Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Utility Billing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee debates billing fix for shared condo electric meters; three related bills ITLled or tabled

2650911 · March 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Lawmakers and utilities debated amendments to let homeowner associations bill shared residential well/septic electric meters at residential rates. The committee ultimately recommended “Inexpedient to Legislate” for the primary bills after mixed testimony from utilities, the Department of Energy and condominium stakeholders.

Lawmakers on the Science, Technology and Energy Committee heard extensive testimony on efforts to change how shared electric meters that serve residential well pumps and septic systems are billed, and voted to ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate) on multiple related bills.

The proposal reviewed by the committee would allow a condominium association or other entity receiving a single meter that serves only residential well or septic pumps to be billed at residential — rather than commercial — rates, and require the association to allocate the meter’s cost equally among the units served. The change was intended to address cases where shared meters routed through homeowners associations (HOAs) were charged commercial rates and those costs were spread across all HOA members rather than only the users of the shared meter.

Representative John Bernardi, who chaired the subcommittee on the issue, said the panel considered two approaches: naming a single resident to be billed, or amending one of three introduced bills (5‑37, 5‑39 and 6‑80) so that a dedicated line serving only residential well or septic would be billed at residential rates. "When Unitil looked at the language, they agreed with that," Bernardi said of the amendment the subcommittee drafted. He told the committee the fix was meant to apply only to shared residential well and septic meters, not things like shared laundry facilities or lighting.

Department of Energy attorney Matt Young and DOE witness Megan Stone cautioned there are practical and rate‑design concerns. "The department does still have some concerns," Stone said, pointing to uncertainty about whether utilities would need to inspect lines to verify that a meter serves only well or septic loads and to the potential for cost shifting through rates. Stone said the department worried how a change would affect utilities' cost recovery and how those costs would ultimately flow to other customers.

Eversource Energy also objected. Griffin Roberge of Eversource told the committee the draft language could allow condo associations to "bypass the appropriate process for rate designation" and create a precedent for other customers to seek reclassification of service. Eversource said rate classes and tariffs are designed to reflect costs of service and that the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and tariff process are the appropriate forum for rate classification issues.

Supporters of the amendment, including some legislators and condo advocates, said the proposed change would correct what they described as an inequity where residential users served by a shared meter paid commercial rates or where HOA fees redistributed the shared meter cost across all units, including those not served by the meter.

Votes at a glance

- House Bill 6‑80 (standardizing HOA billing for shared meters): Committee motion adopted ITL; vote 18–0. (Executive session)

- House Bill 5‑39 (one of the drafted bills combining language): Committee motion adopted ITL; vote 18–0. (Executive session)

- House Bill 5‑37 (the subcommittee’s preferred vehicle after amendment discussions): Committee motion adopted ITL; vote 10–8. (Executive session)

Why it matters

Legislators framed the bills as an attempt to close a narrow but tangible billing gap for certain condominium or HOA arrangements where a single meter serves a small number of residential units. Proponents argued the change would ensure only the users of a shared meter pay for it; opponents warned about precedent, rate design, and enforcement complications that could shift costs to other customers.

What’s next

Committee members split on whether the problem should be solved by statute or left to HOAs, utilities and the PUC. The committee majority voted ITL on the legislative fixes considered this session; a minority will file a report urging a different outcome. Those who supported legislative change argued stakeholders should continue to pursue a durable solution, whether by non‑legislative fixes (bylaw changes at HOAs) or carefully redrafted statute to limit unintended consequences.

Speakers quoted in this article are direct participants listed in the committee transcript and are identified in the article’s speaker list.