Committee hears testimony for SB 15 88 'Upgrade and Save' program; proponents tout access, utilities raise finance and operational concerns

Senate Bill 15 88 — dubbed an 'Upgrade and Save' inclusive utility investment pilot in testimony — received a public hearing on Feb. 9 before the Senate Energy and Environment Committee.

Sponsor Senator Jeff Golden framed the bill as complementary to SB 15 82: where SB 15 82 creates distributed power programs, SB 15 88 addresses the demand side by enabling investor‑owned electric companies to pay upfront costs for qualifying energy efficiency and electrification projects and recover costs through a bill charge that is intended to be less than expected energy savings.

Proponents — including MCAT, Climate Solutions, Rewiring America, Clean Energy Works, and Oregon Environmental Council — said the program removes upfront cost barriers for homeowners and renters, can be structured to protect customers, and would expand access to heat pumps, weatherization, batteries and other measures. Rewiring America modeling cited during testimony estimated as many as 110,000 homes could qualify for a new heat pump under the program, with about half of those homes in PGE territory.

Portland General Electric and other opponents argued the bill as written asks utilities to perform unfamiliar functions (project financing, underwriting, contractor management) and raised payback and cost allocation concerns. PGE testimony included several illustrative calculations: the company said an estimated 10,000 homes in its service area still use electric resistance heating; financing a $7,500 ductless heat pump after Energy Trust incentives would yield a payback period the company estimated at more than 30 years using ETO average savings assumptions; PGE also cited large amounts collected for Energy Trust of Oregon from PGE customers ($158 million last year, projected to $240 million annually in 2030) as a complicating factor.

Other witnesses disputed the characterization of the bill as consumer lending and emphasized that the proposed mechanism is a utility tariffed service subject to PUC oversight and precedents in other states. Committee members asked clarifying questions about how obligations attach to properties (witnesses explained the obligation would commonly attach to the meter/deed if a customer sells a home) and about pilot design and oversight. The committee closed the hearing on SB 15 88 and adjourned without taking further action.

Next steps: the bill will remain in committee for further consideration; the committee requested written testimony and fiscal/technical details be submitted to the record.