Senate Bill 618 - Another try to kill Community Choice
In 2014, SDED and Community Choice advocates statewide banded together for a big fight. A former utility employee now legislator introduced a bill intended to kill Choice programs, by removing their core Opt-Out provision. The battle was epic but successful.
In 2017, that same Senator Steven Bradford is at it again. His SB 618 intends to tie the hands of Community Choice programs by forcing them to get CPUC approval for local clean energy procurement plans. This requirement is duplicative and unnecessary --locally elected officials carry responsibility for operations of the Choice program; they are and should remain directly accountable to their voters for management and programmatic decisions.
The CA Alliance for Community Energy (CACE) goes further. SB 618 is intended to harm Choice programs, CACE argues, by placing this planning approval in an agency that "has demonstrated strong bias favoring monopoly utilities against Community Choice". CACE supports this argument with their position paper "CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice", here.
Join SDED and CACE in voicing opposition to SB 618. For details on how to help, click here.
In 2017, that same Senator Steven Bradford is at it again. His SB 618 intends to tie the hands of Community Choice programs by forcing them to get CPUC approval for local clean energy procurement plans. This requirement is duplicative and unnecessary --locally elected officials carry responsibility for operations of the Choice program; they are and should remain directly accountable to their voters for management and programmatic decisions.
The CA Alliance for Community Energy (CACE) goes further. SB 618 is intended to harm Choice programs, CACE argues, by placing this planning approval in an agency that "has demonstrated strong bias favoring monopoly utilities against Community Choice". CACE supports this argument with their position paper "CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice", here.
Join SDED and CACE in voicing opposition to SB 618. For details on how to help, click here.
March 27, 2017
The Honorable Ben Hueso, Chair
Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
State Capitol, Room 4035
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SB 618—OPPOSE
Dear Senator Hueso,
The California Alliance for Community Energy writes to oppose SB 618 (Bradford).
The Alliance is a statewide coalition of organizations, initiatives, and individuals that supports and defends Community Choice energy programs in California that advance local clean energy for the environmental and economic benefit of our communities.
SB 618 requires that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approve the integrated resource plans of Community Choice energy programs—how they plan to integrate different local renewable energy resources and remote procurement to meet anticipated customer demand.
SB 618 was introduced by Sen. Steven Bradford, a former Southern Cal Edison executive and author of AB 2145—a failed 2014 bill that would have killed Community Choice programs in California. There is little doubt that Senator Bradford’s intent behind SB 618 is to tie the hands of Community Choice programs by putting approval of their integrated resource plans in an agency hostile to Community Choice (see the attached document: “CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice”).
SB 618 contravenes the intent of AB 117, the Community Choice Aggregation law, passed in 2002 and threatens to undermine Community Choice energy programs in California.
Community Choice energy programs were made possible by AB 117 to provide reliable, clean and affordable power while addressing the local needs of their communities. They are public, not-for--profit agencies that are formed to respond to and invest in the needs of their communities. They are established by local governments to advance local policy priorities including developing local renewable energy resources (both new generation, demand reduction, and storage), providing less expensive and greener energy, stimulating local business growth and job creation, advancing equity and increasing community resilience, all while exercising local control over energy procurement.
As intended by AB 117, Community Choice agencies are governed and operated by boards consisting of local elected officials who are directly accountable to their ratepayers and voters. As public programs, Community Choice agencies were not intended to be regulated by the CPUC, just as the state’s public municipal utility programs are exempt from CPUC regulation. Rather, the CPUC was set up to regulate the monopoly utilities, the for-profit investor-owned utilities (IOUs), which strive to maximize profits for their shareholders—a goal often at odds with the public interest.
Under current state law the CPUC is charged only with certifying that the implementation and integrated resource plans of Community Choice programs are consistent with State law regarding RPS, Greenhouse Gas reductions, Resource Adequacy, and other broad statutory mandates. SB 618, however, vests the CPUC with new authority to approve or disapprove a Community Choice program’s integrated resource plan beyond such state compliance. This unduly interferes with the ability of Community Choice programs to locally control electricity procurement and to be accountable to their local communities.
Municipal utilities and other local agencies engaged in power planning and management of water, waste, sewer and other resources successfully conduct integrated planning without needing intervention from a state agency like the CPUC, which is already overstressed, overworked, and unable to properly regulate the private monopoly utilities in the public interest.
Moreover, we note that the CPUC has become increasingly prejudicial in its attitude and actions against Community Choice energy programs, as documented in the attached document: “CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice”).
State law (AB 117 and subsequent law) requires that the CPUC not only support Community Choice programs, but enforce utility cooperation with such programs. Yet, as the attached document demonstrates, CPUC bias has consistently shored up the investor-owned monopoly utilities against Community Choice competition. Nevertheless, there is growing movement toward Community Choice by counties and cities throughout the state. It is estimated that as many as 60 percent of utility customers could depart to Community Choice programs during the next five years,1
For the above reasons, we find SB 618 not only contrary to the intent of existing Community Choice law, but an effort to undermine Community Choice as the most powerful tool cities and counties have to cut greenhouse gas emissions, scale up renewable energy, and meet community needs regarding energy services.
Sincerely,
Al Weinrub, Coordinator, California Alliance for Community Energy
Cc: Members of the Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee*
Jay Dickinson, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
Nidia Bautista, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
Kerry Yoshida, Republican, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
1 “Meet the latest disruption for utilities: community power,” EnergyWire, June 9, 2016, http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060038517 .
The Honorable Ben Hueso, Chair
Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
State Capitol, Room 4035
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SB 618—OPPOSE
Dear Senator Hueso,
The California Alliance for Community Energy writes to oppose SB 618 (Bradford).
The Alliance is a statewide coalition of organizations, initiatives, and individuals that supports and defends Community Choice energy programs in California that advance local clean energy for the environmental and economic benefit of our communities.
SB 618 requires that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approve the integrated resource plans of Community Choice energy programs—how they plan to integrate different local renewable energy resources and remote procurement to meet anticipated customer demand.
SB 618 was introduced by Sen. Steven Bradford, a former Southern Cal Edison executive and author of AB 2145—a failed 2014 bill that would have killed Community Choice programs in California. There is little doubt that Senator Bradford’s intent behind SB 618 is to tie the hands of Community Choice programs by putting approval of their integrated resource plans in an agency hostile to Community Choice (see the attached document: “CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice”).
SB 618 contravenes the intent of AB 117, the Community Choice Aggregation law, passed in 2002 and threatens to undermine Community Choice energy programs in California.
Community Choice energy programs were made possible by AB 117 to provide reliable, clean and affordable power while addressing the local needs of their communities. They are public, not-for--profit agencies that are formed to respond to and invest in the needs of their communities. They are established by local governments to advance local policy priorities including developing local renewable energy resources (both new generation, demand reduction, and storage), providing less expensive and greener energy, stimulating local business growth and job creation, advancing equity and increasing community resilience, all while exercising local control over energy procurement.
As intended by AB 117, Community Choice agencies are governed and operated by boards consisting of local elected officials who are directly accountable to their ratepayers and voters. As public programs, Community Choice agencies were not intended to be regulated by the CPUC, just as the state’s public municipal utility programs are exempt from CPUC regulation. Rather, the CPUC was set up to regulate the monopoly utilities, the for-profit investor-owned utilities (IOUs), which strive to maximize profits for their shareholders—a goal often at odds with the public interest.
Under current state law the CPUC is charged only with certifying that the implementation and integrated resource plans of Community Choice programs are consistent with State law regarding RPS, Greenhouse Gas reductions, Resource Adequacy, and other broad statutory mandates. SB 618, however, vests the CPUC with new authority to approve or disapprove a Community Choice program’s integrated resource plan beyond such state compliance. This unduly interferes with the ability of Community Choice programs to locally control electricity procurement and to be accountable to their local communities.
Municipal utilities and other local agencies engaged in power planning and management of water, waste, sewer and other resources successfully conduct integrated planning without needing intervention from a state agency like the CPUC, which is already overstressed, overworked, and unable to properly regulate the private monopoly utilities in the public interest.
Moreover, we note that the CPUC has become increasingly prejudicial in its attitude and actions against Community Choice energy programs, as documented in the attached document: “CPUC Bias Favoring Monopoly Utilities Against Community Choice”).
State law (AB 117 and subsequent law) requires that the CPUC not only support Community Choice programs, but enforce utility cooperation with such programs. Yet, as the attached document demonstrates, CPUC bias has consistently shored up the investor-owned monopoly utilities against Community Choice competition. Nevertheless, there is growing movement toward Community Choice by counties and cities throughout the state. It is estimated that as many as 60 percent of utility customers could depart to Community Choice programs during the next five years,1
For the above reasons, we find SB 618 not only contrary to the intent of existing Community Choice law, but an effort to undermine Community Choice as the most powerful tool cities and counties have to cut greenhouse gas emissions, scale up renewable energy, and meet community needs regarding energy services.
Sincerely,
Al Weinrub, Coordinator, California Alliance for Community Energy
Cc: Members of the Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee*
Jay Dickinson, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
Nidia Bautista, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
Kerry Yoshida, Republican, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee
1 “Meet the latest disruption for utilities: community power,” EnergyWire, June 9, 2016, http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060038517 .