2005 Senate Bill 334: Expand utility customer low income subsidy surcharges

Legislation watch

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Sen. Bruce Patterson (R) on March 22, 2005, to require all electric and natural gas utility service customers to pay into a state fund to subsidize the utility bills of low income households. The levy on customers of a particular utility would be determined by the Public Service Commission, and could not exceed 2 percent of the commercial and industrial revenues of each utility. The bill would mean that customers of all utilities would have to pay into the fund, not just those of DTE and Consumers Energy. Under current law, in return for receiving payments from non-customers for their "stranded costs" and "transition costs," these two companies agreed to pay into this fund.
- Referred to the Senate Technology and Energy Committee on March 22, 2005.
  - Reported in the Senate on May 24, 2005, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-3) be adopted and that the bill then be adopted.
- Referred to the Senate Government Operations and Reform Committee on September 14, 2005.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Beat the horse that works by Anonymous Citizen on April 3, 2005
I am tired of being the subject of cohersion for every worthy cause Lansing can dream of. In spite of all the tax dollars we have been forced to pour into Detroit...the population is pouring out. Leave people to their own resources. I have a right to work for MY living and to support MY family...not somebody elses.
Reply

Line

2) Bill Round Up by Anonymous Citizen on March 29, 2005
Instead of surcharges and fees to support low income energy payment problems why not ask all the utilities, gas, electric, water, sewer etc. to offer a bill round up (to the nearest whole dollar) option to generate a monthly fund for use by low income families. The most anyone would pay on any monthly bill would be 99 cents or as little as one cent. Assume an average of 50 cents per customer per month and you have a very large fund with very little pain, especially if it’s optional for customers to participate. Most people would not begrudge a few cents each month, and checks would be easier to write!
Reply

Line

3) Utility Tax by Anonymous Citizen on March 24, 2005
I don't want to subsidze those who won't work. If a person is NOT employed and doesn't seek work, why should I pay for their utilities?

Amend the bill to exclude those persons.

Rollie Brengle
3325 Center Rd
Highland,Mi 48357

Reply

Line

View Full Conversation