Introduced by Rep. Jeff Mayes (D) on December 6, 2007, to establish specific definitions for applying the gas and electric energy reduction mandates proposed by House Bill 5525, and the renewable energy mandates proposed by House Bill 5549. The bill is part of a package comprised of those bills plus House Bills 5383, and 5520 to 5524
.
Referred to the House Energy and Technology Committee on December 6, 2007.
Reported in the House on January 24, 2008, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the House on April 17, 2008, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that makes substantive revisions based on months of lobbying and negotiations. This version was subsequently superseded by another substitute with more changes. The substitute failed in the House by voice vote on April 17, 2008.
Substitute offered by Rep. Jeff Mayes (D) on April 17, 2008, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that makes substantive revisions based on months of lobbying and negotiations. See House-passed bill for details. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on April 17, 2008.
Amendment offered by Rep. Virgil Smith, Jr. (D) on April 17, 2008, to clarify a technical provision in the bill so the language of the amended law is internally consistent. The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on April 17, 2008.
Amendment offered by Rep. Steven Lindberg (D) on April 17, 2008, to clarify provisions related to large utilities meeting renewable energy mandates by purchasing "credits" from other producers. The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on April 17, 2008.
Passed in the House (86 to 21) on April 17, 2008, to mandate that Michigan electric utilities acquire 4 percent of their power from "renewable" sources by the end of 2012, and 10 percent by the end of 2015. The mandate would be reduced to the extent it increased residential rates by more than $3 per month, and on commercial customers from $15.83 to $187.50 per month. Utilities could meet the mandate by producing or purchasing renewable energy, or purchasing "credits" from a firm that exceeded the mandate. The provisions creating this regime are divided between this and House Bill 5549. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on April 22, 2008.
Referred to the Senate Energy Policy & Public Utilities Committee on April 22, 2008.
Reported in the Senate on June 17, 2008, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
1) "no vote explanation" [by Admin003 on April 20, 2008] Rep. Agema, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:
“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
A government mandate will again raise the rates because they are not attainable with existing technology. Since the monopoly is now set, they will raise your rates to obtain them to pay the cost of the percentages demanded at a time when consumers can least afford increases. Again, competition should dictate this not government mandates.”
2) "no vote explanation" [by Admin003 on April 20, 2008] Rep. Nitz, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:
“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
I voted against this bill because it mandates that there must be a certain amount of ‘green energy’ produced, and I am against mandating anything. If it is cost effective the market would be providing green energy.”