Energy committee advances bill to phase out Renewable Development Account to Ways and Means, 8-7

The Minnesota House Committee on Energy Finance and Policy voted 8-7 on a party-line‑style split to refer House File 1738 to the Ways and Means Committee after testimony for and against a proposal to phase out the Renewable Development Account (RDA).

House File 1738, introduced by Rep. Swazinski, would close the RDA — a state fund created in 1994 that receives payments tied to dry cask storage of spent nuclear fuel at Xcel Energy sites — and transition remaining or committed payments as described in the bill. Rep. Swazinski told the committee, “If those goals will be reached, it’s time for the legislature to get out of the way. … Drive down the cost of energy for Minnesotans.”

The RDA’s history and recent uses were a central part of the hearing. Legislative staff and historical testimony described the account’s origin in a 1994 compromise tied to additional dry cask storage at Prairie Island and Monticello, and its evolution into a funding source for grants, incentives and programs including solar rebates, biomass research, and community energy projects. Legislative counsel Mr. Eloff summarized the account’s early mechanics, noting that from 2001 to 2010 about $165 million had been contributed and that the fund had supported roughly 200 grants, with a median award near $245,000.

Opponents and supporters framed the policy and fiscal trade-offs differently. Representatives and business advocates in favor of HF1738, including Michelle Benson of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, argued the RDA is an outmoded surcharge on Xcel Energy ratepayers and that renewable technologies can now compete without a dedicated surcharge. Benson said the bill would “phase out special funds for renewable energy projects that are ready to compete in Minnesota's regulated energy market” and that moving funding to the general fund would be more transparent.

Testimony opposing repeal emphasized projects and services currently supported by the RDA. Sam Smith of the Minnesota Department of Commerce told the committee the account “has committed hundreds of millions of dollars to accelerate the development of clean energy technologies” and highlighted Solar Rewards, a production‑based solar incentive program run in Xcel territory that Commerce oversees; Smith said “more than 7,000 projects have received funding from Solar Rewards” and warned the bill would terminate future incentives while allowing existing participants to receive payments already promised. Industry witnesses — including Dan King of Darcy Solutions, Sarah Webby of the Minnesota Solar Energy Industry Association, Bobby King of Solar United Neighbors, Andy Gok of Apadana Solar, and George Damien of Clean Energy Economy Minnesota (CEEM/SEAM) — described RDA-funded programs that support solar on schools, low‑income solar, geothermal feasibility, electric vehicle rebates and other pilot projects.

Committee members asked a mix of policy and practical questions during the discussion. Several members emphasized the original rationale for the fund, noting dry cask storage remains at Prairie Island and Monticello; Representative Jones said, “The reason why this program exists is because we have nuclear waste stored at Prairie Island.” Other members questioned whether the fund continues to be the best way to support emerging technologies, suggested sunset language as a compromise, or pointed to broader federal and market shifts (including federal funding and trade developments) that affect program design.

After testimony and member discussion, the committee recorded a roll-call vote on the motion to refer HF1738 to Ways and Means. The committee clerk recorded 8 ayes and 7 nays and advanced the bill for further fiscal review.

Votes at a glance - Motion: Refer House File 1738 (proposal to phase out the Renewable Development Account) to the Ways and Means Committee. Mover: Chair Swazinski. Second: not specified in the record. Result: referred, 8 ayes, 7 nays. - Ayes (as recorded): Chair Swazinski; Vice Chair Murphy; Representative Anderson; Representative Baker; Representative Igo; Representative Meckland; Representative Sexton; Representative Weiner. - Nays (as recorded): Representative Kraft; Representative Carroll; Representative Frazier; Representative Collins; Representative Jones; Representative Mahamud; one other vote recorded as “Lehi ACOM”/No in the committee roll call.

What happens next The bill was sent to the House Ways and Means Committee; members on the Energy Finance and Policy committee requested a fiscal note prior to further action. Committee members said a fiscal note and additional stakeholder conversations — particularly with tribal representatives and community groups tied to the original Prairie Island agreement — would inform later decisions.

Reporting in the hearing included several quantifiable program details provided by staff and testifiers: the RDA contributed roughly $165 million to funds between 2001 and 2010 (supporting about 200 grants, median award ~$245,000); Solar Rewards has funded more than 7,000 projects in Xcel territory; made‑in‑Minnesota panels, Prairie Island net‑zero grants, Granite Falls hydropower, and low‑income solar allocations were listed among recent RDA expenditures. Committee members and witnesses repeatedly noted the RDA’s link to casks stored at Prairie Island and Monticello, a connection established in the legislation that created the account in 1994.

Committee attendance and next meeting The committee concluded its business and noted the next meeting scheduled for Thursday, March 6, at 1 p.m. (the chair said a fiscal forecast would be released Thursday and requested agencies provide budget overviews for members).