State legislative and regulatory decisions on community power shape local autonomy, clean energy access, and utility accountability. They also determine who – utility shareholders or ratepayers – see the most benefit from the clean energy transition.
ILSR’s annual Community Power Scorecard grades all 50 states and the District of Columbia on how their policies support or hinder local clean energy action across 18 key categories.
In the 2025 Scorecard, five states boosted their community power scores in intervenor compensation, disconnection prevention, third party ownership, and/or integrated resource plan approval by adopting new policies.
But five states also backslid on their net metering and gas ban preemption policies. Community solar was the only Scorecard element with both wins and losses.
Read on for a breakdown of how state policies passed in 2024 impact community power.*
To compare state policies that help or hinder local clean energy action, explore our interactive Community Power Map.
Wins: Massachusetts and Connecticut establish Intervenor Compensation programs
Lawmakers in Massachusetts and Connecticut made it easier for community representatives to participate in utility regulation proceedings by establishing new intervenor compensation programs last year.
Proceedings like the ones in which regulators approve utility rates have a high level of entry. Participants must be comfortable using specific legal language and know how to provide effective expert testimony. The meetings usually take place during the work day, making it harder for everyday people to participate.
Compensating intervenors – especially those representing consumers and highly-impacted communities – helps non-utilities with the financial burden of participating at the state regulatory commission.
As part of its sweeping November 2024 climate bill, Massachusetts included a mandate for a $3.5 million Intervenor Trust Fund that would help ratepayers cover the costs of legal and other expert support.
In Connecticut, the state’s Public Utilities Regulatory Authority established in January 2024 that eligible stakeholder groups can apply for up to $100,000 per application. Each docket is limited to $300,000 in funding across all groups, with $1.2 million for all groups in all proceedings per year.
While these two states picked up three points each for their new intervenor compensation programs, neither program earned full marks. Most notably, neither Massachusetts nor Connecticut carved out funding explicitly for intervenors who represent highly-impacted communities and would not be able to participate otherwise.
In the 2025 Scorecard, only Illinois, Maine, Oregon, and Washington earned full credit for their intervenor compensation scores.
Win: Washington, D.C. improves its Disconnection Prevention program
In the 2025 Scorecard, Washington, D.C. was the only jurisdiction to take new steps to protect consumers from losing electricity service for nonpayment. D.C. earned two additional points for implementing some protections for vulnerable households and during times of extreme cold or heat.
During the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, many states implemented moratoriums on utility disconnection. But electricity is an essential service at all times, not just during an economic crisis or public health emergency.
While Washington, D.C. increased its score, it nevertheless falls short of having a model disconnection prevention policy. Specifically, it has yet to prohibit all utility shutoffs, require automatic reconnections, or eliminate late payment charges, deposits, and reconnection fees year-round for all households.
But D.C. is not alone in this regard. In the 2025 Scorecard, no state earned full marks for its disconnection prevention policy. California, Illinois, and Massachusetts currently have the highest scores in this Scorecard element.
Win: Virginia strengthens Third Party Ownership conditions
In 2024, Virginia’s General Assembly passed legislation enabling full third-party ownership and thus improved its Third Party Ownership score.
Though it has fewer benefits than full ownership, third party ownership laws allow a business to own power generation, like a solar array, on a utility customer’s own property and to sell the customer the electricity. Third party ownership laws have been strongly associated with the success of rooftop solar because the solar firms pay the upfront cost, allowing the property owner to access electric bill savings from solar with little to no down payment.
Virginia still does not earn full marks for its Third Party Ownership score, however, because a model policy allows power purchase agreements in all sectors (e.g. residential, commercial, etc), which the Virginia policy does not.
In the 2025 Scorecard, 25 states earned maximum points in this category.
Win: Alaska now requires Integrated Resource Plan approval
In 2024, Alaska joined 20 other states that already required Integrated Resource Plan approval.
An Integrated Resource Plan approval process helps prevent sudden electricity rate increases by requiring utilities to share their investment plans for meeting demand with regulators.
The model policy for integrated resource planning requires that utilities file a plan and get regulatory approval. There should also be opportunities for the public to file comments as part of the proceeding.
Wins and Losses: Four states boost their Community Solar scores, but two states falter
2024 was a mixed bag for community solar, with four states making strides toward increasing access — and two others taking major steps back.
Community solar provides a way for people who cannot install solar on their rooftop to share in the benefits of renewable energy. Community solar gardens — which are larger than residential solar installations, but smaller than utility-owned solar fields — are also not only the most cost-effective size for solar, but also reduce electric bills for members of the community.
To receive basic credit, a state’s community solar policy must at minimum create a competitive market that allows independent power producers to develop and own community solar gardens. A model community solar policy does not artificially restrict the market with a cap and establishes a fair compensation rate for utilities to pay for community solar power. A model policy also simplifies the billing process for subscribers, meaningfully accounts for the challenge of reaching low- and moderate-income subscribers, and rewards other beneficial development or small subscriber-friendly practices.
In 2024, community solar wins included Alaska becoming the most recent state to enable community solar. The program incorporates some elements of a model policy by not having a cap, and by offering consolidated billing. Other program components, like compensation rate and whether credit checks will be allowed, are still being worked out. Colorado improved its community solar score by abandoning a program cap, approving consolidated billing, raising the low- and moderate-income carveout to 51%, and disallowing credit checks. Massachusetts and New Mexico upped their scores by adopting consolidating billing.
Losses include Vermont eliminating virtual net metering, and thereby its community solar program, altogether. However, the 2024 law requires the creation of a successor program. California also slashed its compensation rate, lowering its community power score.
In the 2025 Scorecard, Maryland maintained its leadership as the only state earning full marks for its community solar policy.
Losses: Connecticut, Idaho, and West Virginia erode Net Metering policies
Unfortunately, in the 2025 Scorecard, Connecticut, Idaho, and West Virginia joined an increasing number of states eroding their net metering policies, to the detriment of current and potential residential solar adopters.
Net metering enables people to connect and receive compensation for rooftop solar projects. This simple policy has widespread benefits including increasing climate resilience, creating local jobs, and reducing fossil fuel power plant pollution that disproportionately impacts marginalized communities.
The best net metering policies:
- Guarantee full retail-rate net metering as kWh credits on the customer’s bill,
- Cover all types of utilities (e.g. investor-owned utilities, cooperatives, municipal utilities),
- Do not allow demand charges,
- Offer continuous rollover of credits, OR net excess generation (NEG) paid out annually at or near retail rate,
- Explicitly legalize virtual net metering.
In Connecticut, some residential solar customers are now being charged a per-kilowatt fee on their utility bills, in effect constituting a type of demand charge, while Idaho lowered its score by shifting from a net-metering to a net-billing policy. West Virginia took the biggest step backwards by abandoning its commitment to compensating residential solar customers at retail rates.
In the 2025 Scorecard, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Virginia maintained their Net Metering leadership by meeting model policy criteria.
Losses: Nebraska and Washington preempt localities from passing Gas Ban ordinances
With new policies adopted in 2024, Nebraska and Washington have tipped the scales: a majority of states now prohibit states and towns from banning natural gas in new buildings.
When localities ban natural gas hook-ups in new buildings, they lower the cost of new buildings, improve the lives of residents, and clean up the climate for all.
Gas ban preemptions, on the other hand, are state-level decrees that prevent cities from making their own decisions about whether buildings can pass gas bans or electrification ordinances. Since Berkeley, California first passed a gas-ban ordinance in 2019 (overturned in 2023 by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals), the gas industry has been bending over backwards to make sure this type of locally-driven climate action can’t take place elsewhere by lobbying to pass statewide gas ban preemption policies.
* Each year’s Scorecard presents information that we understand to be correct at the time of research. Sometimes we realize in retrospect that a previous score was incorrect, and update those scores for the most recent Scorecard.
This article originally posted at ilsr.org. For timely updates from the Energy Democracy Initiative, follow John Farrell on Twitter or Bluesky, and subscribe to the Energy Democracy weekly update.
Photo credit: Gillfoto via Wikimedia Commons.