Michigan Senate Bill SB0255

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/23/25
• Refer: 4/23/25

Caption

Criminal procedure: other; violation of tampering with utility shut-off procedures; decriminalize under certain circumstances. Amends title & secs. 282 & 383a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.282 & 750.383a).

Impact

The modification in the legal interpretation of utility service re-establishment is projected to significantly impact state laws regarding utilities. Under the current framework, individuals who came into contact with utility lines or devices faced severe felony charges, which could lead to imprisonment. With the enactment of SB0255, the penalties will instead favor civil infractions, reducing the burden of heavy criminal penalties on individuals struggling to maintain utility services, particularly in cases of financial hardship. These provisions are aimed at promoting equitable access to essential services while still addressing illegal tampering.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 255, also known as SB0255, proposes amendments to the Michigan penal code specifically concerning the tampering of utility services and the associated penalties. The bill seeks to revise how violations relating to the unlawful use of utilities such as water, gas, and electricity are categorized and penalized. Notably, the legislation aims to decriminalize certain actions regarding the restoration of utility services interrupted due to non-payment, allowing individuals to avoid felony charges if they restore service to their homes without damaging metering devices.

Contention

However, the legislation has sparked discussions around the potential for misuse. Proponents of the bill argue that it provides much-needed reforms for those unable to afford their utility bills, aligning legal repercussions more closely with social realities. Critics, on the other hand, express concerns that softening the penalties for tampering might encourage others to violate integrity and consumption regulations, which could undermine utility operations and fiscal stability. The balance between supporting vulnerable populations and maintaining strict regulatory compliance remains a point of contention among legislators and advocacy groups alike.