West Virginia Senate Bill SB709

West Virginia 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/23
• Refer: 2/20/23

Caption

Making supplementary appropriation to Miscellaneous Boards and Commissions, Consumer Advocate Fund

Impact

The passage of SB709 would directly impact the financial operations of the Public Service Commission by increasing its allocation for the Consumer Advocate Fund. This fund is vital for providing assistance and representation to consumers in matters related to public utility services. By supplementing the existing appropriations, the bill aims to enhance the Commission's capability to advocate for fair consumer practices, ensuring that the interests of consumers are adequately represented in regulatory processes. This could lead to better protections and services for consumers across the state.

Summary

Senate Bill 709 is a legislative measure introduced in West Virginia aimed at making a supplementary appropriation of public moneys from the unappropriated balance remaining for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. Specifically, the bill focuses on enhancing funding to the Consumer Advocate Fund administered by the Public Service Commission, which plays a critical role in advocating for consumers in the utility service sector. The bill intends to ensure that the fund has adequate resources to support its operations and fulfill its mandate effectively.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB709 appears to be generally supportive among those who recognize the importance of consumer advocacy in the utility sector. Stakeholders and advocates for consumer rights might regard the bill as a positive step towards strengthening the resources available for consumer representation. However, as with any appropriation bill, there may be discussions about the prioritization of state funds and the implications of reallocating resources towards the Consumer Advocate Fund, which may polarize opinions among those with different views on state budget management.

Contention

While there may not be significant points of contention highlighted in the discussions surrounding SB709, concerns could arise over the effectiveness of increasing funding in achieving the desired outcomes for consumers. Opponents might question whether this financial boost is sufficient to address the broader systemic issues faced by consumers in the utility landscape or if ongoing funding would be necessary for sustained impact. Additionally, debates may surface regarding the allocation of public funds, especially in light of competing financial needs across different sectors in the state.