Thoughts on Solar Measure B

Earlier this week I was on Larry Mantle to discuss Solar Measure B.

A link to the discussion can be found here.

If you listen to the debate, there are a few unanswered questions that stand out:

1. On the program, former DWP president David Freeman made mention of the fact that we need solar power. But he really didn’t go into why we need Measure B to achieve this goal. He himself admitted that the DWP could go and install solar power on roofs without this Measure – so what then is the purpose of Measure B?

2. Beyond hiring and training technicians, how does the DWP plan on executing this program? How will audits be done to ensure that the goals of the measure are being achieved? How will people be compensated for having solar on their roof? How will the DWP satisfy claims resulting from poor/improper installations? There is no provision for any of this in the ballot measure, and David Freeman couldn’t answer these questions.

These are the questions that I believe need to be debated, answered in public, and should have been answered in the ballot measure, before it was passed by the City Council. As I stated on the Larry Mantle program, the current measure, as written, lacks the specifics necessary to ensure that this program is implemented in a manner that is fair and accountable to DWP ratepayers.

Look, at this point everyone wants Solar Power. The issue isn’t IF we do it…the issue is HOW.

On today’s program, David Freeman admitted that there is nothing preventing the DWP from installing solar now. So what does Measure B do? As I stated in the discussion, the purpose of this measure is to modify the Los Angeles Charter to allow the Council to have significantly more say in DWP operations while compressing the timeframe for debate and contract awards.Additionally, this measure significantly benefits the IBEW Union, who as a result of this measure will become the only game in town for solar installation in the City of LA if this bill passes.

For over 20 years the DWP has fought against solar and solar subsidies for environmentally minded citizens. Why? The harsh truth is that (historically) solar increases the cost of energy production to the DWP. How? The business of power is the business of infrastructure costs. For a power company, their infrastructure costs – transformers, power lines, etc – are fixed. Simple supply and demand dictates that the more power that they put out on a line, the lower their cost to provide that power.

Rooftop solar changes the supply/demand dynamic by putting the power source on your roof. As a result, the consumer usually benefits because they are drawing less power from DWP, thereby lowering their power bill. DWP, on the other hand, just had their transmission costs increase as less power will be put out on the line (because it is now coming from the roof).

It seems that the DWP’s solution to this supply/demand issue is either 1) to take the solar power from my roof, and supply it to my neighbor (see section 23.162 on page 10 of the ballot measure) ; or 2) DWP will use their ownership of my roof to acquire renewable energy credits (and possibly future carbon credits) to offset the cost of the panel installation and maintenance. In either case, the result of Measure B is the same – DWP keeps their transmission costs low, and my power bill high. David Freeman admitted as much when he said “he didn’t know how the customer would be compensated for having solar on their roof”.  I don’t think Measure B is a good deal for the DWP ratepayer, but is a good deal for DWP.

In short, Measure B will put solar panels and an easment on your roof – but it will not lower your monthly electical bill.

I encourage you to do your own research on Measure B – read the ballot measure, the argument for, the argument against, and decide for yourself. I think you’ll see that we don’t need Measure B – we don’t need to amend the city charter to get rooftop solar (a statement that even the former president of the DWP can agree with, as he did on Airtime with Larry Mantle).

Based on this, I sincerely hope that people take off their green colored glasses and say yes to solar, but NO to Measure B.

Cases Are Won Before Their Day In Court

This may sound strange to those outside the legal community, but most cases are won before court is even in session. The victories I am talking about are the ones where there is no mediation, there is no settlement – there is your day in court, before a judge, where both sides can argue their case, and the judge will rule.

Pre-trial motions and briefs are used to present your argument (your case) before your day in court.

A court appearance is not a starting point – it is an ending point. The court appearance is not the time when an argument is presented – it is when the argument that was presented is defended. So if you show up and have to say very little to defend your argument – it means that your pretrial motions and briefs were either extremely persuasive, showed an incredible grasp of the issue, or both.

Margaret Thatcher once said that “Ronald Regan won the cold war without firing a shot.”

As Ron Kaye notes on his post talking about the Measure B ballot fight:

“The judge’s mind was made up in advance of the hearing and City Attorney candidate Noel Weiss — who came to the rescue of the Solar 8…”

http://www.citywatchla.com/content/view/1900/

Well it looks like Noel Weiss won for the Solar 8 with out firing a shot, either. Not because he just showed up and the judge agreed with him, not because he is an expert in election law (he isn’t), but because he took the time to understand the issue and craft a persuasive argument before the trial began.

When Ron Kaye and Jack Humphreville called at nearly the last minute after no one else would defend them against the establishment’s attempt to suppress free speech, Noel Weiss delivered for them under pressure. This is what Noel has done on behalf of tenants in this City as well has homeowners during the last four years (often for minimal or no compensation whatsoever). It is what is behind the litigation that Noel is pursuing to set aside the SB 1818 implementation ordinance the City passed last year. As your City Attorney, Noel Weiss will continue to fight for the people of this City.

-Marc Weiss

Noel Weiss As Attorney – Angelenos Win

Opponents of Solar Measure B – the solar energy “plan” approved by the mayor and city council for inclusion on the March 3 ballot – asked all City Attorney candidates to help them defend against the lawsuit brought by the mayor’s allies.

The lawsuit was intended to prevent the opponents from stating their position in the official ballot booklet that educates the public to the issues, both pro and con.

I was willing to take the time and work with the group, the Solar 8.  It included DWP board president Nick Patsaouras, now a candidate for city controller, and former Los Angeles Daily News editor Ron Kaye.

Here’s how it went in court, as told in articles reporting on the case in CityWatch and the LA Times:

“… Mitchell Schwartz, a political strategist who staged Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s 2005 inaugural gala, had asked the judge to take out wording in the voter pamphlet warning that the solar plan would give a monopoly to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents employees at the city’s Department of Water and Power…”

“Those who signed the argument against Measure B accused allies of the mayor of using expensive lawyers to squelch the opposition’s political views. After Schwartz went to court, signers of the ballot argument hired a lawyer – city attorney candidate Noel Weiss – and dubbed themselves “the Solar 8″ …”

” In his tentative ruling, [Judge] Yaffe also refused to remove language that warned that “no competitive bidding” would be used by the solar program. And he declined to take out wording that warned that the DWP would use “outdated technology” for the initiative. “The judge did the right thing” Weiss said…“

“The judge’s mind was made up in advance of the hearing and City Attorney candidate Noel Weiss – who came to the rescue of the Solar 8…” [emphasis mine].

By wanting to censor the opposing argument, the pro Solar Prop B. side, in effect, attempted to squelch the voice of all Angelenos.

Whether you are for or against Measure B, we can all agree that freedom of speech is a key component of democracy, and in the case of ballot arguments, both sides should be able to present their arguments so that Angelenos can make an informed decision on March 3.

With my knowledge of the law and my commitment to the public interest I will fight for all Angelenos as City Attorney just as I fought for the opponents of Solar Measure B.