Committee hears bills to reclassify shared well and septic meters in residential condominiums as residential service

Representative Allison Knabb (Rockingham 12) introduced three bills—HB 537, HB 539 and HB 680—saying they aim to require that electric meters used only for well and septic pump service in residential condominium developments be billed at residential (Schedule D/domestic) rather than commercial (Schedule G) rates.

The bills were presented as a narrowly drawn fix for condominiums whose common meters for potable water and septic pumps are billed at commercial rates, increasing costs for affected unit owners and, in some associations, causing managers to spread higher delivery charges across all units. "The homeowners association cannot, on the advice of counsel, change this charge ... The homeowners association is then forced to charge this expense back to all unit owners," Knabb said.

Nut graf: Proponents said the change would stop an outcome they described as an overcharge—commercial delivery rates for electricity that serves domestic needs in residential condo units—and would restore parity with single-family residences. Condo leaders told the committee their members were hit with higher delivery charges and that nonlegislative fixes had not resolved the dispute with Unitil, the utility mentioned in testimony.

Richard Sweat, testifying as a board member and condominium association leader from the Vineyards at Stratham, told the committee the assertion that "condominium associations are, by nature, commercial entities" is "not correct," and urged lawmakers to adopt clearer statutory language distinguishing residential condominiums from commercial enterprises. "Condominiums...require a statement of purpose in the declaration, which may restrict use to residential," Sweat said, noting the association and the Condominium Leadership Council back the bills.

Megan Stone, legislative liaison for the New Hampshire Department of Energy, said the department was neutral but had concerns. Stone told lawmakers that electric utilities classify service as residential or nonresidential and that common-area service often "provides benefit beyond that provided to an individual home or residence" and is therefore treated as nonresidential in tariff practice. She said the department believes the bills as drafted could shift classification authority from utilities to condominium associations and might produce unintended cost shifting between rate classes.

Representatives of distribution utilities echoed administrative concerns. Michael Licata of Eversource said utilities generally assign a tariff based on the account holder and the name on an electric meter: "If the account is in the name of a commercial enterprise...they are charged the commercial rates regardless of whether the use is to support a multifamily condominium or an apartment building," Licata said. He added that if the account were changed to a residential customer name, utilities would bill the residential rate, but doing so for many shared meters could create billing complications for utilities and for condominium members.

Proponents said they had tried nonlegislative steps. Representatives of the Vineyards said they had communicated with Unitil and the Department of Energy but could not secure a remedy, and that the association was told its legal structure left it without a clear path to reassign costs to only the units that share a meter.

Ending: Committee members asked technical questions about statutory drafting and urged sponsors to consider a single combined bill to address overlapping statutory sections. No vote was taken; sponsors and stakeholders were directed toward drafting a single consolidated amendment to clarify which meters and what types of condominium ownership or declarations would qualify for residential treatment.