Best Practices of Existing CCAs in California:
- Serve community identified goals and local policy objectives, including greenhouse gas reductions and increased renewable energy supply
- Protect, engage, and empower vulnerable and disadvantaged sectors of the community through universal residential service, rate protections, transparent and culturally appropriate outreach, and programs designed to create economic opportunities and increase savings for low income customers
- Control and safeguard customer revenues to ensure long-term financial viability and local government ownership, even when power supply costs fluctuate
- Offer competitive rates and choice in customer electricity services
- Plan for long-term financial viability through integrated resource planning, in-house fiscal management, transparent rate setting, and policies that build program reserves
- Maintain a firewall between the assets and liabilities of the CCA program and those of municipal general funds
- Incorporate long-term power procurement strategies and local power ownership to hedge risk while using a diversity of energy suppliers, technologies and products
- Implement effective risk management practices
- Adhere to all applicable statutory and regulatory compliance requirements
- Engage meaningfully with the community and provide responsive, equitable service
- Ensure transparency and accountability to the community and oversight agencies
- Build community capacity by offering complementary programs that serve community interests, such as energy efficiency, demand response, community solar, advantageous net energy metering, Feed-in Tariffs, local workforce development, EV charging and battery storage
Operational Models for CCAs:
There are currently three operational models available in California. To date, two have been successfully implemented and a third has been proposed.
Joint Powers Authority (Existing) – A JPA is an independent, public agency that operates the CCA on behalf its member municipalities. JPAs are a common legal structure in California for the administration of cooperative multi-jurisdictional programs. MCE, Peninsula Clean Energy, Silicon Valley Clean Energy, and Sonoma Clean Power have implemented CCA under this model.
Single Jurisdiction (Existing) – A city or county individually establishes and operates a CCA as an enterprise fund within the municipality. This model has the same benefits of the JPA model, but differs in that the City (or County) retains full program autonomy and all revenue. Lancaster Choice Energy and Clean Power SF have implemented CCA under this model.
Commercial Vendor Package (Proposed) – Under this proposed model a private company would manage the CCA on behalf of local government(s). This model has not been applied in California and applicability within State requirements for long term and renewable procurement is unknown. Under the commercial model, the local government would benefit from exercising strong operational involvement and controlling customer revenues to allow local transparency, public engagement and long-term success.
Communities exploring various CCA models are best served by considering… Public transparency, accountability, and equity
- Control and allocation of ratepayer revenues and building program reserves
- Level of autonomy and operational decision-making
- Long-term costs and benefits of each approach
- Opportunities for long-term procurement to balance/hedge short-term procurement
- Responsiveness to local environmental, social and economic goals
- Funding opportunities for local energy programs and new power generation
- Creating economic opportunities through local jobs, GHG reductions, local renewable developments and environmental justice initiatives and
- The risk profile, management team, and track record of each model