Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: We're live. Hi, welcome everybody. It is Wednesday, May 20, as just discussed. This is House Energy and Digital Infrastructure, and I'm representative Kathleen James from Manchester.
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: Richard Bailey, Lamoille two. Chris Morrow, Windham, Windsor Bennington. Michael Southworth, Caledonia two. Christopher Howland at Rutland four.
[Rep. Dara Torre (Clerk)]: Dara Torre, Washington two.
[Rep. Bram Kleppner (Member)]: Bram Kleppner, Chittenden Thirteenth for Lincoln.
[Rep. Laura Sibilia (Ranking Member)]: Laura Sibilia, 22. Great. And, we are here today with our colleague, representative Emily Caris Duncan, who is going to, introduce us to a bill that she's introduced, h nine forty three. So take it away, rep Harris Duncan.
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: Thank you so much. Hello, everybody. Thank you, my big chair and not a wrecking my breath. Am Emily Harris Duncan representing women Wilmington, Windham, and Halifax. I have introduced a bill about municipal permitting for ground mounted solar arrays. So this bill is a bill that was put in by request from one of my constituents who had an issue with a neighbor's brown mountain solar array that is adjoining their property. So due to changes that we made back in 2025, Brown Bag Solar Rates don't have to go through the same permitting process if they're under 25 kilowatts. This array was under 25 kilowatts. And I think what started to come up were these issues of notification, potential on the ground citing issues with adjoining neighbors and trying to kind of rectify potential immunity portion. So the proposal is to turn over the citing of ground mounted solar arrays to the towns as opposed to the peas. Now it is a short form bill, so there is certainly lots of leeway and how it could possibly get formed. But there are the biggest things are adding kind of notification periods or fifteen days after the review of the completed after the application. And to require a public hearing on ground mounted solar rays thirty day after the review of the completed application itself. Okay. Okay.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: So if I'm understanding, we did pass a bill last year, and I and I'm sorry. I didn't review I didn't review that language before you came in today, but we did pass a bill that would allow slightly larger ground mounted solar arrays, 25 kilowatts, to receive the same permitting process as a 15 kilowatt array with basic underlying rationale being that, you know, sort of 25 is the new 15. That these these arrays that now kick out more power weren't didn't occupy that much more physical footprint. And so that may be that's could be the legislation that your constituent is responding to. The rationale behind having the PUC handle solar permitting is that there's a statewide predictable statewide framework so that from town to town, Vermonters who wanna put in ground mounted solar can basically know what they're know what they're dealing with instead of having there be a patchwork of different permitting approaches from community to community. And I I wonder if you had a chance to speak with your constituent about that I did. And the
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: her thought about that was that we can still keep that structure, but the actual, like, on the ground considerations, if it was brought back to the towns, would be able to be mitigated just, you know, for funky funky, like, land patterns and land owner ownership issues. And I think that that that was the thought. So keeping this this, like, statewide permitting structure and the rules around what can go on where, but the actual siting Mhmm. Work should be done by the towns.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: I'm trying to remember. Rest of do you remember? We put in Yeah.
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: In a set. We did.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: We put in setbacks. Mhmm. And I'm sorry. I'm having I'm I I didn't review it before you
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: gave it. Got the number.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: We're calling the bill up now. We put in set I remember a robust conversation about setbacks from the roads. Yep. I remember talking about property lines. We did take away one thing that the town folks used to have to do in terms of paperwork. But it didn't change the municipality's role. It just took away that.
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: Registering of the certificate in town? The minimum setbacks shall be 10 feet from a facility with a plant capacity left in your equal to 25 cubic volts, from each property vanity that is not in state, like a municipal highway.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: So 10 feet from the road.
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: 10 feet from the property.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: 10 feet from the property line from the setback. So that is existing law. Yeah. Can you remind me, was your constituent concerned about setbacks, do you know, or just the broader issue? A lot of it.
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: Not necessarily setbacks specifically, but I guess that kind of plays into the concern. The bigger concern for this constituent specifically is that the solar rate is visible from their house. Well, it would be visible. Yeah. And that there's a concern that it would lower property values. For For the
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: loss. Property owners?
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: Yes. For the loss of of you and and you call her a setting.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Wonder how that would be different from, like, an ugly
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: It's like a structure.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Place place that that I might wanna put on my yard or
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: Might as well be a.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: We're not ugly. Well, well, if we're talking about defining property values there
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: Right. Suppose.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Are plenty of things that I can probably do on my property that my neighbors might think, might not like.
[Unidentified committee member (various)]: You might think it's beautiful and they might think it's actually a different view. They might assume a future buyer who thinks it's ugly for the property.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Alright. Well, we appreciate you coming in to introduce us to the concept of this bill. And obviously, you know, I mean, we're adjourning in a couple days. So, I think this is more food for thought for any of us who would be returning to the committee next year. And we really appreciate you bringing your constituents concerns to us and for advocating as you did so strongly to have time to raise this raise this bill to our committee. So you've been a good advocate and appreciate you being here.
[Rep. Emily Harris Duncan (Guest)]: Thank you so much. I greatly appreciate your attention to the students.
[Rep. Kathleen James (Chair)]: Alright. Thanks for the chance. Thanks representative. Alright. Don't we go off live?