Oklahoma Lawmaker Fights Back: Rep. Albright Challenges PSO's Winter Storm Uri Bonds

A battle is brewing in Oklahoma, as State Representative Kelly Albright has officially filed a compelling brief challenging the legality and fairness of the Public Service Company of Oklahoma's (PSO) 2021 winter storm bonds. These bonds, issued in the wake of the devastating Winter Storm Uri, have sparked significant controversy, with critics arguing they unfairly burden Oklahoma ratepayers with costs that should be shouldered elsewhere.

Representative Albright’s impassioned filing takes aim at the very foundation of these "securitization bonds." Her argument centers on the premise that these financial instruments, designed to cover the extraordinary fuel and purchased power costs incurred during the February 2021 deep freeze, represent an unjust imposition on consumers.

Many Oklahomans still vividly recall the multi-day power outages and the sheer desperation caused by the unprecedented cold, alongside the subsequent shock of inflated utility bills.

The core of Albright's challenge posits that the costs associated with the storm, which PSO passed onto ratepayers through these bonds, should be the responsibility of the utility itself or its shareholders, not the everyday citizens.

The Oklahoma Development Finance Authority (ODFA) and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) had previously approved the issuance of these long-term bonds, a move that effectively spread the storm's financial impact over decades onto customer bills.

This legal challenge underscores a broader sentiment among many Oklahomans: a feeling of being unfairly exploited by utility companies after a natural disaster.

Representative Albright is championing the cause of consumer protection, seeking to dismantle a financial mechanism that she believes prioritizes corporate bottom lines over the economic well-being of families and businesses. Her brief outlines specific legal grounds, likely questioning the authority or process by which these bonds were approved and their ultimate burden on the public.

Should Representative Albright's challenge succeed, it could set a significant precedent, not just for Oklahoma but potentially for other states grappling with similar post-disaster utility costs.

It highlights the ongoing tension between utility companies seeking to recover operational expenses and lawmakers striving to protect their constituents from what they perceive as excessive or unjust charges. This fight is far from over, and the outcome will undoubtedly have long-lasting implications for utility regulation and consumer rights across the state.