Hartford Business Journal

31 HARTFORDBUSINESS.COM | MAY 31, 2021 OPINION & COMMENTARY OTHER VOICES CT must lift ban on the direct sales of electric vehicles By Analiese Paik We're in a climate crisis and both the state and federal government have made transitioning to electric vehicles a top priority to rapidly cut carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. But Connecticut is far from meeting its 2025 goal of having 150,000 EVs on the road despite having significant charging infrastructure and CHEAPR rebates for consumers. When compared to "open" states, which allow direct sales of EVs by electric vehicle manufacturers, we're a laggard both in terms of job growth and EV sales by any means. Even dealer-franchisees, the very group fighting against EV direct sales in Connecticut (Senate Bill 127) over unfounded claims it will damage their businesses and harm the economy and jobs, have higher sales and employment in open states, according to data from their own national association, the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA). A comparison of NADA sales and employment data from 2012 to 2019 reveals that we're lagging our neighboring states, all of which allow the direct sale of EVs to consumers. Rhode Island sales were up 52% and dealer employment was up 33%; Massachusetts sales were up 37% and employment was up 23%; New York sales were up 59% and employment was up 22%; yet Connecticut sales were only up 15% and employment was up 16%. Unfortunately, our great state university has published a questionable analysis that paints dire outcomes for the state's 247 dealers and our economy if SB 127 is passed. Putting their stamp of approval on voting against the bill only serves to keep Connecticut backwards and further off track to achieve our EV adoption goals. Why did UConn ignore the positive NADA data from open states that jibes with findings in The Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) white paper "How competition policy affects macroeconomic outcomes"? The OECD stressed that greater competition leads to faster productivity growth and "regulations, or anti-competitive behaviour preventing entry and expansion, may therefore be particularly damaging for economic growth." The Federal Trade Commission advised back in 2015 that "States should allow consumers to choose not only the cars they buy, but also how they buy them. Absent some legitimate public purpose, consumers would be better served if the choice of distribution method were left to motor vehicle manufacturers and the consumers to whom they sell their products." Admiral Dennis Blair of the Electrification Coalition, which advocates for strategies and policies that support electric vehicle adoption, in public testimony given to the state of Washington, notes that states that permit direct sales see EV adoption rates of up to 5 times the rates of states that are closed. Clearly, we want the cars made by EV-only manufacturers like Tesla, Rivian and Lucid. We actually favor them as 5,879 of the 7,880 battery electric vehicles (or of 13,800 total plug-in vehicles including hybrids) registered in the state are Teslas. Tesla accounted for 68% of the growth in EV registrations and 84% of battery electric vehicles over the course of 2020. Every one of those owners/lessees, regardless of where they live in Connecticut, had to travel to another state, New York, to pick up the vehicle even though Tesla has a service center in Milford. These American companies want to open showrooms and service centers in Connecticut, and they would be held to the same standards as current dealerships under SB 127. SB 127 is not a threat, but an opportunity to open up healthy competition and allow consumers to buy any EV they want without having to leave the state to pick it up. The results are so encouraging from open states that any votes against this bill lack sound reasoning and are not only a vote against job and economic growth, both also a surefire way to further derail efforts to rapidly electrify mobility in the state. Anti-competitive policy damages economic growth and thwarts climate goals. Nobody wants to see dealerships shed jobs or go out of business, so it's a relief that data from open states shows only positive outcomes. Similarly, nobody wants to see businesses shut out of Connecticut as we attempt to reach EV goals, grow the economy, and create green jobs. It's time for EV freedom and consumers want it. Analiese Paik is a sustainability advocate and member of the leadership team of the EV Club of CT. Analiese Paik PRESENTED BY: MEDIA PARTNERS: EVENT PARTNERS: • Middlesex Chamber of Commerce • Waterbury Chamber of Commerce • Chamber of Commerce Northwest Connecticut, Inc. • Greater New Haven Chamber of Commerce • CBIA • MetroHartford Alliance • CTSHRM A TRANSPORTATION WEBINAR SERIES: SESSION TWO THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON CURRENT WORKPLACE TRENDS AND COMMUTING On May 18th CTrides presented the second webinar in a series that is exploring transportation topics that affect Connecticut's businesses and residents. This webinar explored COVID-19's impact on "return to work" expectations, the evolving nature of commuting, and strategies for how organizations can move forward in this uncertain time. THANK YOU TO SPEAKERS, ATTENDEES AND SPONSORS! CATCH THE RECORDING OF THE WEBINAR, AVAILABLE AT WWW.HARTFORDBUSINESS.COM/CTINMOTIONSESSION2

• Cover