By Claire Carlson for The Daily Yonder.
Broadcast version by Deborah Van Fleet for Nebraska News Connection reporting for The Daily Yonder-Public News Service Collaboration

A federal grant of $62 million to the nonprofit Center for Rural Affairs in Lyons, Nebraska, will help build residential solar-power installations for Nebraska families who usually can’t afford the cost-saving systems, the center’s director said.

The Center for Rural Affairs is one of 60 grantees across the country that will participate in the Solar for All program, a Biden administration initiative that is part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The program will provide a one-time injection of $7 billion nationally to help people who would normally have a hard time paying for residential solar production capacity.

“The people that have built solar have tended to be middle income and higher individuals or institutions that have the discretionary resources to do the upfront costs or do the financing,” said Brian Depew, executive director of the Center for Rural Affairs.

The center has advocated for economic justice and environmental stewardship in Nebraska’s rural communities for more than 50 years. The Solar for All project will serve all of Nebraska, not just rural areas.

“People with less fiscal capacity have not yet been able to participate fully in the benefits of solar energy,” Depew said. “That’s what we’re trying to change.”

The Center for Rural Affairs received word of the grant in April (2024). Depew said learning about the large grant was a “surreal” moment for his organization. 

“It’s a major award for the Center for Rural Affairs,” Depew said in a Daily Yonder interview. “Just the magnitude of the award and the size of the project that we’ll be able to do.”

The Solar for All program comes out of the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The agency estimates that 900,000 households across the country will benefit from the solar projects funded by the program. Recipients range from state governmental agencies to nonprofit organizations like the Center for Rural Affairs. 

Once the awards are allocated to the organizations such as the Center for Rural Affairs that will distribute the funds to recipients, eligible households in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, U.S. territories, and tribal nations will be able to apply for grants, technical assistance, and loans to pay for solar panels. 

In Nebraska, this opportunity will most likely open to residents in the next two years. “There will be an up to one-year planning period where we will further design…the application period [for grants],” Depew said. “We hope to start piloting some actual solar installations during the planning period, but it could be a full year before we are really up and ready to take applications from a broader array of people.” 

Depew credits the Center for Rural Affairs’ success in getting this award to the number of stakeholders they conferred with during the application process. The center met with more than 50 stakeholders from rural, suburban, urban, and tribal communities in Nebraska to get their input for a program proposal that made sense for their communities. What made it into the final application was a three-part strategy for implementing residential solar in Nebraska. 

The first strategy is community solar, in which public utilities manage the solar arrays and eligible residences could benefit from the solar through a subscription service or by owning some of the panels. The second is multifamily affordable housing solar, in which the center would work with utilities, developers, or low-income housing financing partners to deploy solar at multifamily residences. And the third strategy would be directly providing grants or loans for rooftop solar to individual residences. 

The center’s Solar for All application proposed allocating each of the three strategies one-third of the total project funds. This could change as they work on the details in the planning process that will take place in collaboration with the EPA over the next year.

“All of the projects are required to be residential-serving solar, and they’re required to serve low to moderate income individuals and individuals living in historically disadvantaged census tracts,” Depew said. 

The EPA identified these census tracts using the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, which is part of the Biden administration’s Justice40 Initiative to ensure 40% of federal environmental investments go to communities that are “marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by pollution,” according to a press release. Some of these census tracts will include rural communities, but people can also qualify at the individual household level regardless of the census tract they live in. 

The Solar for All money will be disbursed over a five year period. The Center for Rural Affairs plans to put some of the money into a revolving loan fund so they can extend the funding beyond the five years. A complete list of Solar for All awardees may be found here.


Claire Carlson wrote this article for The Daily Yonder.


get more stories like this via email

New York legislation can address growing anti-trust concerns. The 21st Century Anti-Trust Act updates the state's aged anti-trust laws and closes loopholes companies have abused. This comes as an Institute for Local Self-Reliance report finds corporations in New York and nationwide leverage structural racism and use other tactics to establish market dominance.

Susan Holmberg, associate director for research with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, said one such tactic is stripping communities of local businesses and basic services.

"So, a lot of monopolies, they're just trying to edge out smaller competitors, but by doing that they're wiping out independent businesses that are much more well suited to serve communities of color, often because they live in these communities and their incentives are so different," she explained.

Other patterns Holmberg identifies are imposing high prices and substandard services on areas with no alternatives and exploiting workers of color. Some oppose the bill, saying it's anti-business and anti-consumer, while others say it favors competitors over competition. But Holmberg noted these trends aren't limited to companies such as Amazon. They're economy-wide trends also in the banking, waste, pharmaceutical and grocery industries.

Federal bills can also aid national antitrust practices. The Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act gives federal enforcers the necessary resources to do their jobs and strengthens prohibitions on anticompetitive conduct and mergers. Other federal antitrust work is building a foundation to rein in monopolies, Holmberg said.

"They're really reorienting and returning antitrust to its original intent, how the laws were written which is about dispersing economic power, promoting fair competition and enhancing community self-determination," she added.

She said this is also about safeguarding financial liberties for people in the United States. But, some of the biggest hurdles to this are limited resources for agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission and political challenges like a divided Congress.

New Yorkers could see detrimental impacts from a proposed federal budget.

The Republican Study Committee's proposed 2025 budget calls for sweeping cuts some experts feel are not fiscally responsible. It comes as congressional Republicans are calling for trimming government spending. Part of the budget extends Trump-era tax breaks benefiting corporations and wealthy people.

Hae-Lin Choi, District 1 political director for the Communication Workers of America, said tax policy is a top issue for the union's New York members.

"The consequences that we have seen from the devastating corporate tax cuts have been really real for our members," Choi emphasized. "AT&T got a $20 billion windfall and ended up laying off 23,000 members."

The company actually got $42 billion from Trump tax cuts. New York Republican Representatives Nicholas Langworthy, Nicole Malliotakis, Elise Stefanik, Claudia Tenney, Brandon Williams and Nick LaLota are all study committee members who support the budget. Choi argued their budget does not show the lessons of the pandemic have been learned, noting more public service investments are necessary.

The proposed budget aims to cut spending by around $17 trillion and Americans' taxes by more than $4 trillion over a decade.

Porter McConnell, senior director of the Take on Wall Street Project for the group Americans for Financial Reform, noted it would come at a price. Large tax breaks mean making up the revenue in other ways. She said certain public programs will be taking a hit.

"They propose cutting $1.5 trillion in Social Security, and they propose to do that by raising the retirement age to 69 and by lowering the benefits you get when you do retire," McConnell explained. "Basically they're taking money from seniors and redistributing it to corporations and the super rich."

The study committee's proposal slashes funds for the Departments of Education and Labor. However, it calls for increases to the Department of Defense, which has a budget seven times the combined amount the U.S. spends on education and labor.

Leaders of some nonprofit organizations in Arkansas are not happy with a recent tax cut package passed by the Legislature.

The law reduces the tax rate for people who make more than $25,000 a year. The corporate tax rate was also reduced from 4.8% percent to 4.3%. Opponents of the cuts said they only benefit the wealthy.

Syard Evans, CEO of the Arkansas Support Network and co-chair of the Arkansas Coalition for Strong Families, said elected officials are not addressing issues affecting quality of life services for Arkansans and they are concerned the cuts will affect programs.

"Day in and day out we face the challenges of people not having enough resources to meet their basic needs," Evans pointed out. "And to really live a legitimate quality of life that we want and expect for all of our citizens."

Supporters of the tax cuts said Arkansas is expected to have a surplus of more than $700 million annually and community programs will not be affected.

The new rates are retroactive to Jan. 1 and the action mean Arkansas has one of the lowest tax rates in the South. It also has the highest maternal mortality rate in the nation, the second-highest teen pregnancy rate, and the third-highest infant mortality rate. Evans argued the cuts reduce money that could go to programs addressing childhood poverty or incentives for affordable housing.

"It's not even to say that the tax cuts don't need to happen," Evans emphasized. "What we're saying is that in order for things like that to happen we have to be responsible for meeting the needs that the state is obligated to meet."

The tax cut legislation requires almost $300 million to be put into an emergency fund in case the money is needed to make up for any revenue shortfalls.


get more stories like this via email