Eau Claire Energy Cooperative hosts a bi-annual Candidates Energy Forum during election years to discuss energy legislation topics with current candidates for the state senate and state assembly. Below are the positions of the cooperative, questions posed to candidates at the forum, and the candidates' statements. Candidates responses are paraphrased and revised for the sake of readability and space.

Eau Claire Energy Cooperative is non-partisan and does not endorse any party. We advocate for energy issues based on members' best interests.

Right-of-First-Refusal for Transmission Construction and Ownership

Delivering reliable, affordable, and safe electricity to members and consumers requires transmission lines to move the power from generation sites like gas plants and solar fields to where people live, learn, and work.

The need for new transmission infrastructure continues to grow, due to increasing demand for electricity, coupled with a shift away from large coal plants to smaller more dispersed sources for generation like gas, wind, and solar assets.

Do you support the right of incumbent transmission owners including Xcel, ATC and Dairyland Power Cooperative to continue building and operating Wisconsin’s transmission infrastructure?

Paul Hambleton, State Senate District 10 Candidate (D) – When you remodel a home, the question is always do you gut it and start over or use the existing and build up from there? This is the way I see this issue as well. Technology is changing the way electricity gets delivered. Being a non-incumbent, I don't know enough about this topic to choose a stance. I can see both sides of this being valid concerns. My gut instinct says that incumbent owners, such as Dairyland Power Cooperative, should maintain ownership.

Jodi Emerson, State Assembly Incumbent District 91 Candidate (D) – This is still a learning experience, even as an incumbent. If you think back to 30 years ago, most of us got our energy transmitted from out of state. Now, more renewable resources are becoming available here, and transmission will need to go both ways. I would rather have a company with Wisconsin roots and a track record of serving Wisconsin residents be in charge of those transmission lines rather than an out-of-state company coming in to build those lines and not maintain them. We've seen this happen in our area, with internet companies coming in and installing services, leaving holes in sidewalks, and causing other property damage. Getting them to come back and clean up after themselves took a lot. This is why it is important to use companies with roots here and a good track record of servicing the people in our area. I would rather see local cooperatives and companies have their first chance at this. If that doesn't work, I would be open to then opening it up for bids.

Michele Magadance Skinner, State Assembly District 91 Candidate (R) – I approach things by finding out as much as possible. This is a really complicated topic. I made some calls and tried to hear both viewpoints. As I understand, this was a very controversial and complex issue on the legislative floor. Before I take a position, I would need to know more. Talking to those who voted for it, it seems as if it makes sense. Because the bottom line for energy in Wisconsin is that it needs to be reliable and affordable. And however we do that, is the best way to get it done. I did a lot of homework, but I still don't have the exact answer. I would love to do more research to give you a more sound decision.

Clint Moses, State Assembly Incumbent District 92 Candidate (R) – This particular issue occupied the most floor time. I teetered back and forth. Ultimately, I voted for the cooperative position. This decision was not due to those who came and met with us in Madison but to the constituents that we met with. One advantage I have is that I am a provider in my town. I know a lot of local cooperative employees. I would ask those professionals what their thoughts were. It is confusing even to those, so don't feel bad, Michele. It isn't an easy topic to wrap your head around. Many of you here who work in the energy field have a hard time understanding it. I had a conversation with Jesse Singerhouse, the general manager at Dunn Energy Cooperative. He explained how the federal government's policy works and its downsides. Bringing in outside contractor groups will not be as cost-effective, and their maintenance costs will be higher. They aren't interested in controlling the grid. There are always cost overruns. As many of you know, MISO also allows cost-shifting, so you are able to move costs from one project to another, which also is a concern for me. To add to Michele's point about affordable and reliable power, it also needs to be safe. I do think that our area is not well represented in the energy committee right now and that one of us should ask to sit on that committee. Rob Summerfield does currently sit there, but we could have a better representation in the Chippewa Valley.

James Rolbiecki, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (R) – I sit on the Member Advisory Council at Eau Claire Energy Cooperative. With that, I do think that Wisconsin power should come from here and stay here. I think Dairyland's track record says a lot about who they are. They've done a great job. I am confident that there is a lot more for me to learn about this topic, but I am a proponent of keeping things as local, affordable, and reliable as possible.

Christian Phelps, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (D) – Going last can sound like a recap of what others have said. What I can say with a lot of confidence is that I have a lot of faith in our local community and all the trusted individuals who serve on the board and advisory committee for our local cooperative. Those are the individuals who should be in charge of these decisions, especially at a time of great transition as more and more people in our community want to make sure that they're using renewable and green/clean, and safe energy sources. I trust our local cooperative to do so safely and cost-effectively. I agree with Jodi that if the local companies do not wish to take on the project, then at that point, maybe we would open up to larger out-of-state companies. As a believer in protecting the environment, making sure that energy sources are reliable and cost-effective are best trusted by local utilities.

Affordable, Reliable, and Sustainable Electricity

New technologies are rapidly changing the demand for electricity and how utilities generate it.

Like other utilities, Dairyland works every day to meet the needs of our members. For the last several years, that means working to ensure a diverse and balanced generation portfolio that maintains safe, reliable and affordable electricity for our members.

Over the past several years Dairyland:

• Has retired our five oldest coal plants at the Alma Station
• Retired the Genoa Station #3 coal-fired power plant
• Added significant amounts of utility-scale wind and solar
• Is developing a renewable-enabling natural gas power plant

Policy makers in other states have set ambitious goals for emission reduction, including Minnesota’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2050.

(a) Please share your thoughts about risks and opportunities of the transition from fossil fuel power plants to renewable resources like wind and solar.

(b) Do you support a diverse generation portfolio approach to generating electricity, or do you think we should stop using all fossil fuels, and rely on renewable energy resources like wind, solar and hydro?

(c) Do you consider 100% by 2050 an achievable goal?

Christian Phelps, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (D) – I appreciate this question because I think it really gets at the heart of what we're grappling with as a community right now. What can we do that is achievable, aspirational, and safe as we make this transition? My candidacy has been endorsed by Clean Wisconsin, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, and by the Farm Bureau. I think that shows the complexity of moving to these renewable energy sources in a way that respects farming communities and the need for clean energy. How do we balance affordability with renewable resources? I think the risks are that we leave behind the average consumer, and we continue to increase the cost of living at a time when we're all already struggling with that. However, I think the opportunities are great because I've seen a huge appetite for moving to renewable clean energy as I've canvased in our district. I've also learned from a lot of the people who have served in local government, like city council members, town board members, etc., that they're waiting for Wisconsin to make some policy changes to ensure the consumers are protected and to allow energy companies to get paid back for the transition to renewable energy.

As a millennial, I am absolutely a supporter of stopping a reliance on fossil fuels and moving to renewable energy. I have a lot of peers who are genuinely grappling with whether and when to start and grow their families because they want to see how well we're taking care of our environment before they feel stable and comfortable doing so. Again, I am a big believer in local control and a big believer in our community, so I do think that 100% renewable by 2050 is an achievable goal because I trust the aspirational plans for that goal. Many great institutions that make up the 93rd assembly district, such as the city of Eau Claire, the county of Eau Claire, Eau Claire Area School District, UW Eau Claire, and Chippewa Valley Technical College, have supported this goal and will help us get there.

James Rolbiecki, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (R) – I'm okay with reducing traditional fossil fuels as long as we are having a thorough thought process and conversation with our agricultural community. When I say that, I mean operable farmland that could be potentially rendered inoperable by putting solar panels on the land. That is a conversation that needs to be handled in a delicate way and be respectful of both sides. Obviously, we need affordable energy, and I agree, but not at the demise of our farmland. Moving forward, I am also a proponent of seeing things like the Nemadji Trail being incorporated to transmit energy. I think that's a renewable source we can use that will reduce the cost of energy and increase energy for us cost-effectively.

Regarding sustainability moving to 2050, I think it is an admirable goal, and we're making strides towards achieving it. Do I know that that's attainable? I guess we will see. I think that locally, we have made strides to be more energy efficient to help us get there. Ultimately, it's clear that we need more energy, so we have to have an open mind when we're sitting down and talking about this issue and ensure we are taking our agricultural community into consideration.

Clint Moses, State Assembly Incumbent District 92 Candidate (R) – My background is in healthcare, meaning boring things like insurance and MCOs. But, being lucky enough to serve in the legislature for the last 4 years, I had the opportunity to learn more about the energy industry. I was able to tour a wind farm in Minnesota and a couple of solar projects in Denver, one being a large industrial project that was over 1,000 acres. I am also a farmer, and I have an ag background. This is important to me. Just like Rolbiecki brought up, we need to make sure that we're not taking over good, valuable farmland. Especially in Wisconsin, particularly in Western Wisconsin, where ag is such a vital part of our community. I toured a brewery that actually put solar panels on the top of their warehouse. In Menomonie, we have a Walmart Distribution Center. That is a lot of roof acreage that could be utilized for solar panels and wouldn't adversely impact the agricultural community. I think that's a great option. Just last week, I was up a community solar project just in the town of Lafayette, so a new part of my district, which I found absolutely fascinating. That particular solar project is 20-25 acres located in some rocky, marshy, not very productive soil type ground. I think those are great opportunities for us to diversify our renewable portfolio. I recently purchased an electric chainsaw, which is wonderful. However, there are times when I still need to get out my larger gas chainsaw for larger projects. I think the same applies when we're looking at energy in Wisconsin. We need to support a diverse portfolio.

As far as the goal of being carbon-free by 2050 - I love goals. I think it is possible that it will be attainable. But it is a goal. I don't think we should risk affordability or reliability for consumers just so that we can try and meet a goal by 2050. If the technology is there, that would be wonderful. However, I still support a diverse portfolio trying to get us to a more renewable future.

Michele Magadance Skinner, State Assembly District 91 Candidate (R) – Just so people have an idea of where I come from, I'm chair of the Lake Altoona District board, so I view myself as kind of the environmental cop. And we've got problems. Don't we all want clean air and clean water? Because if we don't have it, we get sick and we die. That's the bottom line. My thoughts about transitioning from fossil fuel power to clean power resources like wind and solar sounds wonderful. Don't we all want that? However, the science behind wind and solar is not perfect. I think the marketplace is going to take us there, along with our desire for clean water and clean air. Do I support a diverse generation portfolio? Absolutely. I have a brother in San Antonio, and when that ice storm hit a few years ago, they had to rely on renewable energy that wasn't working because of the storm. They were in trouble for a few weeks. Do I consider 100% by 2050 an achievable goal? I don't know where 2050 comes from. Is it an arbitrary number? Why isn't it 2030, or 2040, or 2070? I think it's something we should attempt, but I don't believe that the expense of higher costs just for attaining a goal is truly necessary.

Jodi Emerson, State Assembly Incumbent District 91 Candidate (D) – I want to let everyone know that we were given these questions beforehand, and, unfortunately, mine went to the wrong email address. I just got them as we were walking up to the table, so I didn't have the chance to talk to people and get other opinions. I am just answering based on what I can remember from the last few sessions and my gut instincts. I think that this question is something that we're going to be grappling with for a few years. I also think we have an amazing opportunity right now with so much federal money coming in. Whether it is local governments, individual homes, or businesses trying to go to a more renewable energy source, there are incentives available. The question is, what are we doing at the state level to market these programs to Wisconsin residents and train the workers of tomorrow to get us to the technology that will be required to meet the goal of 2050? If you asked any of us about this 40 years ago, we would have said, 'Sure, we'll have a colony on the moon by then,' because it just seemed so out of reach. The cell phones we are using today have more power than the first computer I ever bought, so sometimes we can't see what's coming next. I think it is very important that we are training and educating people to have that vision. I'm looking at this through the lens of colleges and universities. CVTC here in Eau Claire has an amazing energy program where they are training people and teaching them how to get there.

One of the things that I think is important is a diverse portfolio of energy. Just like we don't think we should be 100% fossil fuels, that diverse portfolio with renewable energy is important. When I drive around the community, I look at all the rooftops - how can we use that landscape to put the solar panels on? I think family farms are suffering enough that they may think about taking an offer to put solar panels on their fields. That may hurt all of us because we all rely on what those small farms are making and growing so we can eat. We want to make sure that the solar that we're using is coming from an area closer to where it's being used versus transporting it.

Paul Hambleton, State Senate District 10 Candidate (D) – Our energy generation and use changes rapidly. I can remember days when we used a hammer to punch nails in. Then we went to power tools, then air tools, and now battery-operated tools. Same with our energy use. No one has mentioned batteries, but look at what batteries can store. You can buy a battery now that will replace a generator for your whole home for days. It will just be waiting until the power goes out to pick up. Once your power comes back on, the battery will recharge and be ready for next time. These technologies are changing so rapidly. Where does the power come from? Some other sources we also haven't mentioned are nuclear or hydrogen technology. There are plenty of technological innovations that are still coming.

When I look at the goal of 2050, there certainly is an urgency around it that I think is unmistakable. Thinking about our future is part of the reason I'm running for office. I think of my grandkids. We're handing them a world that we know needs to be fixed. Transitions are always difficult, but we are currently going through one. The common values mentioned here are clear. We're going to have to figure out a way to utilize alternative energy sources for a cleaner future. The goal of 2050 to me sounds reasonable.

Community Solar

Wisconsin’s regulatory structure has balanced the need for safe, reliable and affordable energy for decades. In recent years, legislators have faced increasing pressure from out-of-state solar developers to change this arrangement by allowing these developers to build solar fields and sell electricity directly to consumers.

Please share your thoughts on community solar and how you would balance the interests of consumers, local landowners and others as you consider this legislation in the future.

Paul Hambleton, State Senate District 10 Candidate (D) – I'm a little skeptical of community solar unless it happens within the existing framework, which is currently Dairyland and county cooperatives. Community solar, in some form, seems like it could have a place if there's a location and capability to disperse that energy source. It seems like it needs to fit within the current electrical infrastructure and utilities that already exist. It needs to be done in a way that would not be detrimental to consumers in that community. One thing that fascinated me was an idea I heard about on Wisconsin Public Radio. It talked about how electric vehicles are now capable of serving as batteries that can serve as a power source to your house in the event of an outage. Is it possible to have a community of vehicles that serve as a backup to the grid in the case of grid failure? I called and asked a question about it. As it turns out, it's complicated because of the EV models, what type of grid there is in place, and what kind of grid issue may arise. But it is possible it may fit in. How would that work? I think all these questions would need to be answered before such a thing could happen.

Jodi Emerson, State Assembly Incumbent District 91 Candidate (D) – When we hear the words' community solar,' we think, 'Oh, this is great,' but when you start digging into what it actually means, it has some considerations. What I worry about when we're talking about community solar is an out-of-state company coming in, building this stuff, and then leaving town. What happens when a solar panel goes offline due to a storm? Are they going to be here taking care of it, or are they onto the next state building their next project? There is a reason we have parameters and regulations around electricity and natural gas. These things keep our homes warm in the winter and cool in the summer and turn our stoves on so we can eat. That is something we need to rely on day in and day out. That is why the PSC [Public Service Commission] exists. My concern with community solar is making sure they are under the same regulations as other utilities. If people start relying on the power they are generating, and it goes offline, does that just mean that we don't have electricity? That is my concern. As we've seen in the Chippewa Valley, when something that you rely on for life and health disappears pretty much overnight, it is a crisis. We've seen that firsthand with hospitals and clinics. I think it would be even more catastrophic if it happened with an energy company. If someone went to turn on their furnace in January and couldn't because the company left out of nowhere, people could die. We need to increase solar, but we need to do it in a way that is regulated so that we can rely on it. It's not only about having affordable energy; it's about having reliable energy. That's what these utilities that have been in our community for decades are known for. Can we rely on the out-of-state companies that are coming in from wherever and leaving just as fast?

Michele Magadance Skinner, State Assembly District 91 Candidate (R) – As I look through this question, there's a phrase that sticks out to me immediately: 'out of state solar developers.' ,That says, okay, folks were not from Wisconsin,, so do they share the values of taking care of the Wisconsinites they would serve? That raises a question. I've heard about out-of-state developers that come in and lay huge tracts of solar panels on land, and farmers are upset because it's not what they expected. These developers don't care because they're here making a buck, and then they're gone. I don't think anybody agrees with that. Is community solar really community-based? Do they have the needs of the community in mind? Do they have the cooperation of the community in mind? I don't know exactly what community solar is, so I would probably need to do more homework to make an informed, sound decision. However, I think the bottom line is that it has to be safe, reliable, and affordable.

Clint Moses, State Assembly Incumbent District 92 Candidate (R) I think the phrase community solar is slightly misleading. It sounds nice and like a great idea. As previously mentioned, I had taken a tour to visit a number of community solar projects in Colorado. When I came back, the first thing I did was talk to some of the people that may be in this room. I talked to my local energy manager, and we went through this particular bill proposal. The problem I saw with it was once again cost shifting the maintenance of the infrastructure needed to utility companies. These types of projects pass all the administrative costs back to local cooperatives and utilities. I think there are definitely opportunities for community-type solar, but it is something that we have to truly understand how it works before making any decisions. Solar energy is obviously part of that diversified portfolio that we're talking about, but we can't have companies cherry-picking the profitable sectors and passing costs onto other entities or consumers. We really need to look at a balanced approach. There was a big push for this over the last few years because of the federal dollars available right now for renewable energy and the environment. We just have to be mindful of costs being passed on to consumers. I actually have a bill drafted that I did not introduce this session that would put more back to local government. I look forward to introducing it, should I have the honor of coming back this fall.

James Rolbiecki, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (R) – I think this goes hand in hand with the right of first refusal we discussed earlier. I think it's really important that the Public Service Commission regulates this. Community solar sounds great, but I have the same fears about what happens when these outside developers come in as the rest of us. If these community solar projects were built, who is accountable for them? Building solar projects and accountability really needs to stay with Dairyland. If we go back to 100-plus years, we have had reliable utilities. We can still have community-type solar, but I would like to see that developed and controlled locally here in the state. I think our power should be generated in Wisconsin and stay in Wisconsin.

Christian Phelps, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (D) – Lack of regulation risks that others have mentioned are very important. I think Jodi, particularly, got into it. We can move to solar energy in a responsible way if we do it together as a local community. It's not that there is no space and no responsible way to increase access to solar energy; it's that we know best how to do it. I do get nervous about the idea of out-of-state developers making those decisions. We've seen in the Wisconsin economy some examples of out-of-state or international companies coming in with big promises that have been broken. That kind of thing within the energy sphere would make me particularly nervous because, as others have mentioned so articulately, reliance on energy is something we can't just go without. I'm sure that we can come up with innovative ways to create partnerships between the public sector and the energy industry to increase our access to solar energy without risking farmland and by making those decisions here in the local community.

Beneficial Electrification

Efforts to reduce carbon emissions from generating electricity are significant, but another way to reduce emissions is to electrify different aspects of our day-to-day lives.

A tangible example of this is the adoption of electric vehicles.

This past session, significant legislation was passed to allow Wisconsin to access federal dollars to build electric vehicle charging stations.

(a) Please share your position on this bill and what additional policy challenges you see to electric vehicle use in Wisconsin.

(b) Electric Vehicles are just one example of beneficial electrification, do you see any other opportunities through beneficial electrification?

Christian Phelps, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (D) – I really appreciate this question because we have a car-based culture in Wisconsin. The move to electric vehicles is going to be a big part of people's individual and community decisions to transition to more renewable energy sources. The federal dollars that we have access to as a state have also opened up for individuals. My partner and I were able to take advantage of the Biden administration's and the federal government's offer to get a partial tax credit to purchase a new or used electric vehicle. I think access to those kinds of programs is really helpful because it incentivizes individual behavior. We have a scarcity of some resources, but one that we don't have a scarcity of at the state level right now is funds. There's a huge Surplus sitting around in Madison, and I wonder if there are ways that we could come together and be Innovative in making some State funds available for this transition, both individually and as a community. I'm very committed to the idea of increasing the electric vehicle charging station network and also to increasing access and awareness of that network. As technology improves, the time it'll take to charge a vehicle will significantly decrease, and the amount of miles it can go will significantly increase. Expanding access to electric vehicles through incentives can expand information and knowledge so people know more about electric vehicles and how to use them. Chargers will be a part of that landscape, which will make this transition easier and more responsible.

James Rolbiecki, State Assembly District 93 Candidate (R) – I've never really been a fan of using tax dollars to incentivize or modify behaviors. Electric vehicles are great, and I think charging stations are important, but I also have some concerns. We have a lot more research to do, especially in our area, with the concerns about battery life caused by cold weather. If we don't have charging stations and places where it's convenient for people to charge, it will be hard to try to go to that platform. We've talked a lot about areas where battery tools are great. When you're using a mower or a weed wacker, it is wonderful. When you're traveling with your family and you can't find a charging station would be a bigger issue. We also need to make sure that people understand the risks and benefits when they're moving to electric vehicles. They need to be aware that they need to prepare themselves, be conscious of cost, and understand charging. We have a long way to go. I also hear things about trying to move this technology from the road over to the field for farm equipment. I think that's quite a ways out there too. We really have to question whether this is the best use when that's not necessarily something most farmers want. Currently. They still choose to use diesel because it's tried and tested. At the end of the day, from a legislative perspective, we need to think about what our people want. We need to think about how we can make these electric vehicles more user-friendly.

Clint Moses, State Assembly Incumbent District 92 Candidate (R) – It's great to incentivize and give people the opportunity to change behaviors, and sometimes it's hard to change old habits. But I, too, would be cautious about it. Although our state does have a large surplus, I would argue most of that surplus belongs back to the taxpayers, not going out as subsidies to change someone's behavior. I think the market and the consumer will drive the technology to get to a place where electric vehicles will have a place and purpose, just like I mentioned before about my electric chainsaw. I love it for specific applications, and this will be the same.

I am very cautionary when we take some of that money to use as an incentive to get somebody to change their behavior. I looked for myself a few years ago at switching to a hybrid or an electric vehicle, but I couldn't find anything that would give me the range in the wintertime that I would need to get to the Capitol and back. It just wasn't very feasible. I did support the bill during this last session because the federal government (which we have no control over as state legislators) has incentives out there for consumers to utilize. I do think there are applications, and I know this is another issue that's not going to go away anytime soon. Once again, I'm going to reach out to the experts and the people in the industry to find out what they think. I'm going to talk to my constituents and see what's best for the people I serve.

Michele Magadance Skinner, State Assembly District 91 Candidate (R) – When we're talking about access to federal dollars, someone said, "Well, it's not costing us anything because we're getting it from the federal government." I'm thinking, yeah, it's costing us. It's costing us because it's coming out of our paid tax dollars and could be better used elsewhere. Is that where we really want to spend this money? The other thing is that I don't trust electric vehicles enough at this point for me to go buy one.

I've talked to people who had them for 6 years and sold it because they could never get them warm enough during the winter. I've talked to people who have utilized them and sold it because it took so long to charge. The science isn't quite there yet to make it convenient. Also, if everyone bought one today and we all plugged them in, our grid would not sustain the load caused by the electric vehicles. These batteries are made in a dirty industry in China. In my mind, we're not there yet. I think the marketplace is going to take care of this. There is so much innovation and so many bright people out there that there will be all kinds of things to choose from in the near future. I think the industry will get to a point where it will be more sustainable with clean production that will still allow safe, reliable, and affordable energy.

Jodi Emerson, State Assembly Incumbent District 91 Candidate (D) – This is a situation where I wish I had had the questions earlier so I could look up the bill that we had on our final floor day. If I'm remembering correctly, it was thrown in with all kinds of negotiations. I remember the secretary of the DOT running around like crazy in the building that day, trying to get this bill through. We had to change Wisconsin's laws to be able to access those federal dollars. I think we should be doing more things to accept more federal dollars because they are our tax dollars. It is better that they come back to Wisconsin rather than go to a different state. This bill is about exactly the issues that we have all talked about with electric vehicle charging. This is about bringing more charging stations around the state so that they are available. This is about putting rapid charging stations in place so that it doesn't take 2 hours to charge. That is the whole heart of this issue. What can we do to upgrade our infrastructure that we have? If we have federal incentives to do it, there are a lot of people who would be likely to get an electric vehicle or a hybrid. I travel a lot, and I don't have a place to charge. If we can get those federal dollars to help get more charging stations around, maybe we can get some more electric or hybrid vehicles on the road. Technology is moving so quickly. The electric vehicles that were out there a decade ago do not have the same charging capacity and range as electric vehicles today. I believe in the free market, but I believe that occasionally, we need to incentivize individual consumers to do what they want to do, but they may not have the money to do so without it.

Along with this, helping the Department of Tourism put together a map of where all the charging stations are around the state. I think there are people who would travel and like to have it. I think there are things like that that we can do to help modify people's behavior.

Paul Hambleton, State Senate District 10 Candidate (D) – Thank you, Jodi, for those comments on those bills I think we are clearly going to transition how we use vehicles. Electric vehicles aren't for everybody. I think the concerns that were raised are definitely legitimate. However, people need to research carefully if it is right for them or not because it has limitations. I have a friend who has an electric vehicle that drives from Wisconsin to California. Stopping to charge is part of the journey. You have to know where charging stations are, and if you get off track, you can't necessarily find an alternate station like you could with a gas station. If you are up for it and you know what you're getting into, it can be a great adventure. I think the issue with this is all about accepting the federal money and getting more charging stations because tourism is important here. If you have folks coming from the Twin Cities driving into Wisconsin or from Illinois driving into Wisconsin with electric vehicles, having charging stations will be crucial.

I also heard comments about incentivizing using tax dollars. We do that all the time with businesses, so I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. I get it that you don't want to overuse that in certain cases, but it is something we do pretty commonly. It's part of that transition to something new. We also heard a comment about dirty technology. That's what gasoline and diesel are. That's what we're moving away from. Cleaner technology is going to take time; that's why the goal is 2050.