By Kenneth Schrupp, The Center Square

A 17-state-and-territory coalition led by California, Washington and Colorado is suing the Trump administration to maintain access to $5 billion in EV charger funding passed by Congress in 2021 but put on hold by the current administration.

A majority of the coalition, including lawsuit leaders California and Washington, has failed to build any chargers using $3.3 billion in awarded funds over the past four fiscal years.

Following President Donald Trump’s order to eliminate electric vehicle mandates, the Federal Highway Administration suspended the approval of state EV charger network plans submitted for federal grants under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which was signed into law in 2021. It provided $5 billion in National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure grant funding.

The FHWA’s notice said that “until new guidance is issued, reimbursement of existing obligations will be allowed in order to not disrupt current financial commitments.”

According to the NEVI dashboard maintained by the National Association of State Energy Officials, $3.3 billion has already been awarded. That means the suspension mainly impacts the $1.7 billion in unallocated funding that would have otherwise gone out through fiscal year 2026, but are required by the IIJA “to remain available until expended.”

Forty-four states and territories, including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, issued at least one solicitation for NEVI funding. Of the 44 soliciting states and territories, 38 have been issued funding, of which only 16 have at least one operational NEVI station, despite four years of funding between fiscal year 2021 and fiscal year 2025.

The lawsuit filed by 17 attorneys general requests that the courts block the withholding of NEVI grants, citing the explicit congressional mandate in the IIJA.

In its plan suspension notice, the FHWA say the NEVI program is “unique in that this Program requires the Secretary to approve a plan for each State describing how the State intends to use its NEVI funds,” and simply “has decided to review the policies underlying the implementation of the NEVI Formula Program.” 

This suggests that while the IIJA may have required the FHWA to disburse $5 billion in NEVI grants, that it’s also true the IIJA grants the FHWA the power to temporarily suspend NEVI plans for review. 

The lawsuit says that “The Secretary must distribute to each State its share of NEVI Formula Program funds unless the State fails to timely submit its State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plan or if the Secretary determines a State has not taken action to carry out its State Plan.” 

Despite having secured $302 million in NEVI funding since fiscal year 2021 of the $384 million it requested, California is yet to have completed a single NEVI-funded charger. Washington has been awarded $56 million, but also has no completed NEVI chargers. Of the 17 states and territories filing suit, only eight have completed any NEVI chargers.

The lawsuit says the IIJA creates clear guidelines for the FHWA to follow if it determines a state is not carrying out its plan, including identifying actions to rectify concerns and providing at least 90 days to address those concerns, and providing notice of 60 days of its intent to withhold or withdraw funds.

Should courts find that the IIJA’s explicit procedures were violated in excess of the powers available to the FHWA, it’s likely the FHWA will have to reinstate the rescinded state plans and at some point resume the awarding of NEVI funding.

While gasoline-powered cars take two minutes to refill, a 60-kilowatt-hour Tesla Model 3 requires eight to 12 hours to charge at a Tesla Destination charger, 40 minutes to reach 80% on a 150 kw charger and 20 minutes on a 250 kh charger. 

These rapid technological advancements mean significant investments in current EV charging technology may soon become obsolete, challenging the value of taxpayer investments in the sector.

By Christina Lengyel,  The Center Square

A bill aimed at removing a 2007 tax break from wind energy producers has West Virginia legislators at odds over the supremacy of coal in West Virginia’s economy.

Senate Bill 439 would clarify that “wind power projects are not pollution control facilities,” which are taxed at salvage value. The clarification would subject them to real property taxes.

Supporters of the bill say the change would add millions in tax revenue to the state and take away an unfair advantage over the coal industry. Those who oppose it say the wind industry, which employs West Virginians and is an essential component of a clean-energy future, would suffer a huge blow.

Sen. Glenn Jeffries, R-Putnam, argued for an “all energy” policy, encouraging the incentivization of all energy production, including coal, rather than disincentivizing wind power production.

The bill’s sponsor and chair of the Senate Energy, Industry, and Mining committee Sen. Chris Rose, R-Monongalia, said the wind industry profits “at the expense of our hardworking coal and natural gas industries,” which he called “a slap in the face to the men and women who have powered this state for generations, digging coal and drilling gas to keep America running.”

In a report from the Ninth District of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Montana is at the very top in terms of our Gross Domestic Product – or how much we produce, as compared to the other states in our district. The Ninth District is comprised of five states, including Montana.

The latest data, which is third quarter of 2024, shows that Montana has a GDP of 117.7 as compared to the next highest state, South Dakota at 111.7. We are also producing at a higher level than the US average at 114.5 – also we have had a very steep incline in the increase of our GDP, ever since COVID – exceeding all other states in the district.

Montana also has the highest percentage employment per 100 people than other states in the Ninth District and it has been steadily rising. Montana’s ratio is 111.3 as compared to the next highest, again South Dakota at 106.5. The National average is 106.3.

By Sarah Roderick-Fitch, The Center Square

The debate over whether taxpayers should be on the hook for constructing professional sports stadiums has made its way back to Capitol Hill as lawmakers look to end taxpayer subsidies for multi-billion-dollar complexes.

Reps. Don Beyer, D-Va., Glenn Grothman, R-Wis., and Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., introduced bipartisan, bicameral legislation calling for the end of taxpayer subsidies to build professional sports complexes.

The No Tax Subsidies for Stadiums Act would terminate the ability for professional sporting teams to utilize tax-exempt municipal bonds to finance the construction of stadiums. The lawmakers argue that the tax exemptions were “originally intended to help local governments fund essential public infrastructure projects,” including hospitals, schools and roads.

The legislators claim the “loophole has enabled wealthy sports franchises to benefit from taxpayer dollars, often with little measurable economic return to the surrounding communities.”

The lawmakers contend that in the last 25 years, over 40 sports stadiums have been “financed” using the tax-exempted municipal bonds, claiming to have cost taxpayers “an estimated $4.3 billion in lost federal revenue.”

In February, The Center Square reported on $1.2 billion in public funds requested to help build a new stadium for the Cleveland Browns, which is estimated to cost $2.4 billion.

In 2023, The Center Square reported on another stadium project involving the construction of a new stadium to house the Tennessee Titans, requesting a $500 million bond from the state of Tennessee.

The Tax Foundation reported that, according to sports economists, over 50 years between 1970 and 2020, taxpayers “‘devoted $33 billion in public funds to construct major-league sports stadiums and arenas’” in the U.S. and Canada. Adding that the public was left “on the hook for nearly three-quarters of the costs of each new sports venue.”

In 2023, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin announced a plan to build a “world-class” entertainment district in Alexandria’s Potomac Yard neighborhood to house Washington’s NBA and NHL franchises as part of a $2 billion public-private partnership.

At the time, Youngkin touted the development as a major economic boost. Supporters claimed it would generate a $12 billion economic impact for Alexandria and the commonwealth while creating 30,000 jobs. The deal to move the teams across the Potomac has since died.

Despite the governor’s claim, The National Conference of State Legislatures says the “economic impact of stadiums” on cities “is negligible.” However, construction of new stadiums does create jobs, such as, construction and seasonal employment.

NCSL questioned the “quality of the jobs,” citing stadium workers and “game-day personnel,” who often perform “low wage, temporary and part-time” work.

Beyer, whose district includes Alexandria, argues that taxpayers shouldn’t be “forced to fund” sports complexes. “Billionaire owners who need cash can borrow from the market like any other business. Arguments that stadiums boost job creation have been repeatedly discredited. In a time when there is a debate over whether the country can ‘afford’ investments in health care, childcare, education, or fighting climate change, it is ridiculous to even contemplate such a radical misuse of publicly subsidized bonds,” said Beyer.