Transcript Highlights:

• So now I'm going to dive deeper into the program, starting with the EV rebates program.
• program brought on Purchases and sales, the EV rebate program brought on even more sales than those
• I heard it some time ago for the instant rebates.
• So is there a concern about a little bit of a sticker shock in the instant rebates for a combination
• So we do have rebates for charging.

Summary: The House Transportation Committee held a work session focused on Climate Commitment Act transportation spending and electrification programs. Staff first reviewed overall CCA transportation allocations, saying about $2.2 billion has been allocated over three biennia, with major categories including public transportation, active transportation, ferry electrification, zero-emission vehicle programs, rail/ports, and planning. Members asked for additional breakdowns comparing CCA dollars with total program costs across categories. The Department of Ecology presented on the zero-emission school bus grant program. Ecology said the program was codified in 2024 and supports the transition from diesel to electric school buses, including buses, charging infrastructure, and training. For 2025-27, Ecology received $38.3 million in CCA funding; $21.4 million is already obligated or spent, replacing 91 diesel buses in 28 districts, with the rest to be awarded by the end of the biennium. Members asked about cost parity, exemptions for rural and extracurricular routes, health data, and whether the funding covers chargers as well as buses. Ecology said OSPI is developing the parity formula and exemptions are available when electric buses cannot meet district needs. The Department of Commerce described its clean transportation role, including EV rebates, tribal charging and electric boat projects, and the EV Coordinating Council. Commerce said its rebate program was designed to lower monthly costs and prioritize low-income households, with 89% of recipients saying the rebate was essential to their purchase. It also reported strong demand for charging grants, progress on tribal projects, and concerns about utility interconnection timelines, vandalism, and range anxiety. The Department of Enterprise Services reported on state agency EVSE projects, saying it has completed 82 sites with 567 Level 2 ports and 46 DC fast chargers, and that current projects will add 152 more Level 2 ports; members asked about replacing aging chargers and the state’s EV fleet purchasing mix. WSDOT closed with updates on charging, transit, and port electrification. It said its corridor charging program has awarded 23 sites this biennium, with 13 in overburdened communities and five tribal sites, and that the Washington Zero Emission Incentive Program opened with $112 million for vouchers for zero-emission commercial vehicles and equipment. WSDOT also described transit grants, including bus and bus facility funding, commute trip reduction, paratransit, tribal transit, and zero-emissions access car-share projects. The rail freight and ports division reported $89.8 million for port electrification projects, including shore power and drayage trucks, but noted only about 10% has been spent so far because projects are still in design and permitting. Members raised concerns about funding gaps, supply-chain delays, utility capacity, and whether the programs are sufficient to meet broader electrification needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• One really relies on rebates; that’s the pharmacy benefit.
• One really relies on rebates; that’s the pharmacy benefit.
• One really relies on rebates; that’s the pharmacy benefit.
• One really relies on rebates; that’s the pharmacy benefit.
• One really relies on rebates; that’s the pharmacy benefit.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The working session focused on the New Hampshire Prescription Drug Affordability Board’s budget request and its recent work. Early discussion centered on a technical question about a statutory dedicated fund for donations: members asked why the budget did not show a line item for accepting donations, and DHHS CFO Nathan White explained that the statute already authorizes the fund, but because no revenue has been received yet, it does not appear in the budget. He said any future donations would go through the normal process under RSA 14:30-a, with fiscal committee and Governor and Council approval and a memo to the Department of Revenue Administration. The chair clarified that the account was not a prerequisite to soliciting donations, and White said the fund would supplement, not replace, General Fund support. Kirk Williamson, the board’s executive director, then presented the board’s mission and budget. He said the governor’s budget provides about $256,500 in the first year and slightly more in the second, all General Funds, and that the board had distributed a technical amendment to continue the executive director position. He described the board’s role as analyzing prescription drug costs, identifying savings opportunities, monitoring market trends, promoting transparency, and making recommendations to the legislature and public payers. He also emphasized that the board operates publicly, with live-streamed meetings and a stakeholder advisory council that includes unions, state agencies, Medicaid, corrections, higher education, and other stakeholders. A major topic was the board’s estimate of $6 million in potential savings, based on Medicare’s newly negotiated prices for 10 drugs. Williamson explained that the board used those federal negotiated prices as a benchmark to estimate what New Hampshire public payers might be missing by not having similar leverage, and said the board is trying to build evidence for future recommendations rather than directly setting prices. Members asked how those potential savings could become actual savings, and Williamson said the board is sharing findings through its advisory council and feedback loops, though it has not yet sent a formal recommendation letter to specific purchasers. He also discussed the difference between pharmacy-benefit spending, which relies heavily on PBM-negotiated rebates, and medical-benefit spending, which is administered differently and is being added to the board’s next report. Williamson highlighted other work, including a model on Humira and a pending legislative effort to improve biosimilar competition, plus a proposed state-backed pharmacy savings card that would be no cost to the state and could save users about $240 per prescription based on Connecticut’s experience. No votes were taken during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also changes the eligibility requirements to receive a rebate.
• right now um allocates 40% of the rebate right now um allocates 40% of the rebate funding<00:26:
• It basically makes some changes to the e-bike rebate program to make it more accessible.
• Section one is the statutory language for the e-bike rebate program.
• <00:45:43.680> to sure that we're getting the rebates to sure that we're getting the rebates

Keywords: 1183, house

Bills: HB44, HB400, HB444, HB487, SB249, SB252, SB58, HB44, HB400, HB444, HB487, SB249, SB252, SB58

Keywords: teachers retirement, credit purchase, St. Clair County, DAY Program, pension reform, dental insurance, benefit rollover, healthcare, insurance policy, annual maximum, HB444, vaccines, vaccine exemption, religious exemption, religious liberty, private school, church school, faith-based school, parochial school, school immunization

Transcript Highlights:

• And so back in '07, this legislature actually passed what is called anti-rebating laws, and so we passed
• The bill also aligns the life and health anti-rebating statutes with the proper.
• And casualty anti-rebating statutes by moving them out of Chapter 541 of the insurance code to a new
• Is not considered a prohibited rebate, unfair method of competition, or deceptive act or practice in
• planning, but because of the way that the law has always been, um, pre-2007, that's considered a rebate

Bills: HB106, HB144, HB145, HB252, HB1732, HB2221, HB2467, HB2468, HB2517, HB2518, HB2963, HB3016, HB3689, HB3960, HB4386, HB4490, HB4751, HB5247, HJR175, HB2213, HB106, HB144, HB145, HB252

Keywords: HB 106, oil and gas, Railroad Commission of Texas, overhead electrical lines, electrical distribution system, power line maintenance, administrative penalty, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas lease, well operator, energy safety, utility infrastructure, regulatory compliance, cleanup fund, oil and gas regulation and cleanup fund, production safety, leasehold operations, electric utility, distribution poles, inspection

Bills: SB96, SB97, SB130, HB230, SB154, SB93, SB99, SB96, SB97, SB130, HB230, SB154, SB93, SB99

Keywords: salvage title, salvage certificate of title, rebuilt title, flood vehicle, junk vehicle, total loss, motor vehicle title, vehicle branding, insurance claim, insurance company, Department of Revenue, vehicle inspection, rebuilder, automotive dismantler, parts recycler, secondary metals recycler, junkyard, vehicle identification number, VIN, stolen vehicle

Transcript Highlights:

• And so move that the rebate amount to $500.
• And so move that the rebate amount to $500.
• <01:10:22.800> fee reluctant to lower the ebike rebate fee reluctant to lower the ebike rebate
• <01:15:25.640> modification assisted bicycle rebate modification assisted bicycle rebate modification
• They don't get they don't get a rebate.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• MANUFACTURERS REBATE AND DISCOUNT MEDICATIONS TO THE TUNE OF HALF OFF THE LIST COST OF MEDICINE AND THAT
• REBATE AGAIN DOES NOT GO TO THE PATIENT AND REBATES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AMOUNTS TO $2.2 BILLION.
• SAILORS AND BECAUSE THE ENTIRE SUPPLY CHAIN WITH MANUFACTURERS, SAILORS AND DISTRIBUTORS, THE WAY REBATES
• THERE ARE TWO SOLUTIONS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING FORTH AND HIGHLIGHT, ONE IS CHAIRING THOSE REBATES TO THE
• HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT TO YOU BUT IN ADDITION TO PASSING ON THAT REBATE FLORIDA HAS TO CHANGE THE WAY

Transcript Highlights:

• That being said, my question is actually more around the rebates.
• You know, I'm a co-author, but this rebate seems to be written as if there's only one rebate that will
• That's what it says: it must issue a full on-bill rebate to a Minnesota business.
• So, that's one rebate. Is this identified already? It's just kind of odd wording. Mr.
• So this could be a rebate that could be utilized by several companies.

Bills: HF2103, HF2793

Keywords: energy, renewable energy, ammonia, hydrogen, certificate tracking, funding, environment, community solar, energy policy, sustainability, solar garden program, regulation sunset

Transcript Highlights:

• And then you get back into rebates and spread pricing.
• No spread pricing, no rebates.
• 99% rebate back to the plan sponsor.
• So the 100% rebate pass-through on ERISA plan sponsors...
• Now, they choose how to use those rebate dollars.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, so thank you for the opportunity to present about some geothermal rebate program.
• This rebate program would enable those local governments, along with others interested in geothermal
• present about uh some geothermal rebate present about uh some geothermal rebate program<00:01:57.039
• rebates for geothermal systems.
• rebates for geothermal systems.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It's common knowledge that there are rebates available yet not given to the patient.
• It's common knowledge that there are rebates available yet not given to the patient.
• It's common knowledge that there are rebates available yet not given to the patient.
• It's common knowledge that there are rebates available yet not given to the patient.
• It's common knowledge that there are rebates available yet not given to the patient.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing began with SB 59 on prescription drugs, which drew extensive testimony from insurers, pharmacies, patient advocates, and health organizations. Supporters argued the bill would address PBM practices such as spread pricing, unclear reimbursement, and patient steering, and would help independent pharmacies and lower patient costs by passing rebates through to consumers. Opponents from health plans and PBM-related groups raised concerns, while Walgreens supported the measure and suggested amendments to establish a reimbursement floor. After questions, the committee accepted the Hawaii Pharmacist Association’s proposed amendments, added technical changes and a defective date of December 31, 2050, and voted to pass SB 59 with amendments. The remainder of the hearing focused on a series of nominations and reappointments to health, aging, disability, mental health, juvenile justice, and advisory boards. Nominees and agency representatives generally described their backgrounds and interest in serving, with support testimony emphasizing experience, continuity, and the value of volunteer service. Several nominees highlighted issues such as mental health access, substance abuse treatment, elder services, language access, disability access, and rehabilitation services. The Department of Health, SHPDA, DHS, and other organizations largely testified in support of the nominees. No votes were taken on the nominations during the transcript excerpt, and the chair repeatedly thanked the nominees for their service and testimony. The hearing also included brief procedural remarks about time limits, Zoom testimony, and a possible reconvening date in case of technical difficulties.

Transcript Highlights:

• Generally speaking, the laws created authorized certain municipalities to receive a rebate of the state
• A project for a 10-year period, and those rebates can be used for the payment of bonds or other obligations
• In front of you today, we would extend the rebate period for Allen from 10 years to 20 years, asking
• an outstanding support package, including a pay-for-performance agreement, sales, and property tax rebate
• As this committee knows, those rebate funds may be used by cities to service bonds or other financial

Bills: HB 1039, HB2289, HB2370, HB2404, HB3066, HB3076, HB3117, HB3118, HB3169, HB3178, HB3179, HB3182, HB3196, HB3241, HB3377, HB3500, HB3567, HB3715, HB3954, HB4098, HB4109, HB4222, HB4226, HB4412, HB4659, HB4682, HB4683, HB4755, HB4926, HB5165, HB5562, HB5596

Keywords: hotel occupancy tax, municipal revenue, tax authority, border counties, tax legislation, municipalities, hotel tax revenue, convention centers, economic development, local government authority, HB 2370, HOT tax, venue projects, convention center, municipal finance, local government code, Section 334.0082, tourism tax, debt financing, bond repayment

Transcript Highlights:

• And Mass Save sent a $10,000 rebate to our son to offset the costs.
• Turco, your point about instant point-of-sale rebates, check, we've done that.'
• Or they installed the wrong kind of heat pumps and now they can't get the rebate.
• Or they installed the wrong kind of heat pumps and now they can't get the rebate.
• Or they installed the wrong kind of key pumps and now they can't get the rebate.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a broad set of energy efficiency, building decarbonization, school modernization, and lighting bills. Testimony generally came from municipal leaders, labor unions, environmental groups, and advocates who supported measures such as H. 3529/S. 2294 on building energy and decarbonization, H. 3577/S. 2286 on a zero-carbon renovation fund, H. 3476/S. 2275 on healthy and sustainable schools, H. 3565 on Mass Save zero-carbon assessments, H. 3477 on clean lighting and appliance efficiency standards, and the Dark Sky bills on outdoor lighting. Supporters argued these bills would cut emissions, lower utility bills, improve indoor air quality and school conditions, and direct resources to environmental justice, gateway, and low-income communities. Witnesses emphasized that Massachusetts’ older building stock and school facilities need major upgrades, and that state funding and financing tools are needed to close gaps left by declining federal support. Mayors, labor leaders, and environmental advocates said the proposals would create local jobs, expand apprenticeships, and help municipalities and schools undertake retrofits, ventilation improvements, heat pump installations, and other decarbonization work. Several speakers also defended Mass Save as highly cost-effective while urging new funding sources beyond ratepayer bills for larger-scale building upgrades. One representative asked about the difference between current Mass Save audits and proposed zero-carbon assessments, and the sponsor explained the new assessments would include heat pumps, solar, storage, wiring upgrades, and rate-structure guidance. There was also testimony on the Dark Sky bill, with astronomers and museum representatives arguing that better-shielded, downward-facing lighting would reduce energy waste, protect wildlife and human health, and preserve night skies without compromising safety. Committee members raised concerns about pedestrian safety and whether education might be enough instead of legislation; supporters responded that the bill follows established lighting standards and targets only unnecessary glare and skyward light. On the school bill, an open-shop contractor group opposed the measure, arguing its PLA and apprenticeship requirements would restrict bidding and reduce competition, while labor organizations strongly supported the workforce standards and prevailing wage provisions. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee heard extensive testimony and several members asked clarifying questions, but the transcript does not show any final action or disposition on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• The complexities of factoring in the drug rebate is compounded by a lack of rebate transparency, extremely
• believe that passing drug rebates believe that passing drug rebates directly<01:35:07.760> onto
• is compounded by a lack the drug rebate is compounded by a lack of<01:35:17.119> rebate of rebate
• also important to note that drug rebates also important to note that drug rebates are<01:35:26.360
• <01:47:32.199> Avail know there are rebates Avail know there are rebates Avail available<01

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1494 on hearing aids. Testimony was generally supportive of expanding hearing-aid coverage, with the Insurance Division raising concern about possible federal defrayment issues, SHPDA supporting the goal of hearing augmentation, DCAB strongly supporting the bill as an important access issue, and health plans and insurers asking for amendments. Kaiser Permanente and the Hawaii Association of Health Plans requested changes to add a medical-necessity standard and clarify annual notice language, while HMSA suggested the proposal should be studied by the auditor. The chair noted concerns about federal preemption and the lack of an audit, and deferred the bill in favor of a related resolution calling for a study. The committee then heard SB 1448, an emergency appropriation for the Hawaii State Hospital. DAGS and the Department of Health supported the measure, with the hospital administrator saying the funding would improve the environment of care, support cleaning, and allow a third-party review of the building. Committee members questioned the size of the request and the status of litigation against the design-builder. Administration witnesses said they were pursuing a comprehensive study involving destructive testing, had made a demand on the design-builder to fund the study, and were using different processes than before. They also said the roof work would be handled through a separate CIP request. No final action was taken in the portion provided. The committee next heard SB 1432, relating to the future responsibilities of the Department of Health and land issues at Kalaupapa after the last patient dies. DOH supported the bill in part but said its long-term role would be limited mainly to environmental cleanup, with operations expected to continue under the National Park Service and land-use decisions left to DHHL and beneficiary consultation. DHHL asked that the measure reflect that any land-use or zoning changes on homeland lands require commission approval and beneficiary consultation. Testifiers from Kalaupapa and Maui County, including Degra Vanderbilt-Papa and Council Member Keani Rollins-Fernandez, supported deferring the bill, saying there had been no meaningful community discussion about provisions affecting Kalaupapa’s future management and possible transfer of responsibilities to Maui County. The committee also read into the record written testimony from Gloria Marks emphasizing that Kalaupapa stakeholders must be included in future discussions. Finally, the committee heard SB 955 on fitness-to-proceed examinations. The Judiciary and the Public Defender’s Office both supported raising pay and standardizing expectations for private examiners, but opposed reducing felony fitness evaluations from three examiners to one and opposed expanding use of expedited reports. They argued that a single examiner would reduce reliability, create a more adversarial process, and likely increase costs and contested hearings, while expedited reports do not contain enough information for a proper fitness determination. The Department of Health also supported the bill’s intent but asked to preserve a three-examiner framework and said the goal was to reduce the number of people sent to the State Hospital, where admissions have reportedly risen about 20% year over year since Act 26. The bill remained under discussion in the excerpt, with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• They were sales tax rebates.
• They were sales tax rebates.
• They were sales tax rebates.
• They were sales tax rebates.
• They were sales tax rebates.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 5, we move the pharmaceutical rebate fund over to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services
• section five um we move the Hospitals section five um we move the pharmaceutical<00:20:40.960> rebate
• fund<00:20:41.960> over<00:20:42.200> to<00:20:42.280> the pharmaceutical rebate
• fund over to the pharmaceutical rebate fund over to the Cabinet<00:20:42.679> for<00:20:42.799
• 00:26:23.760> changing<00:26:24.200> the<00:26:24.320> drug<00:26:24.600> rebate

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:10 HB 2 Discussion 00:01:00 HB 2 Vote 00:04:00 HB 544 Discussion 00:05:05 HB 544 Vote 00:06:15 HB 552 Discussion 00:07:00 HB 552 Vote 00:08:40 HB 605 Discussion 00:09:35 HB 605 Vote 00:11:35 HB 606 Discussion 00:12:10 HB 606 Vote 00:15:40 HB 695 Discussion 00:16:25 HB 695 Vote 00:34:05, 958, all

Summary: The Appropriations and Revenue Committee took up several House bills and committee substitutes. House Bill 2, as amended by Senate Committee Substitute 1, was described by Rep. T.J. Roberts as restoring a tax exemption enacted in 2024 by providing refunds with interest to those improperly taxed and creating a cause of action; the substitute also aligned state filing deadlines for certain flood-disaster counties with the federal November 15 deadline. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed the bill with favorable expression. The committee also adopted a title amendment for House Bill 544, which Rep. Jason Petrie said was part of the state’s flood-relief discussion and would allow the guard cap to be used over the biennium rather than annually, effectively increasing the cap from $50 million per year to $100 million over two years; the measure passed with favorable expression. House Bill 552, handled by Rep. Josh Bray after Rep. Kim King’s absence, was described as simplifying tourist commission appointments. The committee substitute added creation of the Kentucky-Ireland Trade Commission and changed marina licensing agreements by exempting private contractors from the model procurement code. The committee adopted the substitute, approved a title amendment, and passed the bill with favorable expression. House Bill 605, sponsored by Rep. Kim King, clarified which grants qualify for a grant program and allowed cities or counties to apply on behalf of water districts or other entities not directly affiliated with them; Rebecca Hearts of Grant Ready Kentucky said the program had matched $103 million of the $200 million allocation, generating about $469.98 million in total project value. The committee adopted the title amendment and passed the bill with favorable expression. House Bill 606, by Rep. Wade Williams, added a capital-oversight reporting requirement for school district general obligation bonds that had been omitted from prior legislation. The committee substitute also made several budget and program adjustments, including moving Regional Training Center funds, accelerating funding for the Grand Lyric Theater, correcting water funding language, removing Odyssey Inc. language from a treatment-related item, fixing a double appropriation to LifeWorks Transition Academy, clarifying carry-forward language, allowing SRO reimbursements for public and non-public schools, and authorizing an additional $10 million in agency bonds for Western Kentucky University athletic facilities. The committee adopted the substitute, approved a title amendment, and passed the bill with favorable expression. The committee then spent the most time on House Bill 695, a Medicaid-related bill. Rep. Adam Bowling said the bill was intended to stabilize Medicaid, create oversight and advisory mechanisms, and address growth in the program. Cabinet for Health and Family Services Secretary Eric Friedlander and Medicaid CFO Steve Beckle said they were generally supportive of the transparency and reporting changes but flagged risks, including federal compliance concerns, budget growth from changing the drug rebate treatment, administrative costs tied to MCO rebidding and a managed long-term services study, and some data-collection challenges. Representatives from the Kentucky Association of Healthcare Facilities opposed the section calling for a managed long-term care reimbursement study, arguing it would be costly, duplicative, and likely ineffective, and they warned against managed care models for long-term care. Despite the concerns, the committee adopted the committee substitute by voice vote and moved the bill forward with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• will be, how many rebates will there be, you know, what manufacturers will receive the rebates, or how
• What's going to be the size of the rebates? How many rebates do you anticipate? Yeah.
• And then in terms of what that means for like, well, how many rebates are there?
• It doesn't actually translate into a rebate.
• And this rebate is almost like, hey, keep trying, all right.

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• The way they do that is by doing rebates.
• Every time they pay a customer a rebate, that is how they prove that energy was saved.
• on that light bulb, we just saved rebate on that light bulb, we just saved 90<00:19:48.240> watts
• , we use those numbers to for rebates, we use those numbers to calculate<00:19:58.400> out<00:
• to spend in technology to give rebates to spend in areas<00:27:07.440> that<00:27:08.640>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 3296, as amended, was heard in committee and laid over. The bill would extend an existing exemption in Minnesota’s energy conservation/efficiency program calculations so that certain data centers, like crypto-based data mining operations, would not be counted in a utility’s gross annual retail sales if the new load increases the utility’s base load by 40% or more. Representative Gilman and testifier David Meyer of Glenco Light and Power argued the change is needed because large data loads can make the 1.5% annual savings target effectively unattainable for smaller municipal utilities, and they said the added revenue from the facility has helped lower rates for other customers. Ken Sulum of the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association supported the bill, describing it as narrowly drafted to address mid-sized data centers that do not fit other relief provisions but still create local utility problems. Sarah Wolf of Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light opposed the exemption, arguing that energy efficiency remains important amid rising demand and grid stress from data centers, and that large users should continue contributing to efficiency efforts rather than being exempted. Members raised questions about whether the facility had a long-term contract, whether the customer was helping lower rates, and how much savings were being passed on to ratepayers. Meyer said the customer had a three-year agreement extended another three years, the infrastructure costs were borne by the customer, and the facility’s revenue has allowed Glenco to reduce rates by about half a cent per kilowatt hour through a $40,000 monthly buy-down of its power cost adjustment. Some members expressed concern that data centers should continue to improve efficiency over time, while others noted the bill’s focus on smaller utilities facing disproportionate impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• They fluctuate a bit, as do the rebates.
• They also negotiate manufacturer rebates. We talked to some state officials...
• The PBM that negotiates a rebate directly with the drug manufacturer.
• Interestingly enough, the PBM keeps only about 11% of manufacturer rebates.
• is $1,000 for a drug, the rebate might be $600.

Keywords: 1184, house, all