Chamber Testimony: Opposition of SB 1531

Testimony in Opposition to Senate Bill 1531
Submitted by Tony Sheridan, President, Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut
Before the Committee on Government Administration and Elections

Honorable Chairs, Ranking Members, and Members of the Committee,
On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut, I submit this testimony in strong opposition to Raised Bill No. 1531. The Chamber’s mission is to foster a positive business climate that supports economic growth in our region. Several provisions of this bill, particularly Sections 1, 2, 13, and 14, threaten business operations, increase costs, and undermine economic development in Connecticut.

Concerns Regarding Sections 1 and 2: FOIA Obligations for Private Utilities

These sections propose redefining "public agency" to include certain private utility companies, subjecting them to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requirements while prohibiting them from recovering compliance costs.

• Erodes Business Confidentiality: Private utilities are not government agencies. Subjecting them to FOIA disclosures exposes proprietary information, weakening competitive strategies and financial stability.
• Imposes Unfair Financial Burdens: Compliance requires significant legal, administrative, and technological resources, yet the bill bars cost recovery. This will lead to reduced service quality and higher indirect costs for consumers.
• Unnecessary and Redundant: Utility companies are already highly regulated, with state regulators regularly scrutinizing their operations. This additional oversight is excessive and counterproductive.
• Harmful Economic Impact: A safe, reliable electric grid is essential for businesses. Increased costs and weakened operational efficiency will negatively affect economic growth statewide.

We urge the Committee to recognize that FOIA obligations on private utilities set a dangerous precedent that could extend to other private industries, discouraging investment and business expansion in Connecticut.

Concerns Regarding Sections 13 and 14: Utility Ownership Restrictions & Franchise Revocation

These sections mandate the separation of electric and gas utilities by January 1, 2026, and grant the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) expanded franchise revocation powers.

• Eliminates Cost Efficiencies: Integrated utility companies benefit from shared infrastructure, coordinated maintenance, and consolidated administration—resulting in lower costs and improved reliability. Forced divestiture will eliminate these efficiencies and increase overhead costs.
• Raises Costs for Consumers and Businesses: The financial burden of restructuring will inevitably be passed down to ratepayers, disproportionately affecting small and medium-sized businesses.
• Violates Property Rights: Utility companies have made long-term investments based on existing franchise agreements. The bill disregards these investments and creates regulatory uncertainty, deterring future investment in Connecticut.
• Undermines Economic Stability: The expanded authority to revoke franchises introduces instability, making Connecticut a less attractive place for business investment and job growth.

We urge the Committee to reject these provisions and preserve the operational efficiencies and property rights that support a strong economy.

Conclusion: A Call for Constructive Solutions

Senate Bill 1531 imposes excessive regulatory burdens on private businesses, increasing costs without providing tangible benefits. Instead of punitive measures, we urge the General Assembly to collaborate with utility companies to develop policies that:

• Reduce costs for businesses and consumers,
• Encourage investment in energy infrastructure and innovation,
• Streamline regulations to promote economic growth.

Utility companies play a vital role in Connecticut’s economy, supporting job creation, energy reliability, and sustainable development. Working with them—not against them—will lead to better outcomes for businesses, consumers, and the state as a whole.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide this testimony and welcome further discussion.

Respectfully submitted,