URGENT - THE FUTURE OF YOUR VOICE AGAINST TEXAS WATER UTILITIES AND OTHER UTILITIES IS AT RISK!!

Tomorrow is the PUC public hearing on Project No. 59557 about the complaint process.
June 25, 2026 at 9:30 a.m.
Commissioners’ Hearing Room, 7th floor
William B. Travis Building
1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX
You do not need to register ahead of time. Just show up, sign the sheet outside the hearing room, and you’ll be called in order. Each speaker gets 3 minutes.
Why this matters:
The PUC is considering rule changes that could make it harder for complaints to grow into formal, public complaint cases. That means less transparency, less accountability, and a weaker path for regular people to create a record when repeated utility problems are happening.
And yes, utility-side interests are already participating and pushing back. That is exactly why the public needs to show up too.
If you care about fairness, transparency, and keeping a real public complaint process, please come speak tomorrow. And if you cannot attend in person, please still file written comments in Project No. 59557 through PUC Interchange - https://interchange.puc.texas.gov/filer
Below is an example of what I may say:
“Good morning. My name is Heather Screws and I am here to comment on Project No. 59557, Streamlined Complaint Process.
I support efficiency, but not at the cost of the public’s rights. That is my concern with this proposal.
This rule change appears to do much more than streamline. It pushes complaints further into an internal agency process while weakening the public’s ability to move from an informal complaint into a formal one. OPUC made this same point in its filing. OPUC stated that the proposal would remove the right of a complainant to present a formal complaint if the informal dispute is not resolved to the complainant’s satisfaction within 35 days. That is a major change, and it should not be minimized.
That matters for ordinary people because the formal complaint process is not just paperwork. It creates a public docket. A public docket means the complaint can be tracked, referenced later, and used to show a pattern if many people are reporting the same kinds of problems. If you weaken that process, you make it harder for the public to build a record, harder for others to see what is happening, and easier for repeated problems to stay buried in an internal process.
OPUC also argued that Senate Bill 790 was meant for a much narrower purpose, mainly simplified owner-tenant water and wastewater billing disputes, not a sweeping rewrite of the complaint process for all utilities and all disputes. I agree with that concern. This proposal seems to go well beyond simple streamlining.
I also agree with OPUC that the Commission should keep the current good-cause waiver, keep a defined path from informal complaint handling into formal complaint status, and keep the current docketing language. OPUC was right to say that removing the possibility of a complaint being officially docketed after the informal process creates transparency concerns and takes away an important source of pressure on utilities and the Commission to resolve complaints seriously and promptly.
For the public, this is really about accountability. A complaint process should not be designed only for administrative convenience. It should also protect the public’s ability to be heard, to create a record, and to seek meaningful relief when repeated utility problems are occurring.
So I respectfully ask the Commission to reject any changes that eliminate or weaken the public’s path to a formal complaint, to retain the good-cause waiver, to retain the ability for complaints to become officially docketed, and to preserve a complaint process that is transparent, public, and accountable.
Thank you."