This is a guest piece from David Room.
I often introduce myself as Melia’s Papa when meeting someone new. Melia, my seven year old daughter, is my inspiration for working on clean energy. The indigenous saying “we do not inherit the planet from our parents; we borrow it from our children,” resonates strongly with me. I think it is our responsibility to pass on a healthy planet to the next generation. That’s why I bike, take rapid transit 20 miles to pick up Melia from school, and campaign for Community Choice Energy- a promising new model in the energy sector.
With Community Choice Energy, cities and counties contract with a licensed energy service provider to purchase energy in bulk, build renewable energy generating facilities, and implement energy efficiency programs. This efficient public/private partnership makes it possible to get the greenest energy at the best rates. Each consumer is enrolled in the program unless they “opt out.” In other words, consumers can choose to buy electricity through the community Choice program or stay with the investor-owned utility. The city or county keeps prices competitive—and affordable for low-income residents— while investing in renewable energy generation and energy efficiency with full citizen oversight. The utility company continues to handle transmission and billing.
Community Choice Energy is working already in Massachusetts, Ohio, and California to deliver cleaner, more affordable power than investor owned utilities. But it may get killed in California by ballot initiative Proposition 16 (Prop 16) in the upcoming June elections.
PROP 16 SIMPLIFIED* from No on Prop16 Films on Vimeo.
The Trouble With Prop 16
California’s largest utility, PG&E, is the sole financier of Prop 16. Prop 16 will more or less enshrine their monopoly in the California Constitution. It reduces consumer choice by making Community Choice Energy programs nearly impossible to start, and could lock Californians into high rates for the foreseeable future. PG&E says Prop 16 protects communities, but this is clearly about protecting profits at the expense of communities.
PG&E often presents itself as on its way to becoming the greenest utility, if not already there. They point out that they were named the greenest utility in Newsweek’s Green Rankings 2009. But they are not even close to being the greenest utility. Many of the public utilities in Northern California have not only greener power but also lower prices. These include Palo Alto Utilities with the most successful 100% green power option, Sacramento Municipal Utility District with 19% renewable power, and Alameda Municipal Utility which also claims to be the greenest utility with most of its power coming from renewable sources.
In contrast, only 14% of power delivered by PG&E in 2009 was derived from renewable sources in 2009, up only slightly from 12% in 2003. Investor owned utilities are mandated by the 2002 Renewable Portfolio Standard to be at 20% renewable power by 2010. PG&E has already said that they will not make the 20% target for 2010.
Meanwhile, nascent Community Choice Energy programs across the state are signaling their intent to pursue 50% renewable power by 2017 and to generate significant amounts of electricity locally, which creates clean energy jobs for residents. For instance, Marin and San Francisco counties are moving forward with Community Choice Energy despite withering and possibly illegal opposition from PG&E.
Prop 16 will make it nearly impossible for new municipal electric companies or Community Choice Energy programs to come into existence. It will amend the California Constitution so that it will require an extraordinarily high two-thirds vote of citizens to expand municipal electric companies (like those in Alameda or Sacramento) or to start Community Choice Energy programs. The two-thirds requirement means there has to be twice as many Yes voters than No voters. Getting a Yes vote on a ballot initiative is very difficult in California. And getting a Yes vote will be virtually impossible with PG&E spending millions in opposition.
By killing honest competition from municipal utilities and Community Choice Energy programs, PG&E will have a free hand to raise rates and slow the adoption of clean energy produced in California.
And this is not exactly a fair fight. PG&E’s board authorized the company to spend $35 million to get Prop 16 passed. In contrast, public electricity companies, like those in Marin and Alameda, are prohibited by law from spending any money on advocacy.
If Prop 16 passes, there will likely never be another Community Choice program in California. Here are two easy ways for you to help defeat Prop 16:
Can you possibly help make calls from your own phone, on your own time, to key voters in California? As we count down the days to June 8th, getting the truth about 16 out to voters, especially those in Southern California, is critical. The big money ad blitz from PG&E there is intense. But the single most effective method of winning campaigns is proven to be personal voter-to-voter contact, whether that’s canvassing door-to-door or making phone calls. Sign up here and you’ll get an email inviting you to phone bank. We provide a suggested script and voter lists, and encourage you and anyone you know to carve out some dedicated time between now and June 8th to make contact, make the difference. Questions? Email megan@themmob.org.
Spread the word about Prop 16 and PG&E’s deceptive media campaign- Please visit http://www.noprop16films.org and share the videos with friends in California and elsewhere. Help give Community Choice a chance to grow. A clean energy future might depend on it and for Melia and all of our children, we must come together and say No to PG&E!
David Room is co-founder of Bay Localize and coordinates the Local Clean Energy Alliance.
