Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Puc topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces RS 31781 to trim Public Utilities Commission code language
Summary
A legislative committee voted to introduce RS 31781, part of a red tape reduction package that would remove multiple code sections that Representative Joe Palmer said exceed the Public Utilities Commission—s authority; a member raised concern about removing a "common carrier" reference from the code.
A legislative committee voted to introduce RS 31781, a measure described by its sponsor as part of a red tape reduction effort that removes multiple code provisions from the Public Utilities Commission—s (PUC) chapter.
The bill was introduced during the committee—s brief meeting after the body approved minutes from its Jan. 8 session. "This piece of legislation is part of the red tape reduction act. It's RS 31,781," said Joe Palmer, a representative from District 20 in Meridian, who carried the measure for the PUC.
Palmer told the committee the proposal largely removes code sections he said fall outside the PUC—s authority. "All it does is take out quite a few sections of code, for instance, dealing with aircraft. The PUC doesn't have any authority to deal with any aircraft. That's all dealt with through the federal government," Palmer said. He offered to bring a PUC representative to a future hearing to answer technical questions.
Representative Achilles said she supported moving the bill forward to print but raised a substantive policy concern about one set of edits. "I agree with moving this forward to print, Representative Palmer, but I am concerned with 1 area in the edits here to explain why we're removing common carrier from the Code," Achilles said, adding she wanted further conversation when the bill returns to committee.
Representative Crane moved to introduce RS 31781; the motion passed on a voice vote. The committee did not record a roll-call tally for either the minutes approval or the motion to introduce the bill.
The measure was presented to the committee for introduction only; no committee-level amendment or final disposition of substantive language occurred at the meeting. Palmer said the committee could summon a PUC representative at a later date to provide technical answers before further consideration.
