Topeka ? Gov. Sam Brownback’s office said Thursday that he has not pushed for any changes in the focus or mission of an agency that represents consumers in utility rate cases, although he doesn’t necessarily think it’s a bad idea.

Leaders of the House and Senate utility committees also expressed surprise at developments at the Citizens Utility Ratepayers Board, or CURB, whose members last week openly discussed disbanding the organization or shifting its focus to helping the Brownback administration fight new federal clean air regulations.

“We did not ask CURB to change its focus,” Brownback’s press secretary Eileen Hawley said. “However, overly burdensome regulations from the EPA are clearly the biggest threat to Kansas utility customers.”

Last week, CURB held a meeting in Wichita where, according to reports, several of its members openly discussed shifting the agency’s mission to focus on fighting the EPA’s new Clean Power Plan.

That plan, which some critics say will result in higher electricity rates for consumers, is aimed at reducing carbon emissions from power plants to combat global climate change.

“Would we be better off taking our budget and fighting (against) that?” board member James Mullin III was quoted as saying. “If we’re talking about affecting the consumer’s bottom line, if we could defeat that mandate from the EPA we would save way more.”

The board also stripped its interim chief counsel, Niki Christopher, of her role in testifying before legislative committees and speaking to the news media.

Those development prompted the board’s chairman, Brian Weber, of Garden City, to resign Wednesday.

CURB was established in 1988 by the Kansas Corporation Commission, the agency that regulates public utilities in Kansas. It was codified in law the following year during Republican Gov. Mike Hayden’s administration.

The board is comprised of five members, all appointed by the governor. The board, in turn, hires a chief counsel who carries out most of the day-to-day operations, including representing consumers and small business customers before the KCC in rate cases and consumer complaints.

“Much of the proposal I believe violates the law that created CURB,” said Rep. Tom Sloan, R-Lawrence, who follows utility and energy issues closely.

The statutes governing CURB give it very specific and limited authority.

The board itself is empowered to employ an attorney as a consumer counsel; guide the activities of the consumer counsel; and recommend legislation to the Legislature. It also has general supervisory authority over the agency’s budget, which is $860,390 in the current fiscal year.

The general counsel, in turn, has authority to represent consumers and small business customers before the KCC and to file actions before that commission on consumers’ behalf. He or she also has authority to appeal KCC orders in state courts.

But there is nothing in the statute specifically authorizing CURB to initiate actions in state or federal court, especially if they are not related to an underlying KCC decision.

House Utilities Committee Chairman Rep. Joe Seiwert, R-Pretty Prairie, and his Senate counterpart Rob Olson, R-Olathe, both said Thursday they’d had no prior discussions with CURB officials about changing its mission.

“Not in my capacity as chairman of the utilities committee, no,” Seiwert said. “I’ve never been to any of their meetings.”

Sen. Marci Francisco, of Lawrence, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Utilities Committee, said she was troubled by the talk of changing CURB’s mission.

“Individually, it’s difficult for an individual ratepayer to follow these hearings, do the filings, and CURB has, I think, done a very good job of identifying concerns and participating in those hearings,” she said. “I am very disturbed to hear that they are contemplating abandoning that mission.”

Meanwhile, Sloan said he sees little value in adding CURB’s name to federal lawsuits already underway challenging the Clean Power Plan.

“Adding CURB’s voice and money will not affect the judicial outcome,” he said. “How many states, utilities, etc. joining the lawsuit does it take? This is similar to the lawsuits against same-sex marriage, the Affordable Care Act. … Once you have a case, adding plaintiffs just is a political statement. Spending Kansas ratepayers’ money to join existing lawsuits just means we are spending tax and ratepayer dollars, double-dipping the same purses.”