Ohio House committee tees up its own energy plan after Senate approves overhaul
Last week the Ohio Senate approved a wide-ranging energy measure and House lawmakers aren't far behind them. Following the Senate vote, House Energy committee chair, Rep. Adam Holmes, R-Nashport, laid out his timeline.
'We want to vote out Wednesday morning,' he told the committee, 'Next Wednesday morning, and have it on the (House) floor next Wednesday — that's our goal.'
Broadly speaking, both proposals do the same thing.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Pole-and-wire utilities, think AEP, FirstEnergry or Duke, are barred from the power generation market, and there are tax incentives ready for the companies who build new power plants in Ohio. The House and Senate both get rid of the programs energy giants have used to avoid opening their books to regulators, but they agreed to allow utilities to set rates on a three-year basis.
Both measures also put an end to subsidies for two Eisenhower-era coal plants operated by the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation. Ohioans have already spent close to half a billion dollars on their monthly energy bills to prop up the aging OVEC plants. The bailout was part of House Bill 6, the 2019 measure at the center of the largest bribery scheme in Ohio's history.
Still, there are notable differences between House Bill 15 and Senate Bill 2, which lawmakers will have to hash out on the floor or in conference committee. House lawmakers include a community energy pilot that could defray participants' monthly bills and greater oversight for utilities' transmission projects.
One factor that could simplify compromise is the vast array of stakeholders lined up behind the proposals. The state's consumer watch dog and environmental groups are both on board. So are several coalitions representing industrial power users as well as a laundry list of companies who want build new power plants.
Ohio Senate unanimously approves energy and utility overhaul
Perhaps the biggest point of separation shows up in a pair of ancillary programs that made their way into the bills. On the Senate side, after dismantling the OVEC subsidies, lawmakers were left scratching their heads over what to do about a much smaller pool of money.
When lawmakers passed House Bill 6, they included a fund for future solar projects as a kind of fig leaf. The fund brought in more than $60 million but paid out very little of that total. Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, proposed using the remainder to fund loans for schools that want to invest in rooftop solar.
The House bill doesn't address that solar generation fund, but it does propose a program that could shake up how small communities get power.
Lawmakers envision a community energy pilot program — something like crowd funding a neighborhood solar array rather than every household getting solar on its roof. But the range of viable fuel sources extends beyond solar, including wind, natural gas, biomass, hydroelectric, and fuel cells. Those facilities have to be small (10 megawatts), but the legislation directs regulators approve a lot of them (1,000 megawatts over five years).
'The key element of community energy projects is that we avoid costly transmission infrastructure,' David Murray of TurningPoint Energy explained. The company develops community solar projects around the country with 60 megawatts already up and running and 10 times that in the pipeline.
'We do not need to rely on the regional electricity grid,' he argued. 'We, as a developer, we will pay for the cost of interconnecting our projects to the distribution grid, which deliver benefits to all utility customers and enhance grid resiliency as well.'
What that means for the average customer subscribing to a community power program is a rebate on their monthly bill. 'Typically, we see bill savings of around 10 to 20% for customers,' Murray explained. And although, he insisted the systems' costs won't impact utility customers who don't subscribe, the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, Maureen Willis, isn't so sure.
'While we support renewable energy,' Willis argued, 'we continue to advocate for its development in the competitive market without subsidies from utility consumers. Subsidies for the community solar (program) may be unintended but are likely to occur under the bill as written.'
In her testimony against a similar measure last General Assembly, Willis argued utilities would likely engage in cost-shifting — finding ways to make up the revenue lost from program participants by increasing charges elsewhere.
Chair Holmes acknowledged those concerns but downplayed the risks.
'We don't like subsidies,' he said. 'So we don't want anyone subsidizing. That was a driver behind eliminating the OVEC and the solar subsidies, and so we're looking at this, and also for members, this is a pilot program, so it's a five-year program.'
The House bill also departs from the Senate version by including changes to the which utility projects qualify as 'major,' and thus get heightened regulatory scrutiny.
'The added review should provide consumers some protection against 'gold-plating' transmission investment and charging utility consumers for that,' Willis argued.
The investments, known as supplemental transmission projects, offer a kind of backdoor for charging customers, she argued. So long as the utility is cleared to proceed with the project, they get to bill their customers for it. Projects get reviewed by the 13-state regional transmission organization PJM, but only on the basis of 'do no harm.'
'That's not a protective standard for Ohio consumers,' Willis insisted. 'It doesn't consider costs, and it doesn't consider alternatives.'
'In 2023, she added, 'the Ohio tab for the supplemental projects was $1.38 billion.'
David Proaño, a lobbyist for the Ohio Energy Leadership Council, dug a bit deeper, with a report from PJM detailing supplemental projects.
'Just look at the AEP column,' he told lawmakers.
In 2012 the company had just five projects, he explained. Eight years on that number had jumped to 132. Proaño put that explosion in projects down to utilities' guaranteed rate of return — if their investments increase so does their revenue. 'This is what's driving this transmission boom,' he argued. And when utilities don't have to competitively bid their projects or justify their cost effectiveness and necessity, it's easy to inflate project costs.
'(PJM) trust(s) these transmission companies to build it, because we'll trust that you're doing whatever you need to do to keep things reliable,' Proaño said.
And the number of AEP's supplemental projects didn't stop growing in 2020 — since then the it's almost tripled.
'In 2024 they had 354 — 354,' Proaño said, 'can you imagine?'
Chair Holmes took a moment after Proaño was done to insist, 'we're not accusing anybody of anything, but clearly, we don't know. And those numbers don't have to be challenged right now, so we got to fix that.'
To provide greater oversight, HB 15 lowers the threshold for review on transmission lines based on their capacity and length. The changes mean 69kV power poles — one step up from what you might expect for neighborhood distribution — and replacement of any lines longer than a mile will now get state level review.
Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7 minutes ago
A look at Texas' redistricting walkout and California's response, by the numbers
A walkout by Democratic legislators in Texas has ended and Republicans arranged to push a plan for redrawing the state's congressional districts through the GOP-controlled Legislature and give President Donald Trump a better political landscape. Democrats' boycott of daily sessions kept the House from passing a new map because the state constitution requires 100 of the chamber's 150 members to be present to do business. Democrats hold 62 seats. A national, partisan brawl over redistricting has now started to shift to California, where Democrats are hoping to impose a new map that offsets any advantage Trump and his fellow Republicans might gain in Texas. Here's a breakdown by the numbers. Texas is the nation's second most-populous state and has 38 congressional seats. Republicans hold 25 of them but are hoping to boost that number to 30. Their goal is to make it easier for the GOP to hold on to its slim U.S. House majority in the 2026 midterm elections, so that Democrats have little ability to thwart Trump's agenda and can't initiate investigations of his administration. Democrats hold 43 of 52 congressional seats in California, the nation's most populous state. At Gov. Gavin Newsom's urging, they've drafted a proposal to increase the number to 48. However, the current map was drawn by an independent commission created though a voter-approved ballot initiative in 2008. To avoid legal challenges, Democrats want to put their proposal on the ballot in a special election in November. Redistricting usually happens after the once-a-decade population count by the U.S. Census Bureau and sometimes in response to a court ruling. Changes are required to keep a state's congressional districts equal in population after people move into or out of an area. Trump is pushing for a rare mid-decade redistricting in Texas, and Republicans are also considering it in other states including Missouri, Florida and Indiana. Republicans currently hold 219 seats in the U.S. House, seven more than the 212 held by Democrats. Four of the chamber's 435 seats are vacant, three of them previously held by Democrats. Midterm elections most often go against the president's party. In 2018, during Trump's first term, Democrats had a net gain of 41 seats to capture the House majority. Most House Democrats left Texas on Aug. 3 and stayed outside the state for 15 days. They fled to blue states like Illinois, California and Massachusetts to stay out of the reach of the Texas law enforcement officers trying to bring them back. Many of the same lawmakers also walked out in 2021 for 38 days to protest GOP proposals for new voting restrictions. Once they returned, Republicans passed them into law. The Democrats who bolted for other states and returned now have an around-the-clock escort from Texas Department of Public Safety officers to make sure they return to the Capitol, House Speaker Dustin Burrows' office said. Burrows' office did not provide more details, calling it an ongoing law enforcement operation. Plainclothes officers escorted them from the chamber after Monday's session.
22 minutes ago
Appeals court overturns order that stripped some protections from pregnant Texas state workers
NEW YORK -- A federal appeals court has upheld a law strengthening the rights of pregnant workers, vacating a judge's earlier order that had stripped those protections from Texas state employees. The ruling was a victory for advocates of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a law that passed with bipartisan support in 2022 but quickly became embroiled in controversy over whether it covers workers seeking abortions and fertility treatments. A federal judge last year blocked enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act for Texas state employees, ruling that its passage was unconstitutional because a majority of House members were not physically present to approve the law as part of spending package in December 2022. In a 2-1 decision, the Fifth Circuit appeals court disagreed, finding that the law was properly passed under a COVID-19 pandemic-era Congressional rule allowing members to vote by proxy to meet the quorum requirement. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act strengthens the rights of women to receive workplace accommodation for needs related to pregnancy and childbirth, such as time off for medical appointments and exemptions from heavy lifting. Its passage came after a decades long campaign by women's advocacy groups highlighting the struggles of pregnant workers, especially those in low-wage roles, who were routinely forced off the job after requesting accommodations. The Texas case differed from other lawsuits that have narrowly focused on federal regulations stating that abortion, fertility treatments and birth control are medical issues requiring protection under the new law. The lawsuit, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, instead took aim at the entirety of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, drawing opposition from Republican lawmakers including former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who defended the pandemic-era proxy voting rule. Under the Trump administration, the Department of Justice has continued to fight Paxton's lawsuit, which if successful, could help open the door to legal challenges of other pandemic-era laws passed by proxy. Paxton's office did not reply to emails seeking comment, and it was not clear whether he would appeal Friday's ruling. The Justice Department declined to comment. 'This is a big win for women's rights. We are really happy to see that the Fifth Circuit agreed with us that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act was passed constitutionally and will continue to fight for the PWFA to stay legal,' said Inimai Chettiar, president of a Better Balance, an advocacy group that spearheaded the campaign for passage of the law. Texas state employees are not immediately protected, however, because the appeals court ruling doesn't become final for several weeks to give time for a possible appeal, Chettiar said. Conservative officials and religious groups, meanwhile, have been largely successfully in challenging the regulations passed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which established that workers seeking abortions are entitled accommodations. In May, a federal court struck down the abortion provisions of the EEOC regulations in response to lawsuits brought by states of Louisiana and Mississippi, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholic University and two Catholic dioceses. The Trump administration is almost certain to comply with that ruling. President Donald Trump in January fired two of the EEOC's democratic commissioners, paving the way for him to quickly establish a Republican majority at the agency. EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas, a Republican, has signaled her support for revising the regulations, arguing the agency exceeded its authority by including not only abortion but fertility treatments and birth control as medical needs covered by the law.
2 hours ago
Democrats get police escorts to prevent a new redistricting walkout as California moves to retaliate
AUSTIN, Texas -- Texas Democrats who ended a walkout found themselves shadowed by law enforcement officers to keep them from repeating the protest that stalled Republican efforts to redraw congressional districts and fulfill President Donald Trump's desire to reshape U.S. House maps. Republicans in the Texas House forced returning Democrats to sign what the Democrats called 'permission slips,' agreeing to around-the-clock surveillance by state Department of Public Safety officers to leave the floor. However, Democratic Rep. Nicole Collier, of Fort Worth, refused and remained on the House floor Monday night. The Democrats' return to Texas puts the Republican-run Legislature in position to satisfy Trump's demands, possibly later this week, as California Democrats advance new congressional boundaries in retaliation. Lawmakers had officers posted outside their Capitol offices, and suburban Dallas Rep. Mihaela Plesa said one tailed her on her Monday evening drive back to her apartment in Austin after spending much of the day on a couch in her office. She said he went with her for a staff lunch and even down the hallway with her for restroom breaks. 'We were kind of laughing about it, to be honest, but this is really serious stuff," Plesa said in a telephone interview. "This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and really performative theater.' Collier, who represents a minority-majority district, said she would not 'sign away my dignity" and allow Republicans to 'control my movements and monitor me.' 'I know these maps will harm my constituents,' she said in a statement. "I won't just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination.' The tit-for-tat puts the nation's two most populous states at the center of an expanding fight over control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The battle has rallied Democrats nationally following infighting and frustrations among the party's voters since Republicans took total control of the federal government in January. Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers left for Illinois and elsewhere on Aug. 3, denying their Republican colleagues the attendance necessary to vote on redrawn maps intended to send five more Texas Republicans to Washington. Republicans now hold 25 of Texas' 38 U.S. House seats. They declared victory Friday, pointing to California's proposal intended to increase Democrats' U.S. House advantage by five seats. Many absent Democrats left Chicago early Monday and landed hours later at a private airfield in Austin, where several boarded a charter bus to the Capitol. Cheering supporters greeted them inside. Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows did not mention redistricting on the floor but promised swift action on the Legislature's agenda. 'We aren't playing around,' Republican state Rep. Matt Shaheen, whose district includes part of the Dallas area, said in a post on the X social media platform. Even as they declared victory, Democrats acknowledged Republicans can now approve redrawn districts. Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu said Democrats would challenge the new designs in court. Lawmakers did not take up any bills Monday and were not scheduled to return until Wednesday. Trump has pressured other Republican-run states to consider redistricting, as well, while Democratic governors in multiple statehouses have indicated they would follow California's lead in response. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said his state will hold a Nov. 4 special referendum on the redrawn districts. The president wants to shore up Republicans' narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of the midterms during his first presidency. After gaining House control in 2018, Democrats used their majority to stymie his agenda and twice impeach him. Nationally, the partisan makeup of existing district lines puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Of the 435 total House seats, only several dozen districts are competitive. So even slight changes in a few states could affect which party wins control. Redistricting typically occurs once at the beginning of each decade after the census. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among those that empower independent commissions, giving Newsom an additional hurdle. Democratic legislators introduced new California maps Monday. It was the first official move toward the fall referendum asking voters to override the independent commission's work after the 2020 census. The proposed boundaries would replace current ones through 2030. Democrats said they will return the mapmaking power to the commission after that. State Republicans promised lawsuits. Democrats hold 43 out of California's 52 U.S. House seats. The proposal would try to expand that advantage by targeting battleground districts in Northern California, San Diego and Orange counties, and the Central Valley. Some Democratic incumbents also get more left-leaning voters in their districts. 'We don't want this fight, but with our democracy on the line, we cannot run away from this fight,' said Democrat Marc Berman, a California Assembly member who previously chaired the elections committee. Republicans expressed opposition in terms that echoed Democrats in Austin, accusing the majority of abusing power. Sacramento Republicans said they will introduce legislation advocating independent redistricting commissions in all states. Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott launched the expanding battle when he heeded Trump's wishes and added redistricting to an initial special session agenda that included multiple issues, including a package responding to devastating floods that killed more than 130 people last month. Abbott has blamed Democrats' absence for delaying action on those measures. Democrats have answered that Abbott is responsible because he effectively linked the hyper-partisan matter to nonpartisan flood relief. Abbott, Burrows and other Republicans tried various threats and legal maneuvers to pressure Democrats' return, including the governor arguing that Texas judges should remove absent lawmakers from office. As long as they were out of state, lawmakers were beyond the reach of the civil arrest warrants that Burrows issued. The Democrats who returned Monday did so without being detained by law enforcement. The lawmakers who left face fines of up to $500 for each legislative day they missed. Burrows has insisted Democratic lawmakers also will pay pick up the tab for law enforcement who attempted to corral them during the walkout.
