Senate committee advances bill to reinstate Consumers Utility Council, 8–3
February 17, 2026 | 2026 Legislature Georgia, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
A Senate Regulated Industries and Utilities Committee advanced legislation to reestablish a Consumers Utility Council (SB 94), voting 8–3 to send the bill to the Rules Committee. Proponents said the council would provide independent legal representation and discovery powers for ratepayers in contested Public Service Commission (PSC) cases.
Senator Huff Statler presented the bill to the committee, saying, “This would set up a consumer utility council, like 46 states currently have,” and that the text mirrors the version the committee considered last year. He said the council would give ratepayers legal standing for discovery in complex rate and capital-expenditure proceedings.
Bobby Baker, a former PSC commissioner who testified in support, told the committee that the current process has produced “secret stipulated agreement[s] entered between Georgia Power and the commission staff” and described the prudency review for Vogtle Unit Number 4 as “a 1 day hearing” rather than a full contested proceeding. “Georgia ratepayers are unrepresented today before the Public Service Commission,” Baker said, arguing the council should be reestablished and “adequately funded to ensure Georgia utility customers have some dedicated and qualified representation in billion-dollar rate cases.”
Kiana Jones Moore, senior environmental policy aide to DeKalb County Super District 6 Commissioner Ted Terry, testified the county supports the bill and said constituents have reported negative experiences at PSC meetings that make a separate consumer advocate desirable.
Committee members questioned costs and whether the PSC’s public-interest staff could be expanded instead of creating a new body. Senator Summers asked whether the proposal would put a non-elected actor in a position to override Commissioners’ decisions; Baker and other backers said the council would present evidence and litigate positions but not dictate final PSC rulings. Supporters noted the council would have discovery and litigation rights that individual interveners do not.
The committee recorded a roll-call style count that resulted in eight votes in favor and three opposed; the bill will proceed to the Rules Committee for further consideration.
Next steps: SB 94 moves to the Senate Rules Committee. If scheduled there, the Rules Committee would decide whether the bill reaches the Senate floor.
Senator Huff Statler presented the bill to the committee, saying, “This would set up a consumer utility council, like 46 states currently have,” and that the text mirrors the version the committee considered last year. He said the council would give ratepayers legal standing for discovery in complex rate and capital-expenditure proceedings.
Bobby Baker, a former PSC commissioner who testified in support, told the committee that the current process has produced “secret stipulated agreement[s] entered between Georgia Power and the commission staff” and described the prudency review for Vogtle Unit Number 4 as “a 1 day hearing” rather than a full contested proceeding. “Georgia ratepayers are unrepresented today before the Public Service Commission,” Baker said, arguing the council should be reestablished and “adequately funded to ensure Georgia utility customers have some dedicated and qualified representation in billion-dollar rate cases.”
Kiana Jones Moore, senior environmental policy aide to DeKalb County Super District 6 Commissioner Ted Terry, testified the county supports the bill and said constituents have reported negative experiences at PSC meetings that make a separate consumer advocate desirable.
Committee members questioned costs and whether the PSC’s public-interest staff could be expanded instead of creating a new body. Senator Summers asked whether the proposal would put a non-elected actor in a position to override Commissioners’ decisions; Baker and other backers said the council would present evidence and litigate positions but not dictate final PSC rulings. Supporters noted the council would have discovery and litigation rights that individual interveners do not.
The committee recorded a roll-call style count that resulted in eight votes in favor and three opposed; the bill will proceed to the Rules Committee for further consideration.
Next steps: SB 94 moves to the Senate Rules Committee. If scheduled there, the Rules Committee would decide whether the bill reaches the Senate floor.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
