Lawmakers consider axing program that has helped lower electric bills for over 40 years: 'A slap in the face to workers and families'
A bill introduced in Minnesota threatens to reshape the community solar program and financial incentives for residents who generate their own solar energy.
Community solar advocates note that the program was just updated in 2023 to prioritize low-income communities. And the net metering system that essentially pays household producers of solar power has been operating, in some form, for more than 40 years, according to Canary Media.
The Minnesota Senate advanced a bipartisan energy omnibus bill this spring. By definition, it aims to make a number of changes. One would be to end the state's community solar program in 2028.
Another big change would be to net metering, which enables residents who generate their own power with at-home solar panels to sell excess energy back to the grid in exchange for credits. According to Canary, "The Senate bill would eliminate that option for systems in electric cooperative and municipal utility territories that apply for grid connections after Dec. 31, 2026, and instead set compensation using a less generous 'avoided cost' standard."
Critics of the bill note that customers living outside of major cities could be hardest hit by this change — people like farmers and rural families. Proponents of the bill say small, rooftop systems are not efficient and large-scale projects should be prioritized, while others note that could put companies first.
In 2023, then-Governor Tim Walz signed a bill setting 2040 as the year by which all of the state's energy would come from clean, carbon-free sources. Climate-positive initiatives like net metering and community solar have been seen by many as a part of the plan to meet that fast-approaching deadline.
The local CLEAR Energy Coalition wrote to Senate committee members in April, opposing the changes the bill would make to net metering, saying that they "would unfairly reduce compensation for rooftop solar owners in rural areas and small towns ... . This would take away options from farmers, households, and small businesses who want to lower their energy costs."
Of community solar programs, Pouya Najmaie, policy and regulatory director at Cooperative Energy Futures, said in a statement that they "power 30,000 Minnesotans, create local jobs, and save people money, especially renters, low-income households and public interest institutions."
"All of this makes it the largest and most equitable form of solar in the state," Najmaie continued. "Killing this program is a gift to monopoly utilities—and a slap in the face to workers and families."
Proponents of the bill say these programs have been successful, but their time is over. In an editorial for the Star Tribune, Minnesota Rural Electric Association CEO Darrick Moe and Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association CEO Karleen Kos called them "outdated" and unfair to low-income families who can't afford solar panels themselves.
Do you think governments should ban gas stoves?
Heck yes!
Only in new buildings
Only in restaurants
Heck no!
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
News about proposed changes like this can be discouraging for homeowners who want to save money on their utility bills while contributing less pollution to the environment. It's worth noting that the Minnesota bill has not yet passed and could be altered as it moves through the legislative process. Constituents who voice their preferences for its final form could end up influencing the path it takes.
Meanwhile, community solar programs thrive in many other places. They can often provide a lower barrier to entry for those who desire access to clean energy and cost savings.
And since 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act has offered tax credits and rebates to U.S. residents switching to solar and similar upgrades. The Trump administration has voiced an intention to end its incentives, so those looking to take advantage of potential savings on solar systems might consider acting sooner rather than later. Legally, however, it would take an act of Congress to make major changes to the IRA.
While local policies continue to be worked out, the technology has been advancing. Developers have created high-efficiency tandem solar panels that produce more energy than standard versions while taking up the same amount of space. Thin, flexible panels are also in the works, as is wearable solar tech.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
39 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Big changes are being proposed for a US food aid program. Here's a breakdown by the numbers
TPresident Donald Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food aid for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food aid program, by the numbers: Year: 2008 The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. Number: 42 million A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the county. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. Dollars: $295 billion Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Ages: 7 and 55-64 To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents would need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. Percentages: 5% - 25% The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. Margin: 1 House Resolution 1, containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts, passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘We're living in the dumbest timeline' — Gov. Cox comments on SLC Sego pride flags
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — Governor Cox commented on Salt Lake City's Sego pride flags in his monthly press conference Tuesday, calling them and the Utah law that banned pride and other unofficial flags 'dumb.' Governor Cox was asked if he supported the official flags that Salt Lake City adopted in response to Utah , the law that from being displayed on government property and at public schools. Previously, Cox called H.B. 77 the . Cox allowed the law to go into effect without his signature, and he did not veto the bill because it passed with a veto-proof majority. 'I don't support [the bill]. They're dumb flags, and it was a dumb bill,' Cox said. He clarified that he was referring to the Sego pride flags in Salt Lake City. Gov. Cox's pick to head new state records office gets OK from Senate panel despite criticism In response to H.B. 77, Salt Lake City adopted pride and Juneteenth designs as official flags for the city in . These flags allow the city to circumvent the law banning pride flags and other unofficial flags because they are now official city flags. The Sego Celebration, Belonging, and Visibility flags are meant to honor Juneteenth and Black and African American residents, LGBTQIA residents, and transgender residents respectively. 'It's ridiculous. I feel bad for the Japanese Americans. I feel bad for the Polynesian Americans… I mean, who are we leaving out here?' Cox said. 'I'm sure they [Salt Lake City Council] feel great that they got around this dumb law, and they did it with dumb flags. The whole thing's dumb.' Cox offered his thoughts on what both the state and cities should do instead of squabbling over pride flags. 'We should raise the American flag, and let's unify around that. It's a great flag, represents everyone, and the legislature doesn't need to be in everybody's business all the time,' he said. 'We're living in the dumbest timeline right now, that's all I can say,' Cox concluded. RSL hoping to make a run in second half of season Utah lawmakers oppose AI regulation in Trump's 'Big, beautiful bill' 'Somebody has to stop it:' Gov. Cox defends Trump's decision to deploy troops to LA 'We're living in the dumbest timeline' — Gov. Cox comments on SLC Sego pride flags Calif. governor asks court to block Trump administration from using troops in immigration raids Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Utah lawmakers oppose AI regulation in Trump's ‘Big, beautiful bill'
SALT LAKE CITY () — Utah Lawmakers have signed a letter opposing specific measures related to artificial intelligence in President Donald Trump's In a letter addressed to Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Senator John Curtis (R-Utah), state lawmakers say they are 'concerned with the proposed ten-year moratorium on state-level artificial intelligence regulation.' According to , initially the bill was and block dozens of states from enforcing preexisting AI regulations and oversight structures in any way. But on June 5, the Senate Commerce Committee altered the text on the bill. The new version would only require states not to regulate AI if they want access to federal broadband funding. The bill allocates $500 million over the next 10 years to modernize government systems with the help of AI and automation technologies. In a letter signed by nearly 50 lawmakers including House Speaker Mike Schultz (R-Hooper) and Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore (R-Draper), they claim the provision would hinder Utah's nationally recognized efforts 'to strike the right balance between innovation and consumer protection.' They add that since Utah to establish an Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy, followed by the launch of an AI learning Lab, Lawmakers say these initiatives 'allow Utah to encourage responsible AI development, empower industry leaders and shield consumers from real-world harms, all without stifling innovation.' According to , a centerpiece of the legislation is making the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent — which nonpartisan scorers and think tanks estimate would cost trillions of dollars over the next decade. Utah taxpayers may take a hit if 2017 cuts expire The bill also includes a proposal that would raise the cap for the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, which would allow taxpayers — especially those in higher-tax blue states — to deduct more of their regional taxes from their federal tax bill. The bill also has major reforms to Medicaid, estimated to lead to millions of people losing coverage by 2034. Trump is pushing Congress, where Republicans have majority control, to send the final product to his desk to become law by the Fourth of July. RSL hoping to make a run in second half of season Utah lawmakers oppose AI regulation in Trump's 'Big, beautiful bill' 'Somebody has to stop it:' Gov. Cox defends Trump's decision to deploy troops to LA 'We're living in the dumbest timeline' — Gov. Cox comments on SLC Sego pride flags Calif. governor asks court to block Trump administration from using troops in immigration raids Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
