Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home Energy Rebates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
JFAC deadlocks on home energy rebates and Speed Council; federal rebate motion fails to secure majority
Summary
Committee members debated administering federal Home Energy Rebates funds and a governor-backed "Speed Council" to streamline permitting. An amended substitute to accept the $24.58 million federal rebate package failed to pass the committee; other substitute and original motions also failed to achieve the required majorities.
The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee considered the Office of Energy and Mineral Resources’ FY2026 requests, including administering a federal Home Energy Rebates Program (funds coming from the Inflation Reduction Act) and creation of an interagency Speed Council to streamline permitting for large infrastructure projects.
Budget analyst Kellen McGurkin told the committee the federal Home Energy Rebates Program provides roughly $80.8 million to Idaho through 2031 and that OEMR requested a FY2026 appropriation of about $24,579,900 to administer the program (including $20 million for direct rebates, approximately $4 million for third‑party implementer costs, and personnel and indirect costs). McGurkin also described the governor’s Speed Council proposal: one new position and $481,000 to stand up a council and a public dashboard to track project timelines.
Committee members offered multiple motions. Senator Ward Engelking moved an amended substitute that would have funded the rebate program ($24,579,900 and four FTP); that amended substitute failed in committee by a vote of 9 yes, 10 no and 1 absent. Other substitute and original motions that would have funded the Speed Council or otherwise advanced the governor’s initiative also failed to secure the necessary majorities on the floor of the committee or were split between chambers and therefore did not pass the committee.
Senator Woodward said he supported the Speed Council to reduce permitting delays and to "keep government out of the way of industry," while proponents of the rebate program said the federal money should be spent in Idaho rather than reallocated to other states. Opponents raised concerns about readiness, the need for consensus on federal program administration, and statutory and interagency complexities.
Because the motions did not obtain majorities in both chambers of the committee, the committee did not adopt the rebate appropriation or the permanent Speed Council funding and the measures were left for further consideration.
