The idea behind Senate Bill 2922, to create a “securitization” process for public utilities to recover costs related to enacting wildfire plans and protections, is as emotionally fraught as it is procedurally complex. So emotional that 1,200-plus Maui wildfire survivors opposed the bill because it would help Hawaiian Electric, which many blame for the Aug. 8 inferno; and so complex that even the state Attorney General’s Office was still honing its position this month.

“Because of the complexity of the securitization process,” the AG testified on April 2, “additional information is required to safeguard ratepayers and prioritize the public interest. Our comments are still being refined and developed.”

The bottom line, though: SB 2922 is worth passing — but only if state lawmakers include many guardrails that protect the public, such as ensuring that none of the securitized capital can be used for utilities’ litigation or settlement-related expenses.

Some basics on securitization, under SB 2922: It would allow a utility to sell low-interest bonds secured by its customers’ future payments on utility bills, to help the company fund anti-wildfire plans and implementation. That entire process would need to be approved by the state Public Utilities Commission after public hearings and input from the state consumer advocate — and it must entail stringent oversight and updates.

Such access to lower-interest financing is critical to Hawaiian Electric (HECO), which is facing a host of lawsuits and major expenses after the massive wildfire that killed 101 people and decimated Lahaina. As it stands, HECO faces much higher borrowing costs, postfire, after its credit rating was slashed from investment to junk grade.

“Their credit rating is, you know, in the pits,” said Rep. Nicole Lowen, House Energy/Environmental Protection chair, in a March 14 public hearing.

As she rightly and succinctly put it: “The choice is between (HECO) borrowing at a lower rate that ratepayers pay for, or borrowing at a higher rate that ratepayers pay for.”

Like it or not, as Hawaii’s major energy provider (Kauai excluded), HECO’s troubles have become the state’s — and the public’s — troubles.

This should not mean a taxpayer bailout, though; HECO’s highly paid top executives and its shareholders must be made to absorb more financial responsibility. “(HECO) ratepayers cannot bear the full burden of mitigation efforts through securitization,” said the House committees on Water/Land and Energy/Environmental Protection in their report. “Shareholder contributions must be a part of utility capitalization moving forward.”

Drier environments due to climate change are already fueling more-intense blazes, so wildfire prevention efforts are an imperative. Calling for actions to reduce fire risk — stepped-up maintenance on aging utility poles and lines, for example — is a key component of SB 2922, but it will cost. That’s where securitization comes into play.

The Governor’s Office notes that utility rate securitization transactions have “an extensive track record of success” — so it does seem fiscally akamai to approve SB 2922 to help defray wildfire mitigation costs.

But that shouldn’t mean fiscal irresponsibility. Legislators must ensure, for instance, that no liability-shield language be included; nor authority for a utility to impose a fee of up to 5% on ratepayers’ bills, as HECO unconscionably had attempted earlier.

As SB 2922 heads toward conference committee, lawmakers must work diligently for the public good. Approving securitization would be a welcome tool to enable utilities to recover legitimate costs for necessary wildfire mitigations; access to low-interest financing will ultimately benefit energy ratepayers, a large majority of Hawaii’s people. But every dollar derived from such financing must go to the public-interest purpose of preventing wildfires — not to special-interest bailouts for subpar business operations.