State Sen. Tom O’Mara wants utility bills to show what customers pay for individual state energy programs each month. RG&E already identifies a System Benefits Charge, but his proposed Ratepayer Disclosure and Transparency Act would require a more detailed accounting of program costs and benefits.
O’Mara renewed his push for disclosure and credits for certain uncommitted energy funds in a column supplied to the newsroom for the week of Oct. 12. He argues that New York’s one-time POWER checks cannot resolve continuing affordability problems; his two utility proposals remain in Senate committees, not enacted requirements.
The debate involves different sources of money. The Protecting Our Wallets Energy Rebate, or POWER, comes from the state budget and is distributed through income-tax records. O’Mara’s proposed credits concern money collected from utility customers for clean-energy programs.
What the monthly bill pays for
For Finger Lakes customers, the bill already separates more than the electricity or natural gas they use. RG&E’s billing explanation describes supply charges as the cost of purchased energy, which the utility says it passes through without markup.
Delivery charges support the infrastructure and services needed to bring that energy to a home, including distribution lines, transformers, gas pipes and billing. Choosing another energy supplier does not eliminate those delivery charges.
RG&E also identifies customer charges, a transition charge and an SBC charge within its delivery section, along with applicable taxes. Those existing categories are not the same as the program-by-program accounting O’Mara proposes.
The Department of Public Service’s explanation of clean-energy initiatives describes the System Benefits Charge as a charge on electric and gas bills that customers cannot bypass. It supports public-policy programs, rather than purchasing the energy consumed in a particular household.
State-supported programs include energy efficiency, research, renewable energy and assistance for low-income customers. The department also maintains a clean-energy dashboard for financial and energy-savings reporting. The existence of those reports does not mean every program’s cost appears separately on an individual bill.
Disclosure and refunds remain proposals
The active version of O’Mara’s disclosure legislation, S6412A, would require the Public Service Commission, working with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, or NYSERDA, to report monthly estimated or actual ratepayer costs and benefits of mandated energy programs to state leaders and the comptroller.
It would also require itemized program costs on each resident’s monthly utility bill and publication of the information on agency websites. Its scope includes clean-energy standards, offshore wind, efficiency, heat pumps, electric-vehicle infrastructure, transmission and energy storage.
The Senate lists the bill in its Consumer Protection Committee. It advanced from the Energy and Telecommunications Committee in May, but the current record does not show enactment.
O’Mara’s second proposal, S8461A, would require surplus or uncommitted qualifying funds remaining at the end of each fiscal year to be credited to ratepayer accounts. It covers money collected by utilities under the Public Service Commission’s Clean Energy Fund framework, including qualifying collections not yet transferred to the climate investment account or NYSERDA.
That bill remains in the Senate Finance Committee. Its text does not set a flat credit for each customer or establish that every dollar described as unspent is available for a refund. Money not yet spent and money not committed to a project are not necessarily the same balance.
O’Mara describes the potential return as nearly $3 billion in his column. That is his estimate, not a guaranteed distribution established by the bill, whose fiscal impact is listed as undetermined.
Budget relief follows a different funding path
The enacted POWER program has a $1 billion allocation. In her May budget announcement, Gov. Kathy Hochul presented the checks as immediate relief alongside longer-term utility protections and energy investment, rather than as the entire affordability response.
Her office also described restrictions on passing lobbying and political costs to customers, increased scrutiny of rate requests and a new commission to examine energy prices. Those measures address utility regulation separately from the rebate payment.
The Tax Department’s rules provide automatic mailed payments of $100 to $200 based on filing status and income reported on timely filed 2024 resident tax returns. Eligible recipients must have been full-year residents and cannot have been claimed as dependents; utility bills are not required. The payments are not calculated from a household’s energy use or its contribution to clean-energy funds.
For the monthly-bill changes O’Mara seeks, the next decisions remain with lawmakers. S6412A remains before Consumer Protection and S8461A before Finance; neither has completed legislative passage and enactment. Their current committee status establishes no new disclosure deadline for utilities or refund amount for customers.
FingerLakes1.com is the region’s leading all-digital news publication. The company was founded in 1998 and has been keeping residents informed for more than two decades. Have a lead? Send it to news@fingerlakes1.com.
