Pence lets bill ending Energize Indiana become law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence will let a bill that eliminates an energy-conservation program become law without his signature, prompting harsh words from environmental leaders who opposed the bill.

Pence said he’ll look to lawmakers next year for help developing “a new energy-efficiency program for our state that will encourage conservation and promote a strong Indiana economy.”

And Pence said he’s asking state utility regulators to make recommendations for a new program that includes an opt-out for large electricity consumers.

“By reducing our need for electricity, we reduce our need to build expensive power plants at a cost to Hoosier ratepayers,” Pence said in a statement issued Thursday, the last day he could take action on the bill.

“For this reason, I believe that energy efficiency is an important part of our ‘all of the above’ energy strategy,” Pence said.

The change will eliminate a fee now added to the electric bills of all Hoosier households and businesses to pay for the conservation efforts that include weatherization and other programs.

Pence said maintaining the Energizing Indiana program – created by Gov. Mitch Daniels’ administration – is too expensive for Hoosiers and makes “Indiana less competitive by denying relief to large energy consumers.”

But the governor said he didn’t want to sign the bill into law either because it eliminates what he called a “worthwhile” energy-efficiency program.

“For that reason, I have declined to sign this bill and acknowledge that this bill will become law without my signature,” Pence said.

Pence's only other option would have been to veto the bill, an action that could be overturned in another vote by a simple majority of legislators. The bill passed the Senate 37-8 and the House 69-26.

The decision makes Pence the first governor in the country “to repeal a successful, ambitious and foresighted program aimed at significantly cutting energy bills for Hoosiers,” said Jesse Kharbanda, executive director of the Hoosier Environmental Council.

He accused Pence and lawmakers of a “rushed decision” to end the Energizing Indiana program.

“The governor’s decision needlessly creates instability in the energy-efficiency market, when a careful deliberation – before any radical shift in policy is made – was what was merited,” Kharbanda said.

Environmentalists say the Energizing Indiana program has created more than 1,500 jobs and served more than 200,000 Hoosier households and businesses. The Sierra  Club estimated the program resulted in $80 million in savings for utilities in 2012.

“It is critical that Gov. Pence and the Indiana General Assembly now follow through on their promise of creating an improved energy-efficiency program for Indiana,” said Jodi Perras, the Indiana representative for Sierra Club’ Beyond Coal Campaign, in a statement issued late Thursday.

“There’s no denying that hundreds of energy-efficiency workers will be out of a job next January when utilities cancel or scale back home-energy audits, appliance rebates and low-income home weatherization programs,” Perras said.

Critics of the Energizing Indiana program complained that it cost too much – especially for manufacturers and other big businesses – while providing few tangible benefits.

The bill’s author, Sen. Jim Merritt, R-Indianapolis, originally sought to exempt businesses from paying the Energize Indiana fee. But the House amended the bill to eliminate the program.

Merritt has said the program costs too much with too little benefit. He said previously that the program had cost ratepayers $500 million since 2009 and would have cost as much as $1.9 billion more by 2019.


  • That makes sense...
    I believe that we were at a fundraising event for Trimedx Foundation, so the fact they got a kickback for signing up seems plausible.
  • The Truth
    Local nonprofits receive a $25 donation for every completed assessment they provide to Energizing Indiana. The largest Indianapolis participants in the program are the John Boner Center and the Community Action Coalition Educational Fund. Both organizations have contributed significantly to helping Indianapolis save money and energy. I can't speak on Sierra Club's participation in the program, but I can assure you it is nowhere near the participation of these two organizations.
    • wimping out
      I would feel better about this decision if Pence would have said yes or no. Instead, he made a career politician move and did not take a stand either way, simply letting this happen without having to voice a stand.
    • Energizing Indiana is worthless...
      They came out to our house and basically told us that nearly everything we were already doing was conserving energy. The only thing the guy did was stick something in our upstairs sink to reduce the water flow. And the big thing that he harped on my wife about when he was here was that we were using CFL light bulbs and that's usually what they end up replacing... that's all I use in the house, and he replaced them all anyway. What a waste of money! Well, now that the Feds have mandated that incandescent bulbs get phased out, that's all you can buy at the store anyway. Good riddance to a worthless program and too bad the governor didn't have a backbone to stand up against the special interests.
    • Hoosier State FIRST!
      wow remember this day, Indiana is the first state to cancel this type of program. Such a progressive state. Dig baby dig ....coal rains(acid) supreme.
    • Hmmm...
      Geez fellas, don't hurt yourself some real numbers wouldn't hurt, did you know that the sierra club gets 25 dineros for every household they sign-up. 500 million for 200,000 hoosier households and businesses sounds a bit costly but who really knows Lesley W. sure doesn't know but I expect more from youz guys.

      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 am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

      2. Shouldn't this be a museum

      3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

      4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

      5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.