WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

A 5202

Relates to establishing an electoral voting system for electing the governor, lieutenant-governor, comptroller and attorney general

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Karl Brabenec

Prohibits electric public utilities from charging reconciliation charges to customers, aiming to curb ratepayer costs and spur long-term planning; takes effect immediately.

OPINION REFERRED TO JUDICIARY
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · A 5202

Summary of New Jersey Bill A 5202

Note on title vs. content: The bill’s title refers to establishing an electoral voting system for statewide executive offices, but the introduced version text provided focuses on prohibiting reconciliation charges by electric public utilities. The summary below reflects the introduced content as published, not any enacted provisions related to an electoral voting system.

Overview

  • Bill: A 5202
  • Status: OPINION REFERRED TO JUDICIARY (as of March 6, 2025)
  • Introduced: January 16, 2025
  • Primary sponsor: Karl Brabenec
  • Context: The introduced text addresses utility pricing mechanisms, specifically prohibiting reconciliation charges imposed by electric public utilities.

Purpose and Intent

  • Primary aim: Prohibit electric public utilities from imposing reconciliation charges on their customers.
  • Rationale stated by sponsor: Encourage utilities to engage in long-term financial planning and reduce dependence on ratepayers to cover financial losses tied to the utilities’ own business decisions.

Key Provisions (Introduced Version)

  1. Definitions

    • “Electric public utility” (or “utility”): A public utility that transmits and distributes electricity to end users within New Jersey, as defined in R.S.48:2-13.
    • “Reconciliation charge”: A positive dollar amount charged to utility customers intended to recover the difference between estimated and actual costs for providing electricity, including, but not limited to, basic generation service costs, administrative costs, fees, credits, taxes, and interest.

  2. Prohibition

    • A clarifying prohibition: An electric public utility shall not impose a reconciliation charge on its customers, notwithstanding any contrary law, rule, regulation, or order.

  3. Effective Date

    • Immediate effect: The act, if enacted, would take effect immediately.

Legislative Actions and Timelines

  • 2025-01-16: Introduced in the Assembly; referred to the Assembly Telecommunications and Utilities Committee.
  • 2025-02-12: Referred to Election Law (note: referral to Election Law appears inconsistent with the bill’s energy focus).
  • 2025-02-14: Referred to Attorney General for Opinion (duplicated entries indicate multiple parallel action points).
  • 2025-03-06: Opinion referred to the Judiciary; status shows “OPINION REFERRED TO JUDICIARY.”
  • The listing includes duplicates of several entries, which may reflect clerical or docketing variances.

Sponsorship

  • Primary sponsor: Karl Brabenec

Related Bills

  • A 5603 (prior-session)
  • A 5579 (prior-session)
  • A 6323 (prior-session)

Potential Impact

  • Utilities and ratepayers
    • Direct effect: Prohibits reconciliation charges, removing a mechanism some utilities use to recover cost variances.
    • Possible financial impact on utilities: Could constrain revenue recovery from forecast vs. actual cost discrepancies, potentially shaping future rate design and planning.
    • Ratepayer effect: Potential reduction in charges tied to reconciliation mechanisms, with an aim of more stable pricing or reduced pass-throughs for misestimated costs.
  • Regulatory/legislative process
    • The bill’s immediate effect clause would not be the subject of a phase-in; rather, if enacted, the prohibition would apply promptly.
    • Given the inconsistent cross-referencing to election-law topics in the actions list, committee positions and potential amendments may address questions about scope and implementation.

Summary

A 5202, in its introduced form, seeks to prohibit electric public utilities from imposing reconciliation charges on customers, defining such charges as payments to cover differences between estimated and actual costs. The sponsor states the goal is to promote long-term utility planning and lessen reliance on ratepayers. The bill bears a legislative history note of multiple committee referrals and an opinion-stage path toward the Judiciary, with sponsorship by Karl Brabenec. Note the discrepancy between the bill’s title (electoral voting system) and its introduced content (utility pricing), which may indicate drafting or labeling issues to be resolved in the legislative process.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.