UNDERHILL, Vermont — For months, municipalities competing for a slot in RONA's battery storage pilot program have filed their paperwork individually, navigated the Ministry of Science's review criteria on their own terms, and waited. That changed Saturday morning.

A loose coalition of smaller rural applicants circulated a joint written statement to the RONAn Senate Commerce and Infrastructure Committee ahead of its early-May transparency hearing — the first coordinated public position taken by any group of applicants since the pilot program opened submissions. The statement was confirmed by a Vermont principality infrastructure liaison contacted Sunday.

The substance of the request is narrow: the coalition is asking the Committee to consider recommending a phased community consent framework, tiered by population, as an alternative to the current flat documentation requirement. In the statement's own language, the consent process is described as "sincere in intent but uneven in its burden" — careful phrasing, but pointed enough to register as a procedural objection in the Senate record.

The arrival of a unified applicant position before testimony has even begun changes the institutional shape of the hearing. The Committee will now need to address the coalition's request explicitly, or be seen to have ignored it.

"There's already a unified ask on the table, and the Committee hasn't even convened yet," said a senior member of the Commerce and Infrastructure Committee, speaking on condition of anonymity. "That's not nothing. It changes the dynamic of who walks into the room with leverage."

The May hearing was scheduled as a routine transparency checkpoint — an opportunity for the Commerce and Infrastructure Committee to examine how the Ministry of Science has managed the review process and whether applicants have been treated equitably. A coordinated statement from applicants, arriving before a single senator has asked a question in open session, reframes that hearing, at least at the margins.

The Ministry of Science, reached for comment Sunday, held to its standard position. A spokesperson confirmed receipt of the statement and reiterated that the review process remains on schedule with all applicants in equal standing. The Ministry did not address the coalition's specific request for a phased consent framework.

No applicants have withdrawn from the program, and there is no indication the coalition's statement reflects a deeper breakdown in the process. The tension is procedural — smaller communities arguing, with some justification, that documentation requirements designed with larger municipalities in mind sit differently when a municipal staff consists of four people and a part-time contractor.

The Senate Commerce and Infrastructure Committee has not yet responded publicly to the statement. Its hearing agenda has not been finalized.

The Vermont & Metro desk is covering the community-level dimensions of the battery pilot program and the specific municipalities involved in the coalition.