Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johnson County Court Hears PACE Program Pitch as Voluntary Tool for Energy and Water Savings
Summary
Texas PACE Authority presented a voluntary financing program that attaches a contractual assessment to a property to fund energy- and water-efficiency upgrades; officials asked about liability, data-center uses and impacts on local utilities.
The Johnson County Commissioners Court heard a workshop presentation March 9 on the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program, a voluntary financing mechanism that would let commercial property owners, nonprofits and larger multifamily properties borrow for efficiency upgrades secured by a contractual assessment on the property.
Steven Minnick, program director for the Texas PACE Authority, told the court PACE projects must demonstrate that utility-cost savings will cover the loan and be certified by a licensed engineer. “If they can show the projected utility cost will offset the actual cost of the program, they qualify,” Minnick said. He added the program is designed to impose no cost or risk on local governments and to be administered under uniform statewide standards.
County officials tested key limits. Judge Barker stressed the county would not run the program day-to-day: administration would be contracted to a third party at no expense to the county. Commissioners asked whether the program could be used to support new data-center construction and how participation might affect local utilities’ obligations. Minnick said PACE is aimed principally at renovations that lower energy or water use and that projects must “pay for themselves”; he also said the statute and TPA contracts are intended to provide liability protection to counties.
Minnick reviewed examples elsewhere in Texas — from hotel rehabilitations to multifamily and nonprofit projects — and said PACE has generated private capital for energy and water projects without using taxpayer dollars. Commissioners requested time to review the program materials and to contact other jurisdictions; Judge Barker said the court would revisit the matter in a few weeks to determine whether to begin the formal adoption process, which starts with a public report and a resolution of intent followed by a public hearing.
The workshop produced no vote; the court took no action and left next steps to future discussion.
