House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee begins work on guiding principles; members asked to submit ideas by Tuesday

The House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee opened a committee-led discussion on Wednesday, Jan. 22, about adopting guiding principles to shape its work on energy and digital infrastructure, and asked members to submit two to three proposed principles by the end of the day Tuesday.

Chair James framed the session as a timely check-in after recent introductions to the landscape of energy and telecommunications policy, saying the committee should consider “identifying some guiding principles for our role in this big critical infrastructure jurisdiction that we are in legislating in.” Representative Corey, Representative Sadler, Representative Repner and Representative Putner were identified as having worked on the project and led the discussion, and staff shared a handout that included examples drawn from other committees.

Representative Southworth cited the Vermont Constitution while arguing for foundational values, reading from Article 18: “The frequent recurrence to fundamental principles and a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, industry, and frugality are absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty and keep government free.” Southworth said those words offered a useful frame for committee deliberations.

Committee members discussed scope and form. Several members urged a short set of cross-cutting principles that would apply across utilities, broadband and other areas rather than a lengthy list for each subtopic. Representative Tory invoked the U.N. definition of sustainability — “providing for today's needs without compromising the ability of future generations to provide for their needs” — as a personal guiding principle that could inform the committee’s work.

Representative Skin said she supported the idea but expressed concern about some of the draft examples circulated in the handout, calling them “moderately alarm[ing]” in places because they would conflict with principles used to develop past legislation. Members flagged two related categories for the committee’s work: (1) high-level policy principles (for example, consumer protection, transparency, accountability, affordability, sustainability) and (2) implicit community norms for how members and witnesses are treated (for example, honesty and respectful conduct). Several participants said the committee should avoid “pigeonholing” itself and keep the principles flexible and concise.

Members reported a brief “field trip” earlier in the session to look at guiding principles used in other committees, including human services and health care. Chair Black, the health care committee chair, had visited and described her committee’s experience as “arduous” to develop but worthwhile; committee members noted the health care committee displays its principles prominently in its room.

For next steps, the chair asked committee members to submit two to three proposed principles via a shared document or by email. A reminder and a link to the shared document will be circulated; members were asked to provide submissions by the end of the day Tuesday so the group can review common themes at the following meeting. Members also discussed treating the document as a “living” set of principles to be refined over time.

The committee’s discussion covered process and framing rather than the adoption of any formal, binding text. No motion or vote on final principles was recorded during this session. The committee noted scheduling constraints next week related to the budget session and said it would incorporate the guiding-principles review into its routine business at a forthcoming meeting.

Ending: The committee left the topic open for member submissions and signaled a short, collaborative drafting process in advance of the next meeting where members will compare suggested language and identify shared values to post publicly and display in the committee room.