Restructuring the Alabama Public Service Commission, or PSC, has been a key priority for Republican leadership throughout the 2026 Legislative Session. With the passage of House Bill 475 by the Senate Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development Committee on Tuesday, the majority caucus may soon achieve that goal.
As originally written, HB475 would have required the PSC to hold annual meetings, provide public notice of those meetings and prohibit private utilities from including costs related to grants, lobbying or advertising when determining rates. The bill had bipartisan support and passed the House by unanimous consent.
However, the version of HB475 that appeared at Tuesday’s public hearing looked dramatically different from the bill’s original form.
The substitute Senator Clyde Chambliss, R-Prattville, brought before the committee more closely resembled Senate Bill 360, also known as the “Power to the People Act“—legislation Senate President Pro Tem Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman, first announced. It would expand the PSC to a seven-member board, maintain strong restrictions on regulated utilities and statutorily bar any utility rate increases until 2029. The bill also would establish a new cabinet-level office of secretary of energy—as recommended by U.S. Senator and gubernatorial candidate Tommy Tuberville—to oversee the commission.
Committee members, including Senator Merika Coleman, D-Birmingham, expressed frustration with the last-minute substitution.
“This appears to be—on first glance, because of course I just got it in my hand—a significant change to the original version of the bill that we had,” Coleman said.
Coleman then asked for clarification on the differences between the substitute and the original bill, but Chairman Lance Bell, R-District 11, opted to hold a vote on the substitution before her questions could be answered. The committee then adopted the substitute.
People who spoke during the public hearing portion of Tuesday’s meeting also objected to the changes to the original bill.
“These two bills aren’t the same thing,” Jeff Ramsey, a candidate for PSC Place 1, said. “If you want to sub bill 360 into 475, that doesn’t make a lot of sense.”
“After the PSC has been changed from a three-member body into a seven-member body, you will have to have a five-member vote to even have a rate hearing—a rate hearing should happen every year and a rate case should happen every three to five years, and that’s what the people want,” Ramsey added. “Last time I checked, y’all served the people. If you want to address issues with the people and the public, then you should address them one at a time. There’s no reason to combine two bills. Just because they address the PSC doesn’t mean they address them in the same manner.”
Another speaker, Ashton Kennedy, expressed similar frustration with HB475 as substituted.
“We need honest representation,” Kennedy told the committee. “Making seven commissioners isn’t going to make Alabama Power fix the fact that they have a guaranteed profit at our expense.”
“Why are we not opening the books once a year to justify where all this money is going?” Kennedy asked. “In a time where our federal government, we were just declared insolvent, and Alabama citizens are struggling?”
Dev Wakeley, a policy analyst with Alabama Arise, said he originally signed up to speak in support of HB475 but opposed the bill after the substitute was revealed.
“We are an anti-poverty organization and accordingly we supported HB475 when it was introduced, we thought it was a good bill and it was a bill that would have fostered accountability for the catastrophically high utility rates the people in Alabama pay,” Wakeley said. “Our folks pay 20 percent more for electricity than people in Louisiana and Kentucky. Our folks pay more for electricity than all of our neighboring states. That includes states where Southern Company owns the utility provider there—Georgians pay less for power than Alabamians do from the same parent company. It doesn’t make any sense.”
“We urged people to support HB475 and at the same time oppose SB360, because SB360—the provisions of which have just been incorporated into HB475—is the exact opposite of an accountability bill,” Wakeley added. “That is a bill to put the thumb on the scale in favor of corporate interest at the expense of everyday Alabamians’ pocketbooks.”
Wakeley went on to compare the bill’s provision creating the office of secretary of energy with previous legislation that would have transformed the PSC into a board fully appointed by the governor of Alabama. That bill, House Bill 392, was tabled earlier in the session after intense public backlash.
“Now [Alabamians] face a similar effort to subordinate the elected PSC commission to an appointed position,” Wakeley said. “Please don’t do that. The people of Alabama have already made it perfectly clear, they don’t want you to do that. They think it’s a way to shirk accountability for corporations.”
“People are squeezed every which way right now,” he added. “The way to fix that is to lower electricity rates. This bill now doesn’t do that, it would before. It would have fostered the accountability that would have led to lower rates, and now there’s a thumb on the scale that’s going to prevent that in the long run. I urge you to vote ‘no’ on this bill as amended.”
John Dodd of Energy Alabama echoed Wakeley and called HB475 a “Trojan horse.”
“HB475 was a great bill. It was written to deliver real, meaningful economic relief to Alabama Power’s customers—your constituents,” Dodd told the committee. “What stands before you today with this substitute is no longer HB475, it’s a Trojan horse. It is SB360, only wearing HB475’s name. The provisions that gave this bill its teeth have been stripped out and washed away. What remains is exactly what the power company themselves would have written.”
After the public hearing, Coleman continued to criticize the dramatic changes to HB475.
“The way this bill is being handled right now is the reason people have a poor perception of the Legislature,” Coleman said.
Chambliss, meanwhile, argued the bill would save Alabamians money by prohibiting rate increases until 2029.
“If that doesn’t save people money, I don’t know what does,” Chambliss said.
The senator also argued that by removing the original bill’s provision requiring the PSC to hold mandatory rate cases every three years, the new version would prevent regular rate increases.
“A mandatory rate case every three years is the same thing—it equals—mandatory rate hikes, that’s what that does,” Chambliss said. “The reason it does that is because every cost of a company, of us as individuals, goes up over time. So, when you mandate that rate case, and all of those costs are included in there, you’re going to have mandatory rate hikes.”
Coleman then asked Chambliss about the process behind the substitute. Chambliss said he negotiated it exclusively with three Republican state representatives—Representatives Mack Butler, R-Rainbow City; Chip Brown, R-Hollinger’s Island; and Steve Clouse, R-Ozark.
“So three Republicans, on a bipartisan bill…you all came together and made this decision in the absence of the other side of folks that actually supported the original House Bill 475,” Coleman replied.
“Generally there is an opportunity for the minority party to have some type of input into that process,” the senator added. “You just named three white male Republicans—not even any women—that were a part of that decision.”
Despite Coleman’s criticism and the arguments made during the public hearing, the committee passed HB475 as amended. All three Democrats on the committee voted against the bill.
Chambliss released a public statement after the hearing celebrating the legislation’s move to the Senate floor.
“This legislation marries the best elements of the previous Senate and House versions, ensures that regulated utilities are forced to justify every dime of rates they charge to consumers, and allows Alabamians a louder voice in electing their representatives on the Public Service Commission,” Chambliss said. “It also outlaws rate increases until 2029 while still allowing rate reductions, and a provision automatically triggers annual review hearings to keep utility rates in check.”
