Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Energy Advisory Board topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers discuss creating Clean Energy and Natural Resources advisory board; questions about duplication and scope
Summary
House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources members heard debate on House Bill 394 to create a Clean Energy and Natural Resources advisory board to coordinate state energy and resource policy.
House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources members on Feb. 20 considered House Bill 394, which would create a Clean Energy and Natural Resources advisory board charged with advising the secretary of the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) on clean‑energy and resource matters and producing an annual report to the secretary and the Legislative Finance Committee.
Sponsor Representative Luhan said the board is intended to consolidate stakeholder conversations and provide a holistic forum to coordinate renewable energy, energy policy and natural‑resource planning. "This concept is something that I've been working towards," Luhan told the committee, noting an energy policy symposium she hosted and a desire to bring diverse stakeholders together.
Athena Cristadulu, an energy and environmental engineer, testified in support but urged inclusion of broader perspectives in appointments: "I would suggest that academia include environmental engineer rather than just academia in general, and that environmental group be in included as well in this conversation. Otherwise, I fully support this bill."
Several committee members raised concerns about duplication with existing EMNRD advisory panels and commissions. Representative Montoya said the bill as written risks creating “just another board,” and urged consolidation language that would explicitly replace or subsume existing bodies. Representative Murphy and others said a strong board could be useful if it provided clear deliverables and included ratepayer and consumer advocates; Murphy described federal advisory models as a useful template. The sponsor agreed to work with committee members and EMNRD staff on language that would reduce duplication, clarify the board’s scope and timing of meetings, and define deliverables.
No vote was taken. The sponsor asked to roll the bill and continue stakeholder discussions and drafting changes to committee staff.
Ending: Representative Luhan agreed to return with a revised draft addressing consolidation, membership balance (including consumer advocates), meeting scheduling and clear deliverables.
