Dear Friends:
Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is a bad choice for residents and consumers.
Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity.
Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity because of mandated
renewable energy, solar and wind, must be used in the production of electricity.
Renewable energy is taxpayer subsidized; once the subsidy is gone, electricity rates
will go up.
Community Choice Aggregation is a new program that allows California city
governments to operate “communitywide electricity buyers’ programs.” Commonly
known as community choice aggregators, or CCAs, these are new government
agencies created by Joint Powers Agreement among several cities. Additionally,
individual cities may run their own CCA programs.
Our local utility company, Edison, will still provide transmission, distribution and
customer billing services to the CCA agency for a fee that is passed along to
consumers.
Once our city council decides to join or establish a CCA, all residents are
automatically enrolled in the program. It will be up to individual residents to “opt
out” and continue with their regular service with Edison.
CCAs are vulnerable to changing market conditions. Energy procurement is risky,
complex, costly and long-term. Because withdrawal from CCA membership is costprohibitive,
our city’s decision to join binds future City Councils and future
generations of taxpayers.
CCAs operate without adequate oversight, virtually invisible to the public. Creating
Joint Powers Agencies (JPAs), such as CCAs, costs taxpayers money. JPAs employ
staff, set up offices and, most importantly, make decisions -- such as issue debt --
for which taxpayers are responsible but have no knowledge or say. JPA governing
board members are not directly elected by voters, which contributes to their
relative obscurity and lack of transparency.
Does the nominal increase in renewable energy use promised by CCAs justify their
risks? Unequivocally, no.
Local government doesn’t belong in the electricity business. It is reckless for
government to gamble on risky ventures for which it is ill-prepared and
unqualified. “Green” energy companies, consultants, activists and lobbyists all
stand to gain politically and financially from the proliferation of CCAs. Public
agencies rely on some of these same sources for advice on CCAs -- a clear conflict of
interest.
Today’s cities and counties struggle to provide essential services, including basic
public safety and human services. Throwing precious tax dollars into a CCA money
pit won’t help the environment, but will burden future generations with additional
unwanted debt.
Take Action Now:
The city of Hermosa Beach is scheduled to introduce the government electricity
ordinance exploring options to form a CCA at the August 23 meeting.
Please see this 3 minute video of the previous Hermosa Beach Mayor, whose
professional background is in business finance, explain how the new CCA energy
plan will likely deceive residents into unknowingly sign up for “clean” energy.
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0pPzFVzWO0
You can read the proposed program here and watch the video of the last council
meeting discussion from July 26, 2016 here. (Time stamp 3:46:00).
Submit your comments to the city clerk before noon on Monday, August 15,
2016 to be included in the City Council regularly printed agenda for the meeting on
Tuesday August 23, 2016. Later submissions will be included in the online agenda
up to the afternoon of the 23rd.
Send e-mail comments to [email protected]
Group email for the City Council: [email protected]
Here are some suggested comments that you can use. Additional letters submitted
to council are here under Attachments. Please feel free to put them into your own
words:
1. Please be aware of the issues that have surfaced since; per the (past)
Mayor of Hermosa Beach:
• Once residents agree to be part of the CCA plan for Electricity, they can not back
out. It is permanent.
• The introductory costs (on their SCE bill) are based on temporary credits, so
the real costs will be later and are permanent increases.
• It is based on the cost of clean energy, which has never been lower than fossil
fuels.
The most significant ramifications are:
• this permanent subsidy to "clean" manufactures eliminates any incentive for
them to make clean efficient
• there is no limit to the amount of increases you would be subjecting your
residents to
• there is a lack of accountability as to whether it is really "clean" and how much;
huge exposure for fraud
As someone who cares passionately about the environment, I think we can do a much
better job through innovation and integrity.
I will share this information with others as well. DM
2. Hermosa Beach City Manager Tom Bakaly said during last week’s city council
meeting discussion on Community Choice Aggregation that we need to hurry up and
push this thing through in order to meet the city’s carbon neutrality goals. What he
didn’t suggest was for our city government to be practical or fiscally responsible. Do we
really want to dive into something that our city government knows little about and the
residents know even less about? Bakaly also said that this Community Choice
Aggregation program gives residents a choice to purchase renewable energy at a lower
rate than they could purchase from Edison. I did my own research on this and found
that in all four of the current California cities listed on the city’s deceptive marketing
piece that purchasing renewable power is more expensive than the standard bundle of
power residents are currently paying with Edison. If this program is implemented, all
residents will be automatically enrolled in the program, unless they make the effort to
opt out. Where is this “choice” Bakaly speaks of? If there is really a choice, then why is
the option not to opt IN instead of opting out? Very few residents have any idea what
this Community “Choice” Aggregation nonsense is. If this program is as financially
disastrous here in Hermosa as it is in Lancaster, we will all be paying for it, even those
who were wise enough to opt out. Tell your Hermosa Beach city council members to
say No to CCA. LA
3. From the postcard I just received, it might as well have said “City Council will
adopt Community Choice Aggregation on July 26…” rather than “consider”. With all
the misleading information on the back of this mailer, it would appear that CCA will be
moving ahead regardless.
I reviewed all the websites for the cherry picked “Current CCA programs in California”
and they all say the same thing: “greener energy at lower rates”. And then they proceed
to show a cost comparison that proves the exact opposite! The bottom line of the bill is
what counts, not just one of five or six lines of charges. Classic double speak.
Conveniently left off the mailer were all the failed CCAs, the startup and ongoing
expenses, and financial risk to the city at a time when we have other more pressing
basic functions to provide, not to mention debt service. How anyone can expect to
reduce costs by adding a board of directors, salaries, pensions and associated costs to a
system is beyond comprehension. This is such a common sense no-go it should not
even be on your agenda for consideration. This is why your meetings go to 1:00am.
You should direct the City Manager to stop padding your agenda with such nonstarters.
I was under the impression that you had adopted priority based budgeting. Either that
is not the case, staff doesn‘t know what that means, or you need a readjustment of
priorities. WB
Tracy Hopkins
Advocates for Hermosa Beach
JOIN By Liking No CCA in HB on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NoCCAinHB/
Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is a bad choice for residents and consumers.
Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity.
Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity because of mandated
renewable energy, solar and wind, must be used in the production of electricity.
Renewable energy is taxpayer subsidized; once the subsidy is gone, electricity rates
will go up.
Community Choice Aggregation is a new program that allows California city
governments to operate “communitywide electricity buyers’ programs.” Commonly
known as community choice aggregators, or CCAs, these are new government
agencies created by Joint Powers Agreement among several cities. Additionally,
individual cities may run their own CCA programs.
Our local utility company, Edison, will still provide transmission, distribution and
customer billing services to the CCA agency for a fee that is passed along to
consumers.
Once our city council decides to join or establish a CCA, all residents are
automatically enrolled in the program. It will be up to individual residents to “opt
out” and continue with their regular service with Edison.
CCAs are vulnerable to changing market conditions. Energy procurement is risky,
complex, costly and long-term. Because withdrawal from CCA membership is costprohibitive,
our city’s decision to join binds future City Councils and future
generations of taxpayers.
CCAs operate without adequate oversight, virtually invisible to the public. Creating
Joint Powers Agencies (JPAs), such as CCAs, costs taxpayers money. JPAs employ
staff, set up offices and, most importantly, make decisions -- such as issue debt --
for which taxpayers are responsible but have no knowledge or say. JPA governing
board members are not directly elected by voters, which contributes to their
relative obscurity and lack of transparency.
Does the nominal increase in renewable energy use promised by CCAs justify their
risks? Unequivocally, no.
Local government doesn’t belong in the electricity business. It is reckless for
government to gamble on risky ventures for which it is ill-prepared and
unqualified. “Green” energy companies, consultants, activists and lobbyists all
stand to gain politically and financially from the proliferation of CCAs. Public
agencies rely on some of these same sources for advice on CCAs -- a clear conflict of
interest.
Today’s cities and counties struggle to provide essential services, including basic
public safety and human services. Throwing precious tax dollars into a CCA money
pit won’t help the environment, but will burden future generations with additional
unwanted debt.
Take Action Now:
The city of Hermosa Beach is scheduled to introduce the government electricity
ordinance exploring options to form a CCA at the August 23 meeting.
Please see this 3 minute video of the previous Hermosa Beach Mayor, whose
professional background is in business finance, explain how the new CCA energy
plan will likely deceive residents into unknowingly sign up for “clean” energy.
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0pPzFVzWO0
You can read the proposed program here and watch the video of the last council
meeting discussion from July 26, 2016 here. (Time stamp 3:46:00).
Submit your comments to the city clerk before noon on Monday, August 15,
2016 to be included in the City Council regularly printed agenda for the meeting on
Tuesday August 23, 2016. Later submissions will be included in the online agenda
up to the afternoon of the 23rd.
Send e-mail comments to [email protected]
Group email for the City Council: [email protected]
Here are some suggested comments that you can use. Additional letters submitted
to council are here under Attachments. Please feel free to put them into your own
words:
1. Please be aware of the issues that have surfaced since; per the (past)
Mayor of Hermosa Beach:
• Once residents agree to be part of the CCA plan for Electricity, they can not back
out. It is permanent.
• The introductory costs (on their SCE bill) are based on temporary credits, so
the real costs will be later and are permanent increases.
• It is based on the cost of clean energy, which has never been lower than fossil
fuels.
The most significant ramifications are:
• this permanent subsidy to "clean" manufactures eliminates any incentive for
them to make clean efficient
• there is no limit to the amount of increases you would be subjecting your
residents to
• there is a lack of accountability as to whether it is really "clean" and how much;
huge exposure for fraud
As someone who cares passionately about the environment, I think we can do a much
better job through innovation and integrity.
I will share this information with others as well. DM
2. Hermosa Beach City Manager Tom Bakaly said during last week’s city council
meeting discussion on Community Choice Aggregation that we need to hurry up and
push this thing through in order to meet the city’s carbon neutrality goals. What he
didn’t suggest was for our city government to be practical or fiscally responsible. Do we
really want to dive into something that our city government knows little about and the
residents know even less about? Bakaly also said that this Community Choice
Aggregation program gives residents a choice to purchase renewable energy at a lower
rate than they could purchase from Edison. I did my own research on this and found
that in all four of the current California cities listed on the city’s deceptive marketing
piece that purchasing renewable power is more expensive than the standard bundle of
power residents are currently paying with Edison. If this program is implemented, all
residents will be automatically enrolled in the program, unless they make the effort to
opt out. Where is this “choice” Bakaly speaks of? If there is really a choice, then why is
the option not to opt IN instead of opting out? Very few residents have any idea what
this Community “Choice” Aggregation nonsense is. If this program is as financially
disastrous here in Hermosa as it is in Lancaster, we will all be paying for it, even those
who were wise enough to opt out. Tell your Hermosa Beach city council members to
say No to CCA. LA
3. From the postcard I just received, it might as well have said “City Council will
adopt Community Choice Aggregation on July 26…” rather than “consider”. With all
the misleading information on the back of this mailer, it would appear that CCA will be
moving ahead regardless.
I reviewed all the websites for the cherry picked “Current CCA programs in California”
and they all say the same thing: “greener energy at lower rates”. And then they proceed
to show a cost comparison that proves the exact opposite! The bottom line of the bill is
what counts, not just one of five or six lines of charges. Classic double speak.
Conveniently left off the mailer were all the failed CCAs, the startup and ongoing
expenses, and financial risk to the city at a time when we have other more pressing
basic functions to provide, not to mention debt service. How anyone can expect to
reduce costs by adding a board of directors, salaries, pensions and associated costs to a
system is beyond comprehension. This is such a common sense no-go it should not
even be on your agenda for consideration. This is why your meetings go to 1:00am.
You should direct the City Manager to stop padding your agenda with such nonstarters.
I was under the impression that you had adopted priority based budgeting. Either that
is not the case, staff doesn‘t know what that means, or you need a readjustment of
priorities. WB
Tracy Hopkins
Advocates for Hermosa Beach
JOIN By Liking No CCA in HB on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NoCCAinHB/
RSS Feed
