Georgia’s Public Service Commission, or PSC — the group that has final say over how the state’s largest electric utility generates electricity and how much it charges customers — regularly hears from members of the public during its meetings. But because those meetings are almost always in Atlanta, many of the commenters typically come from the metro area.
Since the spring, commissioner Alicia Johnson, one of two recently-elected Democrats, has been pressing the commission to meet in a different part of the state as a way to open the floor to different commenters. On Tuesday, the PSC finally did that.
“For over 100 years, the Public Service Commission has met in Atlanta and rarely, if at all, has meetings across the state,” Johnson, whose PSC district includes Chatham and Effingham counties, said. “This was an opportunity for me to have our commissioners come out and actually speak with their constituents outside of Atlanta to move away just from hearing the voices of interveners or advocates.”
The commissioners traveled to Savannah to hear from coastal residents. Following a brief administrative meeting and a presentation on the PSC’s recent actions on data centers, including approval of Georgia Power’s contract with OpenAI and new protections for regular customers, the floor opened for public comments.
Many of those who spoke voiced concerns over the OpenAI data center that is planned for Effingham County, just outside of Savannah, and called for more transparency around the company’s contract with Georgia Power — the largest for a single customer since the utility started reporting its contracts in 2024.
“There’s a reason you’re named the Public Service Commission and not the Georgia Power service commission or the OpenAI service commission,” said Bill Wright of Pooler, a city northwest of Savannah. “Your name tells you where your loyalty should lie.”
The commissioners clarified the limited scope of their involvement with data centers: They oversee the making and selling of electricity only if a data center chooses Georgia Power as its utility. They encouraged attendees to take up their concerns with local elected officials.
Commenters also criticized the commission over power bills.
Michael Hawthorne, an organizing strategist with the Sierra Club, argued the commission is supposed to set reasonable rates for electricity. Then he posed a question to the room at large.
“Does anybody feel like everything’s reasonably priced?” he asked.
The audience replied with a resounding “No.”
The frustration and anger from the Savannah crowd wasn’t surprising, Johnson said.
“It’s what I’ve heard since running for office, and so I’m just glad that our other commissioners got to hear some of it, too,” she said.
Jason Shaw, a Republican from a south Georgia district and the PSC chair, said the meeting reinforced what he’s heard from constituents as well. In an interview after the meeting, Shaw said transparency has been a core issue with the OpenAI data center in particular, starting at the local level. But he said Georgia Power needs to share more information about its data center contracts, too.
“We’ve got to do a better job of forcing the company to be able to present more to us that’s not redacted,” he said. “And I think that’s something that we’re working really closely on.”
Some commenters accused the commissioners of failing to represent the interests of the public that elected them — and reminded them another election is coming up in November.
“If you truly want to be on this board, it’s time to step up and protect the people,” said Corey Foreman, a candidate running for the state senate from a coastal district. “If you can’t do that, I will be more than happy to help remove you.”
All five members of the PSC were Republicans from 2006 until the start of this year, when Peter Hubbard and Johnson took office after unseating two Republican incumbents in an election that focused largely on power bills and the commission’s recent history of rate increases. The two Democrats have cast dissenting votes several times and closely questioned Georgia Power officials. But both have also been candid that their ability to shift policy on emissions, rates, data centers, and other issues is limited while they are in the minority on the PSC.
The District 3 seat currently held by Hubbard and the District 5 seat recently vacated by Republican Tricia Pridemore are both on the ballot in November. If the Democratic candidates win both seats, the party would hold a majority on the commission for the first time in decades.
Hubbard was elected to a one-year term last year and is now facing former Republican commissioner Fitz Johnson in a rematch election for a six-year term. In District 5, Democrat Shelia Edwards is running against Republican Josh Tolbert. While the candidates have to live in their districts, both races are statewide.
Early voting begins October 13.
Facts Only
* The Public Service Commission (PSC) hears public comments regularly during meetings.
* Commissioner Alicia Johnson pressed for meetings outside of Atlanta to engage constituents.
* The PSC meeting took place in Savannah.
* Comments addressed the planned OpenAI data center in Effingham County.
* Commenters called for more transparency regarding the contract between Georgia Power and OpenAI.
* Commissioners clarified their scope: they oversee electricity generation only if a data center selects Georgia Power as its utility.
* Commenters criticized power bills, expressing a general feeling that rates are not reasonably priced.
* Jason Shaw, PSC chair, stated there is a need for Georgia Power to share more information about data center contracts.
* Some commenters questioned the commissioners' representation of the public interest.
* The PSC membership recently shifted, with two Democrats joining a majority in District 3 and 5 seats if they win, following changes in the board composition.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The event highlights a tension between established institutional procedure and the demands for decentralized, localized representation. The shift of the commission to Savannah was an attempt to redress a historical geographic imbalance, moving discussions from an Atlanta-centric environment to areas directly affected by the issues, specifically the data center location in Effingham County. This exercise reveals a fundamental conflict: whether regulatory bodies should operate based on centralized administrative history or direct community impact. The public's frustration, channeled through specific concerns about large corporate contracts and utility rates, exposed a gap between the commission's perceived authority and the lived experience of its constituents.
The subsequent push for transparency regarding the OpenAI contract underscores a larger theme: ensuring that public oversight extends beyond technical operational facts into contractual accountability. When commissioners deflected responsibility by pointing to local officials or limiting their scope concerning data centers, it implicitly reinforced an existing hierarchy where direct community grievances are secondary to established administrative boundaries. The threats made by some commenters against the commissioners suggest a latent distrust in the institutional legitimacy itself, which is amplified by the demographic shifts and minority status of the board. This pattern suggests that procedural accommodations—like meeting location changes—are often insufficient if the core power structures remain unchanged; genuine change requires substantive redefinition of who holds accountability and what metrics define "reasonable pricing" beyond current administrative definitions.
Bridge Questions: If a commission meets geographically, what structural changes to jurisdiction or oversight are necessary to ensure equitable representation for all constituents? How can regulatory bodies move from addressing localized symptoms (like a single data center) to addressing systemic issues (like rate setting and corporate contracting)? What is the long-term impact of shifting accountability mechanisms on public trust when stated policy goals remain distant from immediate community concerns?
Sentinel — Human
This text reads like standard, well-contextualized local news reporting that synthesizes public commentary and political dynamics surrounding a public commission meeting.