Representative opposes utility securitization language, warns costs could fall on ratepayers

A House member rose on the floor to oppose a provision discussed in a measure that, according to the speech, would permit a utility to recover wildfire-related costs through a new non-bypassable tariff rider and by securitizing unpaid utility debt.

The speaker characterized the draft provision as allowing a Public Utilities Commission (PUC) mechanism for a “non-bypassable wildfire discrete tariff rider recovery charge” and warned that securitization could permit the utility to sell unpaid customer debt collections. The floor remarks tied the provision to concerns about a privately owned, for-profit utility and said taxpayers should not be left to absorb costs or allow securitization that burdens households.

Why it matters: Securitization and tariff riders are legal-financial mechanisms that change how utilities recover costs; if enacted they can shift the timing and incidence of cost recovery to current ratepayers. The floor speaker urged caution and asked colleagues to oppose the provision.

What the speaker said (floor transcript): “This bill will pass along wildfire negligence costs from HECO to consumers. Section B3 of this bill says the PUC may create a non-bypassable wildfire discrete tariff rider recovery charge ... via securitization, would allow HECO to sell unpaid utility debt collections from broken or in-debt Maui families.” The speaker asked colleagues to vote no on the bill’s securitization provisions.

Context: The floor exchange also included parliamentary points of order and a request to strike a phrase in debate; the speaker later clarified wording at the Speaker’s request.

Ending: The floor debate registered clear opposition from at least one member on the securitization language; the underlying provision will be subject to committee review, amendment, or further floor action depending on the recommittal and committee process.