House energy committee debates future of Affordable Heat Act; members split on repeal vs. revision

The House Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure met Feb. 11 to review bills that have been filed with the committee and to take initial positions ahead of crossover deadlines. Committee chair Representative Kathleen James said the committee will give each sponsor a short “pitch session” to explain a bill’s problem and proposed solution, then decide whether to pursue walk-throughs, testimony or further drafting.

The committee’s earliest substantive discussion centered on H.16 — legislation tied to the Affordable Heat Act and a proposed clean heat standard — and related measures on greenhouse gas policy and renewable standards. Representative Michael Southworth argued the committee should “get rid of it” and start fresh, saying the bill as drafted would be too costly for many Vermonters and local markets. Other members countered that the bill contains design elements that could be repurposed, including a fuel-delivery registry and potential revenue mechanisms to subsidize weatherization and heat-pump installation for low- and moderate-income households.

Why it matters: H.16 and related measures touch on greenhouse-gas targets, consumer energy costs and public-assistance design. Committee members noted the practical tradeoffs between an administratively complex market-based approach and simpler charges to raise subsidy funds. The panel also noted intense outside lobbying during earlier consideration of the bill and flagged uncertainties about implementation cost and administrative capacity.

Members discussed three possible paths: repeal and start over; retain the bill on the wall and treat portions (such as a fuel-dealer registry) as information tools; or rework components into a committee-developed bill. Representative Southworth said testimony and responses from the Public Utility Commission and utility stakeholders left him unconvinced the current draft is viable. Other members said the registry and monitoring provisions could be valuable information sources even if the broader market mechanism is revised.

Committee logistics and next steps were also addressed. Chair James reminded members that the committee’s crossover deadline is March 14 and that committee bills or committee-developed concepts need to be prioritized to meet that timeframe. Members agreed to pin further committee discussion to a later slot that day and to conduct walk-throughs with legislative counsel where more detailed statutory analysis was needed.

The committee also reviewed a list of bills currently on its docket, including but not limited to: H.16 (Affordable Heat Act / clean heat proposals), H.62 (repeal of the GWSA as described in the filing), H.88 (prohibition on utility disconnections during extreme heat), H.121 (affordable broadband), H.125 (reporting on energy transition), H.155 (standard-offer program), H.159 (repeal of the renewable energy standard) and H.181 (residential and commercial building energy standards). No formal votes were taken during the meeting.

Committee members asked staff to collect cost and implementation details, to invite relevant state agencies for testimony, and to work with the Joint Fiscal Office and legislative counsel to clarify statutory implications. Representative James said the committee will use pitch sessions, walk‑throughs and targeted testimony to decide which bills to move before crossover.

Ending: The committee did not take final action on any bill at the Feb. 11 session. Members scheduled additional work — including walk-throughs and agency testimony — and flagged the Appropriations process and the committee’s Feb. 26 memo deadline as a parallel timeline for budget-related energy items.