Petaluma Mayor Dave Glass says the city should take a little more time to study whether it wants to join Sonoma Clean Power, the initiative that would offer ratepayers a choice about where to purchase their energy.
Sonoma Clean Power administrators want Petaluma to vote on the issue by June 30 and pass a resolution by the end of July. But Glass and several other Petaluma council members say they want to carefully weigh the advantages of joining Sonoma Clean Power, and that delaying joining would have absolutely no impact on the program or lowering greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).
“There is absolutely no damage to the environment and no reduction of GHG emissions by taking a little more time with this decision since there are only 90,000 hookups offered in the first phase,” Glass said.
Unincorporated parts of Sonoma County and the town of Windsor have already voted to join the initiative, under which the county would partner with an energy provider that utilizes more alternative sources of energy. A similar effort already exists in Marin County, although about 20 percent of residents opt out.
On Wednesday, Glass sent an email to Supervisor Shirlee Zane taking her to task for saying that Petaluma was “quibbling” over the decision.
“We are not quibbling over one to three percent on energy rates,” Glass wrote, adding that the county was sounding like a time-share salesman with their “high-pressure tactics.”
“We are in the process of conducting due diligence with the goal of making the right decision for the environment, the rate payers, and the long term viability of whatever choice it is we make on behalf of our constituents.”
Glass also went on to say that while Marin Clean Power rejected Sonoma County’s offer of merging, it’s possible they would be allow Petaluma to join the program.
See Mayor Glass’s full letter below.
Dear Shirlee, I write today to clarify any misunderstanding you may have regarding the concerns of Petaluma regarding SCP.
We are not quibbling over one to three percent on energy rates. We are in the process of conducting due diligence with the goal of making the right decision for the environment, the rate payers, and the long term viability of whatever choice it is we make on behalf of our constituents.
The impacts of taking the time to make the right choice will in fact have no effect or negative impact on the amount of GHG emission reduction that is achieved. It may very well prove to have a significant positive impact.
As the county has already committed to go forward and is fully capable of consuming the entire capability of hook ups in the first phase that assures that the environment will receive whatever benefits, if any, SCP will provide over other available choices.
It is prudent for Petaluma to proceed in the manner the city council unanimously consented to. In exploring our other viable options we may find that GHG emissions will be reduced sooner and in a more significant manner if we were to go a different path. The idea that studying these options is somehow "quibbling" reduces this important process to high pressure sales techniques that are often identified with the sale of a Time Share.
At the end of a brief but through process it may very well be determined that SCP is the best choice. If we come to that conclusion after exhausting the other viable choices it will lead to a consensus in our community that will enable our rate payers to feel more comfortable with the decision and less likely to opt out of the choice at that time. It is proper to ask questions, even the difficult ones for staff and advocates to answer. Such questions actually give the proponents an opportunity to strengthen their case.
The JPA is structured in such a way as to give veto power to the County and Santa Rosa should they decide to align to exercise that power. In light of that I find it to be a small sacrifice not to jump into this in haste just to have a less than equal voice in SCP's JPA. I can understand why the largest entities would want it set up in such a manner.
We recently were asked to rework the JPA at the Library. I would suggest this JPA formula repeats the flaws of the current Library JPA which is being reviewed to make it more fair to all of its members. The use of REC's makes it more difficult to ascertain if the environment is going to be helped or harmed by moving forward with this proposal. I understand the theoretical benefit's of REC's. I
want to know more about the ramifications to the environment and the rate payers when the REC's are actually utilized. The skeptics make a strong case the use of REC's may very well damage the environment greatly. In the medical profession the concept of do no harm is often the guidelines. We need to make sure this program does no harm.
Much has been said about the need to provide the rate payer a choice. It is also reasonable for Petaluma to pursue its options and find out what choices Petaluma has available. It is entirely possible we would be welcomed into the Marin program. It is my understanding the county pursued this option and was rejected by Marin. It is possible Marin could be open to a smaller jurisdiction joining their program.
As you know they have now incorporated Richmond into their operation. Choice is important. We need to know what the menu of choices are for Petaluma. After reviewing whatever options we may have we may very well determine SCP is the right choice.
I remain committed to seeking the very best opportunity for our community. We will accomplish this in a very short period of time. And the time we take will have absolutely no negative impact on GHG emissions due to the low number of hookups SCP can initially accommodate. As we all know the benefits and the harm to the environment does not stop at the county line.
These very points are many of the reasons Sonoma County Conservation Action and other very strong environmental advocates are urging a comprehensive well thought out approach. It is also true that our Chamber of Commerce in representing the local business community is urging the same approach.
The right decision will be made in due time. I am sure you feel you made the right decision for the county. That decision by the county buys us all time to make sure we make the right decision for the environment that will have the added benefit of being the right decision for our constituents. To be successful in Petaluma we need the environmental community and the business community united in our ultimate decision.
Some in both factions are ready to move forward, many are not. It is much better for all concerned to get more of a consensus before taking action on this issue. That consensus will be achieved by coming to a complete understanding of the choices available to our community.
Sincerely, David Glass Mayor City of Petaluma
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.
