The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) came to Columbus Thursday night for a listening session for consumers to voice complaints regarding rising utility rates.
The IURC held an Investigative Inquiry on Energy Affordability on March 24 where they discussed energy affordability with the “Big Five” investor-owned utility companies in Indiana: AES Indiana, CenterPoint Energy Indiana, Duke Energy Indiana, LLC, Indiana Michigan Power Company and Northern Indiana Public Service Co., LLC. The inquiry started IURC’s process of coming up with short-term and long-term solutions to make energy more affordable for Hoosiers.
While the public could not comment during the initial inquiry, the IURC wanted to give customers a voice by hosting a series of listening sessions throughout the state where utility customers could speak on the topic. Once the listening tour is finished, the commission will use the consumer data in a final report to be presented in June.
IURC Chairperson Andy Zay said that the commission doesn’t want to do empty listening, but seeks to come up with real action items to make changes.
Columbus held the fourth listening session after LaPorte, Syracuse and Elkhart. The event, held at Columbus City Hall, drew a small but passionate crowd including Sen. Greg Walker, R-Columbus and Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington.
Zay, who has only been chairman for 10 weeks, opened up the meeting by introducing the IURC and saying how this new board wants to make a change from the past.
“In my short time as chairman, the commission has received an unprecedented number of complaints from customers who are struggling to pay their energy bills and who have expressed frustration and confusion about what those bills entail,” Zay said. “I’ve always felt that affordability means something different to everyone, and the rates we set aren’t just abstract numbers. They have real impacts on everyday households and businesses.”
When Zay opened the floor to the audience, the speakers focused on three main points: “natural” monopolies, affordability with conservation and legislative change.
In his introduction, Zay called utilities in the state of Indiana a “natural monopoly.”
“Indiana is a traditionally regulated state with vertically integrated utilities with exclusive retail service territories. They are considered natural monopolies, but these are regulated monopolies,” Zay said. “Why does Indiana, like other states, allow monopolies? Because generating and delivering power requires a lot of investment and power plants, transmission lines, distribution lines, substations, etc, that all need constant maintenance at some point it is inefficient and cost prohibitive for multiple companies to compete in the same area.”
When Walker came to the podium, he spoke directly against this idea of a natural monopoly. He said that monopolies may have made sense 100 years ago when they originated, but with modern technology, monopolies should not exist in Indiana. Walker said he was more interested in the idea of local generation instead of larger projects like AI datacenters or company monopolies.
“Are we ready to try something just a little different that says even in the midst of a natural monopoly, there may be opportunities to provide a little more local generation?” he asked.
Walker also said that as a senator in the legislature, he wants to work with the IURC instead of just blindly listening to them. Mike Mullett, a retired public interest attorney from Columbus who mainly focused on energy, utilities and the environment during his law career, agreed with Walker regarding monopolies. He gave a very impassioned speech regarding the villainy of monopolies in Indiana in 2026.
“Electricity is not a natural monopoly in 2026. It’s just not a natural monopoly!” Mullett said.
Mullett said his own provider, Duke Energy, falls into the monopoly category. He quoted British historian John Dalberg-Action’s famous saying “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” regarding Duke Energy.
“When you have the power that they have, they just avoid doing what they should be doing, because they don’t have to,” Mullett said to the board. “Our fundamental job is to protect the customers from the abuses of monopoly. And the fundamental abuse of monopoly that we have today is the prevention of competition. That’s the fundamental monopoly abuse that we have today.”
Next to the monopoly discussion, affordability and sustainability saw a large percentage of the conversation.
More than one speaker came to the podium and asked why they have to pay more than the bigger corporations even when they try to use less energy.
“I use very little energy, and I feel like I’m penalized for it,” long time Columbus resident Cathy Caldie said.
Caldie said that she tries hard to live a sustainable life with solar panels on her rooftop and minimal energy usage elsewhere. She said that the current state of utilities makes it difficult for people to afford sustainable lifestyles. Caldie also said that companies like Duke Energy, who uses a lot of energy get a bigger discount, which does not incentivise them to be sustainable in any way.
Another Columbus resident, Jason Tracy had a similar point. He said that while he does use a lot of energy, he knows he pays less for a kilowatt hour than the seniors elsewhere in Columbus who use much less energy.
“Duke’s declining block structure charges the most per unit to those who consume the least and can afford it the least. That’s regressive. It punishes conservation, and it has no place in modern rate design,” Tracy said.
Kerri Sinibaldi, who moved to Columbus 10 years ago, said that she pays 30% more in utilities than when she first moved to the area. She also said that she tries to use very little energy to save money.
“In my garage and workshop, there is no heat, there are lights and a garage door opener, and what I pay in a month for that is ridiculous. I’m at the point now where I may just get a generator, and every time we want to open the d— garage door, we can fire up a generator. It would be cheaper,” she said.
She also said that she wanted to put up solar panels, but now she cannot afford them due to the increase in rates everywhere else.
When Pierce took the podium, he told the commissioners that their best path forward would be working with the legislature to bring about real change. He said that over the years, the IURC and the Indiana lawmakers have worked against one another, undoing the other’s work. He cited House Enrolled Act 1417 and Senate Enrolled Act 9 as laws of that nature.
“It (made) it harder for you as a commission, I believe, to be able to make the kinds of decisions that will help rate payers with affordability and a lot of those bills,” Pierce said.
Pierce talked about defunct programs like Energize Indiana that helped the ratepayers learn how to be more energy efficient and reduce usage and how legislators over the years cut down on these programs to side with the utility companies instead. He also brought up SEA 309 that hurt people’s hopes for rooftop solar.
“The legislature kind of took away the program the utility commission had put into place. And that has some negative impacts on rate payers,” Pierce said. “You’re going to have to come back and ask the legislature for some help.”
The IURC Listening Session came to a close with Zay thanking the crowd for coming out and voicing their thoughts and concerns. He said that after the tour ends in late April, the commission will go over all the information from across the state to see what changes could occur.
The next listening session will be Monday in Fort Wayne.