Argus-Courier Editorial: Choice ahead on power service?

In two months, the council is expected to have all the necessary data to answer its questions and finally make a decision.|

When the Petaluma City Council decided last year to postpone a decision on whether or not to join Sonoma Clean Power, the publicly-owned agency that aims to provide a greener alternative to PG&E, council members said they wanted more information on things like rates and exactly how the new entity planned to deliver on its promise of producing locally generated renewable energy.

In two months, the council is expected to have all the necessary data to answer its questions and finally make a decision. Since doing so could save money for local residents and businesses, further delay is not an option.

As envisioned, Sonoma Clean Power is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by having more local control over renewable power generation. The County of Sonoma, together with all cities in the county, except Petaluma and Rohnert Park, are part of a joint powers agency that is automatically signing up residents who have the option to opt out of the program and stay with PG&E if they choose. This practice is in accordance with state law encouraging the creation of public power agencies.

Preliminary reports show that participating residential home owners and commercial businesses in Sonoma County are getting their power from greener sources. More importantly, those same residents and businesses appear to be saving money in the process.

Sonoma Clean Power officials say they are providing a larger supply of renewable power sources (33 percent vs. 22 percent) than PG&E, thus reducing the county’s carbon footprint by using more geothermal, biomass and wind energy than their privately-owned competitor. The agency is also offering an “Evergreen” pricing tier which, though pricier than the standard PG&E rates, offers energy drawn from 100 percent renewable sources.

At the same time, according to preliminary comparisons of average billing rates, Sonoma Clean Power’s residential users have begun saving $4 to $5 per month as compared to PG&E rates, while commercial businesses are saving nearly $20 per month.

Petaluma city officials say that more analysis is needed before committing to the new program, and have asked staff to prepare an analysis of the costs, benefits and risks associated with joining Sonoma Clean Power. A staff report is expected to be completed by November, allowing the city two to three months to make a decision in advance of a January 2015 deadline that enables the city to avoid paying an $85,000 administrative fee for participating. Should the city decide to participate by January, service to customers in Petaluma would begin in July.

It seems like a reasonable process, and one that all council members should be committed to completing in a timely fashion.

When Sonoma Clean Power was getting off the ground 18 months ago, we could understand the city council’s desire for more information before committing the city to participate. But now, with a lengthy report nearly at hand that will provide extensive information on how the program is operating in neighboring cities, it would be best for all council members to keep an open mind to the prospect of giving constituents a choice on where to purchase their power and how much they pay for it.

When the Petaluma City Council decided last year to postpone a decision on whether or not to join Sonoma Clean Power, the publicly-owned agency that aims to provide a greener alternative to PG&E, council members said they wanted more information on things like rates and exactly how the new entity planned to deliver on its promise of producing locally generated renewable energy. In two months, the council is expected to have all the necessary data to answer its questions and finally make a decision. Since doing so could save money for local residents and businesses, further delay is not an option.

As envisioned, Sonoma Clean Power is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by having more local control over renewable power generation. The County of Sonoma, together with all cities in the county, except Petaluma and Rohnert Park, are part of a joint powers agency that is automatically signing up residents who have the option to opt out of the program and stay with PG&E if they choose. This practice is in accordance with state law encouraging the creation of public power agencies.

Preliminary reports show that participating residential home owners and commercial businesses in Sonoma County are getting their power from greener sources. More importantly, those same residents and businesses appear to be saving money in the process.

Sonoma Clean Power officials say they are providing a larger supply of renewable power sources (33 percent vs. 22 percent) than PG&E, thus reducing the county’s carbon footprint by using more geothermal, biomass and wind energy than their privately-owned competitor. The agency is also offering an “Evergreen” pricing tier which, though pricier than the standard PG&E rates, offers energy drawn from 100 percent renewable sources.

At the same time, according to preliminary comparisons of average billing rates, Sonoma Clean Power’s residential users have begun saving $4 to $5 per month as compared to PG&E rates, while commercial businesses are saving nearly $20 per month.

Petaluma city officials say that more analysis is needed before committing to the new program, and have asked staff to prepare an analysis of the costs, benefits and risks associated with joining Sonoma Clean Power. Staff’s report is expected to be completed by November, allowing the city two to three months to make a decision in advance of a January, 2015 deadline that enables the city to avoid paying an $85,000 administrative fee for participating. Should the city decide to participate by January, service to customers in Petaluma would begin in July.

It seems like a reasonable process, and one that all council members should be committed to completing in a timely fashion.

When Sonoma Clean Power was getting off the ground 18 months ago, we could understand the city council’s desire for more information before committing the city to participate. But now, with a lengthy report nearly at hand that will provide extensive information on how the program is operating in neighboring cities, it would be best for all council members to keep an open mind to the prospect of giving constituents a choice on where to purchase their power and how much they pay for it.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.