When even Rasmussen says Perry only has a "small lead" over Bill White (the latest is 49-41), it makes you wonder how the race really stands, doesn't it? From their latest poll:
Neither major party candidate appears to be gaining any ground in Texas' gubernatorial race, with Republican incumbent Rick Perry still holding a small lead.
[...]
Despite the perceived differences in ideology, 51% of voters in the state describe Perry’s political views as mainstream, and 52% say the same of White's views. Thirty-three percent (33%) brand Perry's views as extreme, and 29% think White's are extreme.
Here's an update on all the public polls in the race. As you can see, the average remains unchanged -- though, you have to remember that the average is dominated by Rasmussen, an outfit that has shown to set the narratives for races by favoring Republicans in its polls only for the gaps to somehow always narrow just before election day.
The race is absolutely competitive. I'm looking forward to the next 71 days...
Austin's Electric Utility Commission (EUC) conducted its first hearing Monday night regarding complaints about Austin Energy's transparency policies. The hearing was an exciting progression of comments from traditionally fragmented and even competing segments of the Austin community. See pt. 1 of this post, "background" http://burntorangereport.com/d...
Here are some paraphrased quotes from the hearing:
Mike Sloan, clean energy advocate (citizen)
http://powersmack.org/mike-slo... Mike gave a great, 7 minute, PPT to kick off the hearing.* A few excerpts:
> 1983 last time Austinites voted on major expenditures
> 1996 transparency problems began
> 2005 renewal of Austin Energy's "limited disclosure" policy (no sunset)
> Today, city council delegates the responsibility of interpreting and determining Austin Energy's info to Austin Energy (AE)
> Recently, AE has made a number of investments that appear too expensive (purchased way above market value)
Recommends:
- Better transparency = a better utility
Carol B, low income advocate (texasrose.org)
http://www.texasrose.org/About... > Appreciates current situation and good efforts at AE, but thinks we can do better
> "Transparency puts a downward pressure on costs" (bills)
> Primary concern is affordability
Recommends:
- AE be transparent about where costs are coming from; provide at least as much info as other utilities regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Dr. Tony Capraro, affordable carbon reduction advocate (citizen)
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/di... > What info should be available? What shouldn't be available?
> Innovative companies share info to promote new idea growth / competitive edge
> More info that can be shared, the less suspect the unknown feels to outsiders
> Is AE too tight on "competitive matters?"
- Austin is blessed with people who donate their time to reviewing community impact info
Recommends:
- EUC consider positive sides of accessibility to information
Roger Wood, big employer advocate (ccareaustin.org)
http://www.zoominfo.com/Search... > re: AE's BioMass power purchase agreement -- the decision was made without proper time and information regarding costs, to allow for public input
> As a general rule, believes citizens should always know (on major purchases):
- what is AE's plan?
- what does AE think costs will be?
- subsequently, how is the investment performing?
> Currently, customers are kept in the dark
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission requires public disclosure via a 200 to 300 pg annual report (per utility). AE 2009 annual report shows 5 pgs.
> Protocol/Consistency/Sloppiness... from May 2009 to Nov 2010, Roger sat on the task force to review AE's electricity generation plan (for this decade). The task force was given info that was supposed to be protected, yet is still has been unable to get info that's not supposed to be protected.
Recommends:
- the EUC go thru AE's "Competitive Matters Resolution" and review each item, line by line, to remedy today's problems
Andy Wilson, environmental advocate (publiccitizen.org)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... > Information is like oxygen
> We cannot make rational decisions without proper info
> We need to think about a future perfect state ... Andy imagines a utility that makes info access effortless, e.g. - an iPhone type apps that someday notifies you, "lower your thermostat 2 degrees right now to save $x & xCO2"
> Customers can make all decisions as long as info is given
Recommends:
- We should protect customer privacy, but otherwise AE's presumption should always be full disclosure rather than nondisclosure
Paul Robbins, environmental advocate (citizen)
http://www.austinchronicle.com... > We need a total revamp; secrecy has become a catch all guard, for secrecy sake
> Today, the public's right to challenge the institution is constricted in many ways ...
- in the 80's, citizens used publicly available data to demonstrate the faster payback of various green programs
- today, citizens can't get that data
> Austin Energy has not been in a competitive retail market since 1897, when it began
> In 2000, Paul was able to publish an Energy History for Austin in his magazine; can't get the info to do that today
Recommends:
- Consumption of specific buildings, made public
- Aggregate data by class / by month, made public
- Expired contracts more than 1 year old, made public
- Cost of power by power type, made public
- Customer lists (for those who have authorized sharing their info) in green choice program, made public
##
And then the EUC commissioners responded:
Philip Schmandt, EUC chairman (lawyer)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/phi... > Believes Transparency is good
> Encourages AE staff to consider the intangible benefits
> Concerned that some transparency might lead vendors to higher price negotiation with AE in the future (increase prices)
Bernie Bernfield, (mortgage specialist) http://www.linkedin.com/in/gar... > Sees Transparency as a valuable tool for community engagement
Steve Smaha, (software & clean tech specialist) http://www.linkedin.com/in/ste... > Can't think of anything that should be kept confidential which isn't kept confidential in deregulated markets
> AE should leverage the power of smart people / crowd sourcing ... we need as much info as possible with as many of the brightest brains as possible contributing
Dr. Michael Webber (uber academic in clean tech & energy) http://www.austinclimateexpo.c... > 2nds Smaha's comments
> Suggests that, opposite of Philip's concern, Transparency is theoretically a valuable tool to lower costs; Capitalist theory says that once competing vendors see AE's costs in a particular area, they will try to bid below the stated # to get AE's business (lowering prices)
Austin's Electric Utility Commission (the "EUC") conducted its first hearing re: complaints about Austin Energy's transparency policies, Monday night. The results were surprising.
The EUC is a citizen body, responsible for oversight on AE's business decisions. Austin Energy ("AE") is our electric utility, municipally-owned. Austin's City Council is its board of directors. "Transparency" refers to the openness with which AE shares cost and other operating info with the public. AE refers to their transparency policies as "competitive matters." AE was not allowed, nor did it request, any rebuttal during Monday's hearing.
AE has been keeping lots of operating data murky and/or secret. It hasn't always been this way. Citizen-activists Mike Sloan and Paul Robbins point out that from AE's founding in 1897 until around the year 2001, all of AE's operating info was available for public review. Mike Sloan further highlights that 7 other utilities with similar models in the state of TX offer annual reports numbering from 250 to 300 pages. AE's 2009 annual report? ... 5 pages.
##
Why Surprising?
The EUC's hearing on Transparency was an exciting progression of comments from traditionally opposed areas of the Austin community.
Citizen, low income, business, big employer, and environmental activists all stood up to emphasize the need for clearer, more easily accessible, information. Once more, the EUC responded positively, collectively voicing the idea that more public info would most likely have positive impacts on bills and the quality of AE's business.
Last night at 11:58 pm (wink, wink), just as was suspected, the Texas Senate unanimously passed through a net metering bill, HB 1243, with solar SB 545 amended on as a bonus. This is great news for Texas consumers, the environment, and solar power.
Well, we did our homework, and here's what we've found.
HB 1243 will ensure that owners of solar installations, small wind turbines, or biogas generators get paid a fair price for the excess power they produce. SB 545 - which after the Voter ID slowdown, we thought was dead - increases incentives for distributed solar power generation by creating a pool of $500 million in solar rebates over the next 5 years. It also calls for a pilot program with a minimum funding of $4 million to put solar on schools (nudge: the State Energy Conservation Office could potentially spend considerably more of their pending stimulus funds to further these projects) and will create thousands of green, local jobs across the state of Texas.
Another amendment to the bill added on SB 2349. This provision would allow oil wells that create natural gas, but not enough to justify paying for collection, to build a generator to run the gas through, make electricity, and sell it back into the grid. The bill would limit production to 2 MW so that they can provide distributed generation. As of right now, they're just flaring that gas off, so this is definitely a good thing.
According to our friends at Environment Texas (via the Houston Chronicle's NewsWatch: Energy blog), the amended HB 1243 also:
• Requires home builders to offer solar as a standard option in developments with 50 homes or more.
• Prevents homeowners associations from blocking solar panel installations
• Allows up to 70% of incentive funds to be used for utility-scale solar projects
• Allows the Public Utility Commission to extend the program for an additional five years and another $500 million if it determined that a "substantial" amount of manufacturing of solar generation products located in Texas after the initial five-year program
• Requires electric co-ops to allow consumers to interconnect solar to the grid
• Clarifies that consumers will not have to register as a utility and that third party ownership of solar is allowed
• For the next two years, requires retail electric providers to pay at least five cents per kilowatt hour for surplus solar and four cents for other renewable technologies and directs the PUC to determine a fair market price that will become a new "floor" following the two years
• Creates a "Made in Texas" program to certify and encourage Texans to buy locally manufactured solar panels and other energy products. As a result, locally produced products qualify for a 20% larger rebate than imports.
Now that HB 1243 has successfully passed through both chambers of the legislature, we've just got to wait and see what comes out of conference committee, where bill authors from both sides will smooth out the differences between their bills. Many thanks to all of you that wrote e-mails and made phone calls in support of these bills. This is a tremendous victory for Texas solar. Keep your fingers crossed that we can send this bill to Governor Perry's desk!
Original post written by Citizen Sarah at Texas Vox
