Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Emissions Committee Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate over scope stalls joint carbon emissions reduction committee bill
Summary
Committee members debated draft 260765 to retitle and revise the Joint Carbon Emissions Reduction committee to add energy oversight and change membership. The main dispute centered on whether the committee should include the electric sector in its emissions charge; members paused for a caucus and did not advance the bill.
The committee considered draft 260765 to rename and revise the Joint Carbon Emissions Reduction Committee to the Joint Carbon Emissions Reduction and Energy Oversight Committee, changing membership, duties and meeting requirements. The presenter said the draft updates the committee's statutory section, adjusts which standing committees appoint members and requires the joint committee to meet at least five times during adjournment.
Committee members debated several substantive points. The draft removes Appropriations from the committee's membership; staff had told the committee Appropriations was originally included because the committee once oversaw allocation of Volkswagen settlement funds, a role that is "no longer relevant," according to the presenter. The draft also adds duties addressing future energy-generation siting in Vermont and retains language charging the committee to oversee carbon emissions across electric, residential, commercial and transportation sectors.
The scope of that emissions language proved contentious. One committee member said they "would not be able to support this with the emissions language in there for Vermont's electric sector," arguing the electric sector is already highly regulated and that unregulated thermal and transportation sectors drive a disproportionate share of emissions. Other members responded that keeping the electric sector in the committee's charge would allow the panel to examine issues such as nuclear generation contracts and how electric-sector grants and RGGI-related funding are used.
Members also raised concerns about base-load generation and siting — including worry that some stakeholders might use committee work to target biomass — but other members stressed the joint committee has only study and reporting powers and cannot appropriate funds or pass laws on its own.
No final action was taken on draft 260765 at the meeting. A member requested a short caucus to consult with their party, and the chair agreed to recess and reconvene; the committee paused without advancing the draft to a vote.
