House committee advances bill to bring some private water systems under PSC oversight

The House Agriculture and Consumer Affairs Committee voted Monday morning to advance HB 449, a bill that would place limited regulation of some private water companies under the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC).

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Rhodes, told the committee the measure targets privately owned water systems that use surface water and have at least 2,000 customers and that the bill is the product of a multi‑meeting study committee. "We are 1 of 5 states that do not regulate private water companies," Rhodes said, and he described the measure as a start toward PSC oversight. He also warned of a budget impact for the PSC, saying, "we're talking about $750 to $1,200,000 would be the budget need that we would need, for this program."

The bill would give the PSC a formal rate‑case process for those systems, with opportunities for public hearings. Rhodes said the draft removes capital expenditures from hookup (tap) fees as part of compromises made during the study process: "we took the hookup fees and capital expenditures out of the equation. So I feel very good that the 15% increase, is very fair. And if they justify it, it's justified." Committee members pressed on consumer protections for small systems; Representative Darlene Tyler asked whether a system could simply "shut it down" rather than accept a rate increase. Rhodes responded that the bill covers only systems that draw surface water and serve 2,000 or more customers, not small well‑based systems, and he told members he expected affected systems would not shut off service.

Other members described the bill as narrowly targeted. One committee member said it was "the first time the PSC in Georgia has been asked to regulate water systems" and called the proposal a cautious way to "stick [a] toe in" and test oversight on a small number of systems. Representative Mathis asked whether private systems provide fire hydrants and who would bear the cost of water used for firefighting; Rhodes said he did not have an answer at the hearing and would follow up. Representative Taylor asked whether the PSC fiscal estimate was staffing‑heavy; Rhodes said most of the projected cost would be staffing and that the PSC staff present could offer more detail.

After questions, a motion to pass the bill (LC 5,50562S as shown in committee paperwork) carried by voice vote and the committee referred the measure to Rules. The committee record shows the passage by voice vote; there was no roll‑call tally recorded in the transcript.

The bill advances oversight of a small subset of private water companies while leaving many questions for later — the PSC staffing plan, how small systems and firefighting water costs would be handled, and precise fiscal estimates. The chair instructed sponsors to complete required paperwork to move the bill to Rules.

Votes at a glance: HB 449 — motion to pass committee paperwork (LC 5,50562S); voice vote recorded as "aye," no roll‑call recorded; outcome: passed and reported to Rules.