House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB24 - Committee on Utilities
Short Title
Prohibiting municipalities from imposing restrictions on customer's use of energy based upon source of energy.
Minutes Content for Tue, Jan 26, 2021
Matt Sterling, Office of the Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill, explaining that SB24 would prohibit a municipality from imposing any ordinance, resolution, code, rule, provision, standard, permit, plan, or any other binding action that restricted an end use customer's use of a public utility based upon the source of energy to be delivered to the customer.
The bill would apply to natural gas and public electric utilities and will be effective upon publication in the statute book.
The Chairperson called for proponent testimony on the bill.
Proponents, Oral
Patrick Vogelsberg, Kansas Gas Service, spoke as a proponent, stating that the bill would ensure that Kansans have a choice in the energy that they use in their homes and businesses, and that it would help keep utility bills low for Kansans. Further, he said the bill would provide regulatory certainty as well as guidance from the state to communities as they develop sustainability plans.(Attachment 1)
Jerry Watkins, Black Hills Energy, spoke as a proponent, saying that the bill would preserve customer choices, ensure that governments do not restrict the use of economical natural gas in Kansas homes and businesses, and ensures uniformity to balance the needs of customers throughout Kansas.(Attachment 2)
Bart Armstrong, Atmos Energy, spoke as a proponent, stating that across the country, local governments are limiting the types of energy available to customers, and mandating electricity as their only option. This, he said, will increase energy costs, decrease energy reliability and impact economic growth.(Attachment 3)
Scott Schneider, KHRA, spoke as a proponent, expressing that it would be difficult to overstate the negative impact on the restaurant industry if the use of natural gas was restricted. Chefs rely on fire to create their dishes, and a ban would raise costs to build and operate gas-free restaurants.(Attachment 4)
Dan Murray, NFIB, spoke as a proponent, stressing that energy costs are a significant problem for small business owners, and that 88% of their small business owners are against ordinances that ban the use of types or sources of energy. (Attachment 5)
Jason Watkins, Wichita Regional Chamber of Commerce, spoke as a proponent, stating that Kansans currently benefit from a diverse set of energy sources, which ensures reliable power and promotes more competitive rates, and this bill would keep Kansas open for business.(Attachment 6)
Elizabeth Patton, Americans For Prosperity, spoke as a proponent, saying that the bill would ensure consumers can choose the fuel they want for their home, rather than be subjected to California-style energy prohibition. She further pointed out that 70% of Kansans rely on natural gas or propane for home heating. (Attachment 7)
Ernest Kutzley, AARP, spoke as a proponent, stating that it would keep utility rates affordable for their members, many of whom do not have the additional money it would take to switch to a more expensive fuel source to heat their homes.(Attachment 8)
Written Proponent Testimony was submitted by the following people:
Ed Cross, Kansas Independent Oil and Gas Association (Attachment 9)
Chris McGown, Eastern Kansas Oil and Gas Association (Attachment 10)
Sean Miller, Kansas Building Industries Association (Attachment 11)
Greg Noll, Propane Marketers Association (Attachment 12)
Curtis Sneden, Greater Topeka Chamber of Commerce (Attachment 13)
J. Kent Eckles, Kansas Chamber of Commerce (Attachment 14)
Mark Tomb, Kansas Association of Realtors (Attachment 15)
Bonnie Lowe, The Chamber Lawrence, Kansas (Attachment 16)
Following the oral testimony, conferees responded to questions from Committee Members. Discussion ensued.
With no further questions or conferees, Chairperson Thompson closed the hearing for Proponents of SB 24. Neutral and opponent testimony will be heard tomorrow, Wednesday, January 27, 2021.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:26 pm.
