A bill that would make it difficult to form new,
community-based clean energy programs such as Marin Clean Energy has advanced
to the state Senate's Energy Committee, where it is scheduled for a hearing
Monday.
The bill, AB 2145 — introduced by Assemblyman Steven
Bradford, D-Gardena, a former public relations executive for Southern California
Edison — would dramatically alter the law governing Community Choice
Aggregation.
The law, adopted in 2002, allows cities and counties to
jointly purchase electricity for constituents within their political
boundaries, providing an alternative to the incumbent, investor-owned utility.
Initially intended as a means of bringing down electricity rates, the law has
been utilized by environmentalists seeking to reduce greenhouse gas production
by increasing use of renewable energy sources.
Currently, customers must opt out when a public authority
such as Marin Clean Energy is formed in their community; otherwise, they are
automatically transferred from the private utility to the new entity.
Bradford's AB 2145 would reverse that process, requiring customers to opt in to
the new entity if they wish to join.
LEVINE OPPOSED
"It makes more sense to make sure that consumers know
what they're getting into when they sign up for one of these CCAs," said
Assemblyman Mike Gatto, D-Los Angeles, chairman of the Assembly's
Appropriations Committee, who voted for the bill. The bill was approved by the
Assembly on a vote of 51-15, with 13 abstentions. Assemblyman Marc Levine,
D-San Rafael, was among the dissenters.
Supporters of CCA programs say the opt-out requirement is
vital because new public entities need to be able to count on a sizable
customer base to secure the financing necessary to get off the ground.
Ed Mainland of Novato, a board member of Sustainable Marin,
said, "This is a repeat of Proposition 16. It's a power grab by a monopoly
corporation to kill off the competition. And the competition is getting serious
because there are more than a dozen communities throughout California that are
now in the process of setting up a CCA or considering it."
Proposition 16, which Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
bankrolled to the tune of about $46 million, would have required a two-thirds
vote of the electorate before a public agency could form a CCA.
OPPONENTS RALLY
On Thursday, opponents of AB 2145 rallied in front of the
downtown Oakland PG&E payment center. The Alameda County Board of
Supervisors voted earlier this month to spend $1.3 million to study the
feasibility of creating a CCA in Alameda.
AB 2145 is opposed by a large coalition of local government
agencies, environmental groups, civic organizations, and community choice
advocacy organizations. Supporters include PG&E, San Diego Gas and Electric
Co., the Orange County Taxpayers Association and the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers Local 1245.
Local 1245 has distributed an email and paid for advertising
aimed at garnering support for AB 2145, as well as dispatching a political
mailer criticizing Marin Clean Energy's chairman of the board, Damon Connolly,
during his bid for county supervisor in June.
Local 1245 has criticized Marin Clean Energy for its use of
renewable energy certificates (RECs), tradable commodities that certify that
one megawatt-hour of electricity has been generated from an eligible renewable
energy resource. Local 1245 argues that purchasing such credits is an
ineffective means of stimulating development of new renewable energy
production.
But Jess Dervin-Ackerman, conservation program coordinator
for the San Francisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club, said, "The truth is
the utilities use RECs as well. It's just something that is part of our energy
market and mix right now. We believe that using RECs does provide a demand for
additional renewable energy and helps generate investment in renewables."
UNION INVOLVEMENT
Hunter Stern, Local 1245's business representative, could
not be reached for comment on Friday. Spokesmen for the Coalition of California
Utility Employees and the California Labor Federation, both of which are listed
as supporting the bill, also did not return phone calls.
Dawn Weisz, Marin Clean Energy's executive officer, said
some unions are opposing AB 2145. For example, Rob Cole, business manager for
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 100, issued a
statement voicing his local's "strong opposition" to AB 1245, which
he calls the "Monopoly Protection Bill."
Weisz said that during the period when Assemblyman Gatto was
deciding whether to bring AB 2145 up for a vote before the Appropriations
Committee, over a three-day period, he received more than $21,000 in campaign
donations from PG&E, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
the California State Association of Electrical Workers, and other unions.
Gatto scoffed at the idea that the donations affected his
vote. "That's malarkey," he said. "People contribute to
lawmakers on both sides of the issue."
No comments:
Post a Comment