Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: That's our field trip.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And we
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: should all We are live. We're live. Senate
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: appropriations committee is March 11. We are not talking about the budget. We are talking about a bill. At 03:19, we are already here to present the bill to the committee. Awesome. Thank you.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Thank you, mister chair. I am senator Ruth Hardy from the Addison District, and I'm here talking about s two nineteen, which is a bill about energy navigators. Energy navigators are if you're not familiar with them, are people who help homeowners and businesses save money on their energy bills and can help them transition to lower cost energy alternatives or transition to energy usage that is lower greenhouse gas emissions. So there are lots of benefits, And there are lots of different programs for energy navigators in our state. Some of them are remote energy navigator programs. Some of them are hands on community based. Some are through our community action organizations. And depending on where you live, you might have access to one kind or another. And recently, we've had a lot of focus on trying to help people reduce the cost of their energy usage in order to make their homes more affordable and energy efficient. And there were some recommendations from a recent report from the Public Service Commission Public Utility Commission and Public Service Department. I think it was a joint report maybe that recommended some some changes in energy navigation and making it more accessible to people. So this bill builds on that recommendation and also builds on the work that's being done in all of our communities. And because I'm from the Addison District, one of the communities in my in my district had there's a a CF, which is the Center for Energy Action Coalition, I believe, of Addison County. And they have a hands on energy navigation program where they go into people's homes and and and really help them access lots of different funding sources and programs to help them. Sometimes it's switching their furnace. Sometimes it's insulating their homes. Sometimes it's putting in better windows to do these things. And so they are working with a coalition of organizations to also make some recommendations. So this bill kind of melds the two. The public, service department is engaged in a study right now. They're just getting a consultant on board to do it on all of the energy use programs that are used to help Vermonters lower their cost of energy, sort of an evaluation and recommendations of those programs. And so when I heard that about them doing that work, I asked, would you be interested or available or willing to include energy navigation recommendations and program design in that. And lo and behold, they said yes. So that's what this bill does is it builds on this work program and performance evaluation that the Department of Public Service is already doing and then adds on to it a program designed for energy navigator programs, which are community based long term energy navigation programs. Some of our neighboring states, specifically Massachusetts and Connecticut, are have these programs. They include coaching, etcetera, etcetera. So there's the bill includes this whole design. The reason it's in here is there's a little bit of money in it. I will note that there's a lot less money in it now than it was when it was introduced. So your Senate Natural Resources Committee tried to be as as efficient as possible. So if you look on page four of the bill, there is an appropriation of $25,000 to the Department of Public Service to hire a third party consultant before Are
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: you saying they already hired them? But
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: They've hired them to do the bigger study, and they're gonna tap this onto it. That They're trying to
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: do amend the contract they already have or that they're planning on it.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Yeah. And I think they're right now out to bid for it. And my understanding is that they are willing to go ahead with this regardless of funding sources, but I cannot talk speak for the departments. We should talk to them. And that they're willing to look for funding sources to help. And then there's $10,000 for the Climate Action center. This is the absent county group that's been working on this as well. And that would they're supposed to be sort of working in consultation with the department. So that's those those are the appropriations in the bill. Okay. I'm assuming you guys will do your magic and take them out and everything and put in language. But I would just say the language that you often put in about if they don't get money, this won't happen, the more elegant version of that that Alan will draft for you. It there may be ways to make it happen anyway.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I'm just cautioning you you about that. A couple different ways about allowing them to find a way to do it or saying, you know, just there's nothing happening with this now. And so Yeah. Give them more flexibility.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: That would be great. And Alec and Chad from the department was he seemed very eager and helpful to do this. So speaking for not speaking for you, Alec, if you're listening, but he was very, very great to work with.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. Because yeah. And then I just wonder about the verb in that appropriation The verb? Government will to hire. Like, they're not they've already hired they will have already hired somebody. They wanna use this money to pay consultant to do more work than they would have been.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Correct. They they would be basically adding on to a contract this extra little program design for energy navigation. So, yeah, you could change the verb.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I don't know if it's just crystal clear what they would be using the $25,000 for, but I guess it's much complicated. I read it and I'm not Is it because report is has to be done because it says it's to hire the consultant for the report, and the report says yeah. Maybe that's the one.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: The report. Are you talking you're talking
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: about the report in little c above?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Well, I'm talking about the appropriations. So it's 25,000 Yeah. For the department to hire a third party consultant. Yeah. Got that. I I don't know if they say to hire is the right thing you want them to do with the money.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: I wonder if they're to contract.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Clue. Yeah. Yeah.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah. Mhmm. I mean, I'm sure they'll they know what you mean.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: You can do it. Okay. We'll figure it out. Do you wanna say anything about that? I drafted that before they had testimony on where they were in the process. Okay. So I, at the time, was not aware that they were already parted through. So that's why and so I think you kinda change
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: it. Okay.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: And to be fair to Alan, this all happened really fast. We are trying to get bills out because we have so many of them.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I was not trying to cast any shit out.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Yeah. I full responsibility. That was the word I probably put in there. So change it away. Be careful. How you wish for it. Oh, yeah. That's true. Make it a good make it a good verb. Positive, proactive, energy navigation verb. Okay.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Thank you. Awesome. Yes. Oh. Senator Norris. Senator Norris. I do have a question. Sure. I don't know if it should
[Senator Robert Norris]: be directed towards senator Hardy or on page three, line four, where it says provide ongoing state funding to support the operations, blah blah. Does that is that referring to the $35,000 of 25 and 10, or or is that something separate?
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: That is a good question. It is not, and you could. This was that's the language that was in the original bill. But you could you could modify that to say something like make recommendations about funding sources or something like that if you that because it's it's supposed they're supposed to recommend, like, if we make these changes to these type of navigation programs, how could they be funded? And it's possible that they could be funded funded with exit. There are, like, a 100 programs right now that do some sort of, MG, assistance. So it could be folded into something that already exists, or there could be another funding source. So this was just sort of meant to get at. If you design a program, how could it be supported? I
[Senator Robert Norris]: would suggest putting a pin in there so we can find out exactly what may or may not consist of.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Because it kinda is the way I read it is that the the report would say it's a designing report. So the design would, I guess How provide ongoing state funding on how you design it that way. I guess they would just maybe make a suggestion for funding. Yeah.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Once you design a program, how could it be funded, basically, when they would make needed. Recommendations for
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: The report would tell you that.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Yeah. Exactly.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I guess the report would say, like, or did here's the dollar amount.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Yeah. Right. Exactly.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: We wouldn't obligate funds. Correct. It would be in the report.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Yep. But that's a good patch center, Norris.
[Senator Robert Norris]: Oh, you know, I get lucky every now and then. Yeah.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: Alright?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Thank you.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: You're welcome. Thank you all for taking this up. Appreciate it. I think Sandra Watson should report it.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Maybe. Yeah.
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: I don't know. We'll see.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: She reported all our bills today. She said every day, I have report on
[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison District)]: the Yeah. Well, two for two today. So thanks for having me, Anne. Was a pleasure. Thank you. Bye bye. Bye.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Ellen, do you so I think we might go tomorrow to have an amendment, but I think my guess is that we're gonna want an amendment that allows the department to maybe go forward, but even if there's no money. So wondered if you could prepare the that you send us for tomorrow that says, you know, we're taking the money out, but the bill stands. Does that make sense?
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. I guess my slight question, though, is that subsection a on the appropriation on page four, that is about the department. And they're, a is their consultant. But then subsection b is to the climate action center.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah. We just I mean, I guess it'd be the same for both of them. The climate action center won't collaborate with the department without the money they could. So Okay. It'd be the wording of, like, taking that money out, but allowing to build the past with the reports.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Okay.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I don't know how we've worded it. We're, like, whether it's an obligate like, we I don't wanna say they have to do it Right. Without the money, but, like, they could. And here's the report that they would do.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Okay.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So I think we language that we somebody else drafted. Okay.
[Senator Robert Norris]: Okay. I don't know. So that my understanding, and I could be totally wrong, that this is a bill that basically may provide some monies for a study or a one time report back. It's not an ongoing function. Correct? Right.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Right. Designs a program that could inform
[Senator Robert Norris]: Could or could not continue is what we're saying. We're not wanting to continue this. We're wanting to look at this as a as a as a study, so to speak,
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: with the report coming back
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: from her.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Right. And the amendment will take the money out. There So won't be any money. So the the Department of Public Service wants to do the study without the money. Here would be the report that we're asking for.
[Senator Robert Norris]: And you're gonna hone in on the wording on page three, line six? Well, I'm not So use available grant funds.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Well, at least how much
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I'm sorry. Money is needed? Provide ongoing state funding. Yeah. Right. Because those those are the items those seven items are things to include in the design of the report. So the design of the report would I don't know if providing is the right word because they the report can't provide funding. So maybe they would Recommend? Yeah. Maybe if we could also make it Something along with the adjustment there.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: So I do think that the phrasing here is a little bit awkward, but a establishes that they have to have a report that proposes a design
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: of this program, and then subsection b goes on
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: to list the elements of what the program should have. And that is where
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: this includes provide an ongoing funding.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Say provide an estimate of ongoing funding needs that you're doing? And potential sources. Yeah. Provide recommendations for ongoing state funding. Recommendations for Mhmm.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: Yep. And then I I wonder about number seven as well in that same light.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: That recommendation is available. Available to grant fund.
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: So recommendations on grand funds kind of Yeah. Partnerships.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So we'll give lunch counseling time to do that. And tomorrow, we can look at it. I'm not trying to finish it today. So tomorrow, we'll look at that, and and you may not need to be here, but if you can't be here, that's great. K. Well,
[Alan (Legislative Counsel)]: good. We'll be here. Sounds good.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: We'll figure