and energy costs, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, investing in community solar and microgrids and ensuring low-income Oregonians aren’t cut off from power.
Currently, utilities borrow from their investors and guarantee about a 9% return on the investment when they build out their infrastructure. Ratepayers cover both the costs of repayment and the investors’ profit. Bill sponsors said this incentivizes companies not to save ratepayers money, but to make needless and expensive investments in infrastructure to reward investors.
Who’s behind it?: State Sens. Khanh Pham, D-Portland, and Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, sponsored the bill. It has the support of the Citizens’ Utility Board, environmental groups and the League of Oregon Cities, who said that private, monopoly utilities lack financial incentives to contain costs because their profits come from investments in expanding.
“It’s time we modernize the process,” Nolan Pleše, a lobbyist for the League of Oregon Cities, wrote in submitted testimony.
Who’s opposed?: Officials from Portland General Electric, or PGE, say the bill as amended imposes regulations utilities are already required to follow, such as requiring private utilities to acquire cost-effective energy and to reduce emissions.
“PGE is already heavily engaged in many of the activities the bill seeks to incent,” company lobbyist Greg Alderson wrote in submitted testimony.
Bill status: The bill received two public hearings in the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment in March, where it passed near unanimously from the committee to the Joint Ways and Means Committee with the recommendation they also vote to approve it. It’s been sitting in the Ways and Means committee without a scheduled vote since March 27.
Senate Bill 88
What it does: The bill would prohibit private utilities from charging customers to cover the costs of lobbying, lawsuits, political contributions, industry association membership fees and marketing and advertising. Currently the Public Utility Commission decides to what degree companies can raise customer rates to cover these costs.
Who’s behind it?: The bill is being considered at the request of the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment. More than 130 letters of testimony have been submitted in support of the bill, including from environmental groups, the Oregon Solar and Storage Industries Association and the Citizens’ Utility Board.
“We’ve seen in recent years the way our traditional processes for assigning rates to residential customers has become unbalanced,” Jennifer Hill-Hart, a lobbyist for the Citizens’ Utility Board, said in a public hearing on the bill Monday. “Utilities have the upper hand, from control of when they come in for a rate case, to what is included in the general rate case. This is to the disservice of customers, and has outcomes that not only affect affordability but fairness and transparency.”
Who’s opposed?: Private monopoly utilities, the industry group Northwest Gas Association and the Local 290 Plumbers and Steamfitters.
Brad Archuleta, an organizer with the plumbers and steamfitters union, said his members are worried that utilities will cut costs elsewhere if they can’t raise customer rates to pay for membership fees and advertising.
“If SB 88 moves forward, utilities may be forced to cut corners and look for shortcuts,” Archuleta wrote. “We need to ensure the folks who are building out our energy system are paid well, and the market has the ability to grow and welcome more union jobs.”
Bill status: The Senate Energy and Environment Committee sent the bill to the Senate Rules Committee in March without recommending its passage — a common maneuver to give lawmakers more time to work on amendments or gather support for a measure. The Rules Committee held a public hearing for the bill Monday and has not yet scheduled a vote.
House Bill 3179
What it does: Also known as the FAIR Energy Act, this bill would limit private, investor-owned utility rate requests, allowing them only once every 18 months. Rate increases would have to go into effect before Nov. 1 or after March 31 so ratepayers would not suddenly be hit with a bigger bill in winter when usage is highest.
The bill would also require the Public Utility Commission to consider the cumulative economic impact of a rate increase on customers over time and to analyze company profits from the 24 months leading up to a request to increase rates.
Who’s behind it?: State Reps. Nathan Sosa, D-Hillsboro, and Pam Marsh, D-Ashland, and state Sens. Kathleen Taylor, D-Milwaukee, and Janeen Sollman, D-Hillsboro. The bill has the support of the NW Energy Coalition, Citizens’ Utility Board and the city of Portland.
“Energy rates have increased dramatically in recent years, and today too many Portlanders are struggling to pay their energy bills,” wrote Eric Engstrom, Portland’s interim director of planning and sustainability. “HB 3179 seeks to center households and families by requiring greater transparency, additional consumer protections, and an assessment of the real human impacts of utility rate increases.”
Who’s opposed?: Private monopoly utilities, the Alliance of Western Energy Customers and Oregon Business and Industry, a statewide business association, are among bill opponents.
Bill status: The House Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection sent it to the House Rules Committee in April. A public hearing for the bill in the Rules Committee is scheduled for Wednesday.
House Bill 3546
What it does: HB 3546 is also known as the POWER Act. It creates a separate customer class for data centers, which are the fastest-growing energy users in the state. This would allow the Public Utility Commission to ensure charges for grid expansion and infrastructure needed to power those data centers are not being passed onto residential and commercial customers.
Who’s behind it?: The bill is sponsored by a bipartisan group of lawmakers including state Reps. Pam Marsh, D-Ashland, Mark Owens, R-Crane, Dacia Grayber, D-Portland, and state Sens. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, and Janeen Sollman, D-Hillsboro. It has received nearly 200 letters of testimony including more than 180 in support from environmental groups, city mayors and the monopoly utilities.
“While the existing regulatory framework is established to protect customers and align the costs of energy infrastructure with the customers benefiting from these investments, the scale, pace and uncertainty surrounding this potential load growth requires additional regulatory updates to protect all customers while creating a path for large customers to expand their businesses,” wrote Pacific Power lobbyist Annette Price in her submitted testimony.
Who’s opposed?: Among the nine letters of opposition are ones from the Alliance of Western Energy Consumers, the Data Center Coalition and Amazon Web Services.
“As society continues to rely more heavily on technology, global demands for energy and grid capacity continue to grow. It is important for states like Oregon to consider the positive opportunities of data centers in both AI development and sustainable energy solutions to meet these interconnected challenges,” said Shannon Kellogg, a vice president and lobbyist for Amazon, in his submitted testimony.
Bill status: The bill passed the House in April on a 41-16 vote, with several Republicans joining Democrats in voting to approve. It had its second of two public hearings in the Senate Energy and Environment Committee on Monday. A vote in the committee has not yet been scheduled.
House Bill 3792
What it does: The bill would double the amount of money electric utilities contribute to the state’s Energy Assistance Program annually from $20 million to $40 million, which serves low-income customers struggling to pay their utility bills.
Who’s behind it?: State Rep. Tom Andersen, D-Salem, is the bill’s sponsor. It has the support of Portland city leaders as well as Multnomah County leaders and environmental and social groups such as AARP.
“Given the rapid escalation in utility rates in Oregon, HB 3792 will help older Oregonians not only pay their bills but stay in their homes,” wrote Andrea Meyer, a lobbyist for AARP of Oregon.
Who’s opposed?: Portland General Electric. Company lobbyist Greg Alderson said PGE is concerned that increasing the amount of money in the Energy Assistance Program does not address the root causes of high electricity bills, and that the money would be better spent ensuring people have an effective and efficient heat source in their homes, which would lower their bills.
“Limited bill assistance resources primarily go toward covering large bills and balances each year for customers experiencing persistent high energy burden, in many cases the same customers, rather than addressing the underlying contributing factors,” Alderson said in written testimony.
Bill status: The bill advanced on a party-line vote in April from the House Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee to the Joint Ways and Means Committee. It is still in the Ways and Means Committee without a scheduled vote.