by Alison Despathy
Tit for Tat, Quid pro quo, Throw a dog a bone.
Pick your axiom, but Chair of Senate Natural Resource and Energy Committee, Anne Watson’s move to wrap a ‘Clean Heat Standard repeal’ into her heavily opposed and disruptive S.65 bill is weak and manipulative. Vermont can do better.
A brief glimpse of sponsors listed on S.65 sheds light, here you will find Democratic Senators Anne Watson, Rebecca White and Alison Clarkson. Anyone even slightly tuned in knows there is a 99% chance that this will be a controversial, extremist bill that will cost Vermonters more money. No surprises here, this is indeed the case.
S.65 seeks to expand and shift energy efficiency utility jurisdiction by prioritizing the goal of decreased climate pollution instead of the long term mission of reduction in electricity use through efficiency measures. This well established mandate has simultaneously reduced energy consumption and brought benefits of lowered costs to Vermonters.
Disrupting this work has resulted in opposition from the majority of entities impacted. Testimony against S.65 has focused on the bill’s unresolvable internal contradictions, distortion of the intended uses of the energy efficiency charge, interference in the services offered by Vermont electric utilities, and higher costs all around.
Efficiency Vermont which stands to gain in funding and power appears to be the only stakeholder satisfied with this move. Based on testimony, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), the Public Service Department (DPS) and Vermont electric companies stand opposed to this bill. Not because they disagree with the goal of decreasing climate pollution but because there are inherent funding structure issues and a severe warping of the original intent of the energy efficiency mandate. S.65 also centralizes power to Efficiency Vermont away from small Vermont electric distribution utilities who understand the needs of the communities they serve and are already doing this work.
The Public Utilities Commission (PUC), which oversees Vermont’s public utilities and regulates their service, rates, and financial management, submitted a letter to Chair Watson on March 12. Their statements below summarize the core issues with S.65.
“S.65 is legally unsound because it contains internally conflicting standards and creates a regulatory morass likely to result in litigation as regulated monopolies compete over electrification and energy efficiency work.
The PUC points out that this bill alters the “Longstanding legislative intent of the energy efficiency utilities and the energy efficiency charge” With S.65, “the energy efficiency charge becomes a tax to fund decarbonization programs.”
“The language of S.65 also creates direct competition among regulated entities in the provision of service to customers, creating higher costs and reduced efficacy of services.”
Due to concerns related to S.65, the PUC declared that. “Vermont should keep electricity affordable because it is a relatively low emission energy source. Driving up the cost of electricity sends the wrong price signal during a time when the legislature is also trying to achieve greater electrification.”
In their concluding statement, the PUC notes that “S.65 creates a regulatory structure we cannot implement and increases costs for Vermonters. If the Committee nonetheless moves forward with S.65, clarity around a single standard to apply when setting the energy efficiency utilities (EEUs)’ budgets will be essential for the Commission, EEUs, electric distribution utilities and the Department of Public Service to carry out this work. We respectfully request that the Committee consider the Commission’s concerns and hold the bill for further testimony.”
This request was ignored. Chair Watson’s move to tack a ‘sort of’ repeal of the Clean Heat Standard into this sloppy, disruptive bill is irresponsible. This manipulation disrespects Vermonters and Republicans working hard for years to stop the destructive Clean Heat Standard from becoming law. Add to this the recent PUC report which determined high level problems and risks associated with the Clean Heat Standard and it is crystal clear that a straightforward, simple bill to repeal is the only right action. Chair Watson has had this repeal option (S.68) in her committee since the beginning of the session and she has chosen to ignore any action until this recent tactic to guarantee votes for S.65
The reality of her bogus ‘deal’ is evident in the fact that the two Republicans on the Committee held different votes despite their mutual agreement to repeal the Clean heat Standard. Watson’s dirty trick forced an impossible decision. With Senator Beck voting YES to move the Clean Heat Standard repeal forward and Senator Williams voting NO because the repeal was last minute tacked on to this controversial and impulsive S.65 bill.
Yet another slap in the face was Watson’s comment in VTDigger that repealing the Clean Heat Standard is,”not really a big deal”, and “we are not moving forward with the Clean Heat Standard at this time.” Key phrase “at this time.” This is a gross distortion of reality.
Unless the Clean Heat Standard is fully repealed, it could easily resurface and hurt Vermonters. To underplay the significance of this truth is a disservice to Vermonters. It could also possibly be mandated for action if the lawsuit against Vermont by Conservation Law Foundation moves forward with a court order to reduce emissions because Vermont has not achieved its self imposed, unrealistic emission reduction deadlines. The Global Warming Solutions Act must be repealed or significantly amended to break this vicious cycle of destructive climate policy which doesn’t help our environment, climate or infrastructure, regardless of how it’s sold or what it is called.
Add to this, there is a growing call and need for an audit of Efficiency Vermont, a non profit with Vermont Energy Investment Corporation as its parent company. In 2021, Efficiency Vermont received $50,805,893 from Vermont electric ratepayers through the energy efficiency charge on our electric bills. As reported this month by Don Keelan in VDC, back in 2023, Efficiency Vermont also received a $36 million dollar federal grant to help homeowners, renters and businesses recover from floods, one of the largest awarded by a state agency to a nonprofit entity.
Ten million in this recent grant was earmarked for flood relief services. Keelan points out, we are 19 months into this grant and only 28% of the ten million allocated for flood relief to date has been granted to Vermonters. Only 22% of the total grant at $7,552, 233 has been billed at this time. With millions of dollars intended for Vermonters, Keelan raises the key issue, “What is missing is how much follow up the Legislature and Administration are doing to see how the funds are being applied. So little is publicized.”
It would be both responsible and logical to audit Efficiency Vermont and their parent company, Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VEIC), especially before granting them access to more funding and consolidated power in the way Watson’s S.65 would.
Due diligence is missing here, and Chair Watson should be ashamed of herself for folding the Clean Heat Standard repeal language into this contentious and heavily opposed S.65 bill. Vermonters deserve to know how Vermont politicians like Watson use manipulation and rhetoric to force agendas. Sadly, many have come to expect moves like this in DC. But here in Vermont we expect elected officials to step up and take the right action. Just because you have the power to do something does NOT mean you should, especially when it’s poorly planned, ill-advised and will cost Vermonters yet more money.
The author is a clinical nutritionist in St. Johnsbury.