|
|
|
|
|
Senate Passes Amended Bill Which Would Give Towns The Right To Ban Residential Electric Choice
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The Massachusetts Senate passed to be engrossed an amended version of H.5175 (with the Senate substitute numbered S.3143) which includes various reforms or other provisions governing retail energy supply, including granting individual cities and towns with the ability to ban residential electric choice
The Senate's version of the bill differs from the House version of H.5175, and in order for the bill to advance in the legislative process, the House must either agree to the Senate bill, or the chambers must agree on a reconciliation bill via a conference committee
A proposed amendment to the Senate bill, which was offered in order to strike from the bill the proposed grant of authority to municipalities to ban residential electric choice, was rejected, while another amendment to also accomplish such was withdrawn.
As such, the bill would still grant authority to cities and towns to ban residential electric choice, with such provision not applying to opt-out municipal aggregation. The House version of the bill would also grant municipalities the ability to ban residential electric choice, and, while both chambers may generally agree on such a policy, each house's passed version of the bill has unique language concerning the ban
In Senate passage, an amendment was adopted to clarify that the exemption from the residential choice ban, with the exemption generally applicable to municipal aggregations, does in fact extend to the supplier of the municipal aggregation, in addition to applying to the aggregation itself and the aggregation's administrator
Notably, however, the Senate's language used to clarify such exemption could be read as allowing a retail supplier selected to serve a municipal aggregation to be entirely exempt from the residential choice ban, for any marketing activity, and not just service related to the aggregation.
Moreover, the language in the Senate-passed bill would seem to allow a supplier serving any municipal aggregation in the state to be exempt from any municipality's residential choice ban, not just the ban adopted by the specific municipality in which the supplier serves as the CCA supplier.
In other words, Supplier A could serve as the CCA supplier in Town X. Town Y bans residential choice.
Under the Senate's language, Supplier A would be permitted to serve residential customers in Town Y, due to its status as a CCA supplier to Town X.
Specifically, under the amended S.3143 which was passed to be engrossed as H.5175, the bill now states, "Such prohibition [residential chose ban] shall not apply to, or otherwise affect, any supplier selected by a government body that aggregates the load of residential retail customers as part of a municipal aggregation plan pursuant to section 134..."
In context, the Senate-passed bill now reads: "Notwithstanding chapters 25 or 164 or any other general or special law to the
contrary, a city or town which accepts this section may by a vote of its town meeting or other
legislative body, prohibit by ordinance, by-law or vote any supplier, energy marketer or energy
broker, as such terms are defined in section 1 of said chapter 164, from executing a new contract
or renewing an existing contract for generation services with any individual residential retail
customer within such city or town. Such prohibition shall not apply to, or otherwise affect, any supplier selected by a
government body that aggregates the load of residential retail customers as part of a municipal
aggregation plan pursuant to section 134, nor shall it apply to, or otherwise affect, any entity
organizing or administering a program pursuant to sections 135, 136 or 137 of said chapter 164[.]"
The exemption language emphasizes a supplier "selected" by the CCA, rather than describing the supplier's service to CCA and residential customers in the CCA.
Moreover, especially in light of the fact that the following text already existed in the Senate's bill, the language "pursuant to section 134" serves to describe the nature of the municipal aggregation, and is not positioned as limiting the residential ban exemption as applying only to a supplier's activities under section 134. In other words, the phrase "pursuant to section 134" is not drafted as a limit on the supplier's activities allowed under the exemption from the residential choice ban, but rather describes the nature of the aggregation
Additionally, as written, the exemption applies broadly to, "any supplier selected by a
government body that aggregates the load of residential retail customers as part of a municipal
aggregation plan" [emphasis added], as opposed to applying to, "the supplier which currently serves the municipal aggregation which operates within the boundaries of the city/town enacting the residential choice prohibition".
Additionally, the adopted amended language does not limit the aggregation's supplier exemption, from the residential choice ban, to only activities related to the opt-out aggregation
For example, the language does not state a limitation on the residential ban exemption such as stating that the residential ban does not apply to a muni aggregation supplier, "only in regards to those activities undertaken pursuant to the supplier's obligation under a municipal aggregation plan pursuant to section 134".
Rather, so long as the supplier has been selected by "any" government aggregation, the language provides that the residential choice ban does not apply.
While the ability to contact (market to) customers with non-aggregation offers, where permissible, has been a rationale for suppliers to engage in serving CCAs, it is unclear if this adopted amendment was drafted to allow such non-CCA marketing to continue by CCA suppliers, or if the intent is, if residential choice is banned by a town, to limit residential service by a supplier to being only the supply to the town's municipal aggregation, and the language was simply poorly drafted
In contrast, the House-passed version of H.5175 clearly limits any exemption from the residential choice ban to only applying to a CCA supplier's service to the residential customers in the CCA itself.
The House version states, "Such prohibition shall not
apply to suppliers serving residential retail customers as part of a municipal aggregation plan". [emphasis added]
Aside from this amended language described above, H.5175 as passed by the Senate does not alter the major retail energy reforms contained in the Senate committee version of the bill, S.3143
See a full discussion of the retail energy reforms included in the Senate committee version of the bill (S.3143) in our prior story here.
Among other things, H.5175 as passed by the Senate includes a $5 million bond for retail suppliers and (under current language) brokers serving residential customers, and a $1 million bond for retail suppliers and (under current language) brokers serving non-residential customers. The different bonding dollar amounts based on customer class is one major difference, with regards to retail energy, between the passed versions of the House and Senate bills
As more fully discussed in our prior story, S.3143 (H.5175 as passed by the Senate) provides that residential "automatic" renewal may occur only upon, "receiving the written consent of the customer within 45 days before the expiration of the then current contract with the customer".
S.3143 also bans residential variable rates, excluding seasonal and TOU rates
S.3143 bans commissions for residential enrollments
S.3143 would mandate that "each" retail supplier must post at least one offer to the Energy Switch MA website (S.3143 still does not explicitly exempt C&I-only suppliers from this requirement)
Additional reforms under S.3143 (H.5175 as passed by the Senate) are detailed in our prior story here
One adopted amendment to S.3143 struck what the amendment termed a "duplicative" reporting requirement for retail suppliers
Left in tact is the bill's requirement that electric suppliers shall report each residential rate to the DPU, including the number of low-income and non-low-income residential customers charged each rate included in such list, by rate class. The DPU would post on its website, "average rates charged by each supplier to customer
classes and the aggregate number of customers by each supplier[.]"
While this provision had been included in the House version of the bill, H.5175 as passed by the Senate does not include language from the House bill which provides that such data shall be, "presented only in aggregated or anonymized form and shall not include supplier-specific pricing,
offers or terms"
S.3143 also does not include the House language that, "Supplier-submitted pricing and other commercially sensitive information shall be
treated as confidential and used solely for regulatory oversight and market monitoring".
An adopted amendment to S.3143 does eliminate a separate price reporting obligation for retail suppliers that would have been submitted to the Department of Energy Resources, rather than the DPU
As previously reported, a separate section of H.5175 would require similar reporting from suppliers (and other energy providers), including a semi-annual reporting of average rates, plus reporting of data regarding the number of customers, load served,
amounts billed to customers in dollars, renewable and clean energy attribute certificate purchases, and supply product offerings.
This separate DOER reporting section, as it relates to retail suppliers, has been struck from the Senate bill via adopted amendment
The Senate bill which was passed to be engrossed does clean up a reference to electricity basic service rates (default service), providing that the basic service rates for residential customers shall not change more often than every six months (correcting language that had suggested that basic service shall change "no less" than every 6 months for residential customers, aside from TOU rates and the monthly variable option)
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Amendment (Unintentionally?) Allows Any Muni Aggregation Suppliers To Conduct Residential Marketing, Statewide, Notwithstanding Any Town's Ban On Residential Marketing
$5 Million Bond For Residential Retail Suppliers, Brokers; $1 Million For C&I Suppliers, Brokers
July 1, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• Refreshed 5/27/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Channel Partner Manager -- Retail Energy
|
|
|
|
|