Lawmakers review CURB budget, hear agency's rate-case workload and consumer role

The Kansas Legislature’s Utilities Committee reviewed the Citizens Utility Ratepayer Board budget and received testimony on the board’s recent workload and performance measures.

Luke Drury, senior fiscal analyst with the Legislative Research Department, told the committee the CURB budget is fee-funded and that the numbers shown in the committee materials are the same as those contained in House Bill 2007 as it currently stands. He noted that CURB carried over $88,000 in unspent consultant funds from fiscal 2024 into the agency’s base for 2025 and that the FY2026 request reflects modest changes such as a $3,000 net increase in salaries and wages (about 0.4%), higher group health insurance and employer KPERS rates, OITS communication costs, and a small $76 net deletion mostly tied to fringe and commodity adjustments.

Joseph Astrab, consumer counsel for the Citizens Utility Ratepayer Board, summarized performance-based budgeting metrics and a multi-year caseload. “My name is Joseph Astrab. I am the consumer counsel for the Citizens Utility Ratepayer Board or CURB,” he told the committee, and described CURB’s in-house work on Kansas Corporation Commission dockets including Evergy’s integrated resource plan, general rate cases, and post–winter-storm tariff work. Astrab said the agency compares the in-house cost of its work with the hypothetical cost of hiring similar work out privately and that CURB’s interventions have produced ratepayer savings in contested proceedings.

Astrab and Drury told senators CURB is entirely fee funded and did not request general fund appropriations or supplements for the reviewed period. Astrab described the office’s consumer-assistance role: CURB takes phone calls and emails from individual customers, helps them understand bills and regulatory processes and assists with preparing filings before the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC), but it does not represent individual customers in civil litigation or file private lawsuits on their behalf. “We don’t necessarily represent individuals in that capacity…we help people navigate that,” Astrab said.

Committee members pressed for explanations of past expenditure swings and longer-term growth. Drury deferred detailed line-item explanations to the agency but said a portion of year-to-year change reflects consultant carryovers and a legislative pay plan; Astrab said spikes in spending can follow major dockets that require contracted analysis or extended staff hours. Senators also asked about CURB’s governance: Astrab said the five-member CURB board was established by statute in 1989 and last amended in 1992 and that there is no statutory requirement limiting political-party composition for the CURB board as there is for the KCC commissioners.

Senators raised policy questions that lie outside CURB’s regulatory remit. On proposed legislation about utility civil liability for wildfire, Astrab told the committee the civil-negligence portion of such a bill is a matter for the civil courts and the legislature and outside CURB’s mandate, but that CURB could intervene in KCC dockets tied to wildfire training or related regulatory investigations. “Because that’s a type of civil court work that’s outside of our mandates, we are able to help them with being able to say what’s negligence or how to sue in that regard,” Astrab said.

Committee members asked for follow-up information, including a request from Senator Warren for a breakdown of the CURB board’s members by political affiliation; Astrab said he would follow up. No formal committee action or vote on the agency’s budget occurred during the hearing.

CURB officials made materials available in committee handouts, and both Drury and Astrab invited follow-up questions by email for detailed expenditure or docket-specific inquiries.