'Clean energy financing districts' face tough sell at Statehouse

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Proposed legislation would allow municipalities in Indiana to finance residential and business clean-energy projects, such as solar-panel or geothermal systems.

Concern that neither lenders nor taxpayers would be held responsible for property owners defaulting on payments appears to be a major roadblock, however.

Last month, virtually identical measures—House Bill 1457, sponsored by Rep. Tim Neese, R-Elkhart, and Senate Bill 260, by Sen James Merritt, R-Indianapolis—were filed as a way to help property owners make clean-energy upgrades that otherwise wouldn’t be practical.  

Both measures would allow municipalities to form “clean-energy-improvement financing districts” to foot the bill for clean-energy retrofits. A special tax levy would be placed on the property.

Forms of this legislation have been passed in at least 23 states as a way to make clean-energy and energy-efficiency upgrades affordable by stretching payments over 20 or more years.  In some states only commercial properties are eligible.

Currently, investments such as solar panels, which can cost $30,000 or more, are not practical for homeowners because many don’t live in a house long enough to earn a return on the investment.

In such a district, however, a property owner might be inclined to make a retrofit because the cost would be inherited by a subsequent owner of the house, with the special levy remaining with the property.

While environmental groups have applauded the legislation, it has not been well received in some circles.

Merritt’s SB 260 was gutted in committee, removing its original authorization to allow municipalities to issue bonds to fund improvements. Instead, SB 260 would allow municipalities to solicit private equity, federal grants and loans.

Merritt said lenders have expressed concerns that the municipality would receive a priority claim in the event a property owner defaulted on payments. Concerns were also raised about risks to taxpayers from homeowners who default.

He concedes that he’s not certain whether private-equity investors would be willing to take such a risk to back these projects, but that it’s possible federal money might be available to place into a pool for upgrades.

“I thought at least we could get a start” on this concept, Merritt said.

Supporters of such so-called clean-energy financing districts said they’re disappointed at the reception in the Indiana General Assembly.

The type of non-bond funding contemplated in the revised SB 260 would appear to significantly reduce the size of the potential pool of recipients and could potentially shut out households with more modest incomes, said Jesse Kharbanda, executive director of the Hoosier Environmental Council.

But such financing techniques, better known as Property Assessed Clean Energy, or PACE, are facing headwinds on the national level as well.

In mid-2010, the Federal Housing Finance Agency determined that some of these programs raise safety and soundness concerns that must be addressed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks.

FHFA cited “difficult risk management” challenges for lenders, loan servicers and mortgage-securities investors posed by PACE programs that have first liens.

A handful of bills in Congress seek to reverse Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac directives that such liens under PACE programs cannot take priority over a mortgage.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I never thought I'd see the day when a Republican Mayor would lead the charge in attempting to raise every tax we have to pay. Now it's income taxes and property taxes that Ballard wants to increase. And to pay for a pre-K program? Many studies have shown that pre-K offer no long-term educational benefits whatsoever. And Ballard is pitching it as a way of fighting crime? Who is he kidding? It's about government provided day care. It's a shame that we elected a Republican who has turned out to be a huge big spending, big taxing, big borrowing liberal Democrat.

  2. Why do we blame the unions? They did not create the 11 different school districts that are the root of the problem.

  3. I was just watching an AOW race from cleveland in 1997...in addition to the 65K for the race, there were more people in boats watching that race from the lake than were IndyCar fans watching the 2014 IndyCar season finale in the Fontana grandstands. Just sayin...That's some resurgence modern IndyCar has going. Almost profitable, nobody in the grandstands and TV ratings dropping 61% at some tracks in the series. Business model..."CRAZY" as said by a NASCAR track general manager. Yup, this thing is purring like a cat! Sponsors...send them your cash, pronto!!! LOL, not a chance.

  4. I'm sure Indiana is paradise for the wealthy and affluent, but what about the rest of us? Over the last 40 years, conservatives and the business elite have run this country (and state)into the ground. The pendulum will swing back as more moderate voters get tired of Reaganomics and regressive social policies. Add to that the wave of minority voters coming up in the next 10 to 15 years and things will get better. unfortunately we have to suffer through 10 more years of gerrymandered districts and dispropionate representation.

  5. Funny thing....rich people telling poor people how bad the other rich people are wanting to cut benefits/school etc and that they should vote for those rich people that just did it. Just saying..............