Connecticut House Bill HB05014

Connecticut 2019 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/19
• Refer: 1/9/19
• Refer: 3/11/19
• Report Pass: 3/12/19
• Refer: 3/20/19
• Report Pass: 3/26/19

Caption

An Act Requiring The Provision Of Notice To Certain Public Officials When An Application Is Made For A Change Of Control Of A Water Company.

Impact

If passed, this bill would alter existing statutes governing water companies, specifically by ensuring that local governance is informed and has a voice in significant changes to local water service provision. The requirement of notification aims to foster greater community engagement and oversight by allowing public officials to be informed about essential changes affecting their constituents. This act would likely create a more structured approach to how changes in control of water companies are communicated and managed within the regulatory framework of the state.

Summary

House Bill 5014 aims to enhance transparency in the oversight of water companies by requiring those seeking a change of control of such companies to notify specific public officials. This notification must be sent to the chief elected official of each municipality within the service territory of the water company and to members of the General Assembly whose districts are affected. The notice informs them about the application made to the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA), the docket number, and encourages their participation in the process by allowing for written comments or in-person appearances to provide input on the application.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 5014 appears largely supportive, with legislators emphasizing the need for increased communication and transparency in the management of essential utilities. By involving public officials in the regulatory process, the bill is seen as a move to protect community interests in water management. There may be concerns from some quarters regarding the implications of such requirements on the efficiency of regulatory processes, but overall, the narrative is focused on the positive aspects of enhanced oversight.

Contention

Notable points of contention, if any, revolve around the balance between regulatory oversight and operational efficiency for water companies. Critics may argue that additional notification requirements could slow down the approval process for changes in control. However, supporters maintain that the benefits of ensuring that local stakeholders are informed and can participate in the oversight process outweigh potential bureaucratic delays. Thus, the ongoing debate highlights the tension between the need for proper regulation and the need for efficient governance of public utilities.