Mayor: "Why We Voted No!"

We’ve posted numerous stories about Mr Feiner and his Town Board's insistence on moving forward with Sustainable Westchester’s Community Choice Aggregate plan. This plan offers to save utility users money by purchasing the energy supply through Sustainable Westchester, a 3-year experimental program that appears to be set to begin as a not-for-profit and changeover to a for-profit entity once they can prove out the concept using our money.

ABG is against this plan for several valid reasons: 1) all taxpayers are being entered into this plan and must opt-OUT if they don’t want to participate; 2) it has “big brother” written all over it; 3) the resolution adopted by the Town Board (presumed per Mr Feiner’s instructions) forces ConEd to release your private information from them to this company; 4) There is no guarantee that participants will save money. In fact, it’s been said that we may wind up paying even more; 5) Many have said since this is an experiment, let them prove it out with other communities and if it winds up being a good thing, let us opt-IN; 6) Many of the Sustainable Westchester’s Board of Directors are community leaders, Town Supervisors, Mayors and such. This seems like a conflict of interest to ABG staffers.

Here’s the letter from Croton-On-Hudson Mayor Dr Greg Schmidt as it appeared in the Gazette:

A LETTER FROM DR. GREG SCHMIDT, MAYOR, WHY WE VOTED NO, SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT - FEB. 4, 2016

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT - This letter by Mayor Greg Schmidt was published in this week’s (2/4/16) issue of the Gazette.

To the Editor:

Here in the village over the last two weeks, there has been a significant amount of discussion about a pilot program in New York State called Community Choice Aggregation (CCA). A good bit of this discussion has included inaccurate or outright false information. I’d like to set the record straight.

At the January 19, 2016 Village Board meeting, our board chose, as other communities in Westchester have similarly done, to decline to participate in this pilot program at this time. While all of the board members who voted against participation generally agree with what we believe are the goals of such a program, we voted against participation in the program at this time because of our principled concerns about the lack of public outreach regarding the details of the program in the months after the enabling law was passed by the prior village board, the uncertainty about whether residents and small businesses would actually save money, and the lack of transparency and accountability of Sustainable Westchester (SW), the not for profit corporation which will be the administrator of the program.

In addition, there was another, overarching concern. Our approval of the CCA as an opt-out program would change the relationship between Croton residents and Con Ed by inserting the Board of Trustees in the middle. This is unprecedented in New York State. Since most people pay no attention to the details of their Con Ed bill, we knew it was likely that many busy residents, senior citizens, small business owners, or anyone else who didn't respond to or understand the significance of the communications they received about the program – which in many cases would be their first and only direct communication from the village about it – could end up paying more for their energy costs because we opted them in without their express consent or understanding.

Although the NYS Public Service Commission approved the opt-out plan SW requested for the pilot program, it also stated that “the Commission has had a longstanding policy, underlying the Uniform Business Practices and implementation of retail choice programs, that affirmative customer consent is required in order for a customer to change suppliers.” We have made the decision that the village will not be joining the initial round of the CCA. However, to serve those village residents who wish to participate in such a program on an individual basis, we will continue to work with SW to prioritize the implementation of an opt-in option for Croton residents, and residents of the many other municipalities in Westchester which have chosen, as we have, to decline participation in the first round.

Dr. Gregory Schmidt
Mayor

Finally, as we continue to research this issue, we found another community that decided to opt-OUT. See what we uncovered below:

BREAKING NEWS: TOWN OF CORTLANDT DECLINES TO APPROVE COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION (CCA) CITING...

BREAKING NEWS: Cortlandt Declines to Approve Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Memorandum of Understanding. According to two separate sources the Town of Cortlandt declined to approve the CCA MOU at their most recent meeting, citing a need for additional information. It is not known whether that additional information will be forthcoming before Sustainable Westchester's newest deadline of 2/16 to enroll.

Many communities are voting to not participate and the list is growing. This is a tell-tale sign that leaders in other communities are doing their due diligence and letting the taxpaying residents remain confident that the process is working - for them. We believe that as other communities line up to oppose Sustainable Westchester, it requires a hard, laser-focused second look by Mr Feiner and his Town Board. In fact, it would prove that they have our best interests at heart should they come back and admit that they acted too hastily and are withdrawing their original approvals and endorsements. And, as many have stated, let them prove to us that this will work. Finally, let us opt-IN instead of having to opt-OUT! Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.

Pound Ridge Joins Croton and Says "No" to ESCO

ABG recently learned that Pound Ridge's leadership reviewed the proposal from Sustainable Westchester and voted against adopting it in their February 4th meeting. In watching the Board's meeting, the Pound Ridge officials expressed serious concerns about their program, some similar to those expressed by the village board majority and in Mayor Schmidt's recent letter to the Gazette (which ABG is trying to locate).

Additionally, new information has surfaced - in which it is detailed that Sustainable Westchester may not go with the lowest cost provider when narrowing down the bids list and is looking at solely "renewables", which one Pound Ridge official categorized as a "bait and switch". We also learned that Sustainable Westchester's CEO Mike Gordon was present during the meeting.

Watch the meeting here:

http://poundridge.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=13

Concerns about the administrative costs have also risen versus any alleged benefit, etc., given the fact that taxpayer funds would be utilized. Comments by Mr. Gordon about how other communities have joined this ESCO were essentially dismissed by Pound Ridge officials who described those decisions as having been made "will-nilly" given the obvious concerns about the program. 

The Pound Ridge board voted unanimously NOT to participate at this time, waiting to see if the initial roll-out goes well--if need be "18 months down the line". The Sustainable Westchester representative indicated that bids would go out on February 22, offering another "new" deadline, should the Pound Ridge Board could decide to re-vote before then. These officials clearly declined but apparently Sustainable Westchester is holding out for a last minute "hat-trick".

Please also note that on Sustainable Westchester's website, Croton on Hudson's approval of the program is still being shown as "pending" as seen in the screen capture image below. That is simply untrue. The vote was taken and the answer was no.

It remains to be seen how this will play out, especially given the volatility of the fuel industry of late. But it is refreshing to see politicians who have their constituents best interest at heart and not looking to merely ride the publicity wave. We can only hope to see this kind of concern someday in Greenburgh. Only then will we see A Better Greenburgh.