Survey: An Energy Planning and Coordinating Entity for Montana?

You have been sent this brief survey because of the interest you have shown in matters facing the Montana Legislature’s Energy and Telecommunications Interim Committee (ETIC).

The Legislature tasked ETIC to pursue two detailed studies this interim. One of them, Senate Joint Resolution 39, requested the study of the possible creation of an ongoing energy planning and coordinating entity in Montana.

SJR 39 asserted the following points: The cost and development of energy resources is critical to all Montanans; there is a large and uncoordinated complex of local, state, federal, non-profit and for-profit bodies all working on energy issues; there is no single Montana-based entity specifically dedicated to broad planning, analysis, and evaluation of energy issues; without such an entity it is almost impossible to have a vision for developing the energy resources and meeting future energy needs of Montana.

As you know, energy issues are dominating the headlines. The proposition that there be a singular entity created to address these many challenges could have great import for our state, economy, and citizens. Your thoughts about the following questions would be appreciated.

Casey A. Barrs
Legislative Researcher
Legislative Services Division

* * *

Survey Questions

You may respond directly on this document and then either e-mail, fax, or mail it back as indicated at the end.

(1) SJR 36 states that "the lack of a singular Montana-based entity specifically dedicated to broad planning, analysis, and evaluation of energy issues" makes it "impossible for us to have a vision for developing the energy resources and meeting future energy needs of Montana." What do you think of this statement?

a. ___ Strongly Disagree

b. ___ Disagree

c. ___ No Opinion

d. ___ Agree

e. ___ Strongly Agree

(2) There would be substantial benefits in creating an energy planning and coordinating entity for Montana. (If agree, please state them)

a. ___ Strongly Disagree

b. ___ Disagree

c. ___ No Opinion

d. ___ Agree

e. ___ Strongly Agree

(3) There would be substantial challenges in creating an energy planning and coordinating entity for Montana. (If agree, please state them)

a. ___ Strongly Disagree

b. ___ Disagree

c. ___ No Opinion

d. ___ Agree

e. ___ Strongly Agree

(4) Indicate the degree to which you feel such an entity should engage in the following:

Plan Policy?

a. ___ Should play no role

b. ___

c. ___ Opinion in between / No opinion

d. ___

e. ___ Should play key role

Coordinate stakeholders?

a. ___ Should play no role

b. ___

c. ___ Opinion in between / No opinion

d. ___

e. ___ Should play key role

Foster generation & infrastructure?

a. ___ Should play no role

b. ___

c. ___ Opinion in between / No opinion

d. ___

e. ___ Should play key role

Information clearinghouse?

a. ___ Should play no role

b. ___

c. ___ Opinion in between / No opinion

d. ___

e. ___ Should play key role

Other?

a. ___ Should play no role

b. ___

c. ___ Opinion in between / No opinion

d. ___

e. ___ Should play key role

(5) If this entity is to have a mandate to plan energy policy, then our state legislative and executive bodies should consider its recommended plans to be:

a. ___ Merely one source of advice for them to consider

b. ___

c. ___

d. ___

e. ___ Their paramount source of advice to consider

(6) If this entity is to have a mandate to coordinate energy stakeholders, then those stakeholders should consider it to be:

a. ___ Merely a clearinghouse of information and optional guidance

b. ___

c. ___

d. ___

e. ___ A critical way station to pass through in the pursuit of policies and promotion of their interests

(7) I would be much assured about such an entity if it were structured to ensure equal voice for stakeholders from federal, tribal, state and local government, as well as electric utilities, natural gas and electricity suppliers, non-profits, and parties involved in potential energy generation and transmission.

a. ___ Strongly Disagree

b. ___ Disagree

c. ___ No Opinion

d. ___ Agree

e. ___ Strongly Agree

(8) SJR suggests an "ongoing" entity. Would you recommend an entity that is:

a. ___ Permanent

b. ___ Temporary

c. ___ Temporary & Renewable

d. ___ No entity at all

(9) Do you feel other states have successful energy planning and coordinating entities that might be useful models for Montana? (This question is being pursued in separate research, but you are welcome to comment if you have knowledge of practices in other states.)

(10) Are there any other thoughts you would like to offer us?

Thank you for your participation in this survey.

Name: ____________________________

Telephone: ________________________

Email: ____________________________

Employer: _________________________

Please return by November 15 to:

Casey A. Barrs

(406) 444-3957

Legislative Researcher

Legislative Services Division

You may return the survey via the following options:

[email protected]

or

Fax: (406) 444-3971

or

P.O. Box 201706

Helena, MT 59620-1706