-: We will now return to all of our commenters
that we have in our comment queue.
Operator, Could you please call the next caller?
-: Our next caller is Kent Bullard.
You may go ahead.
Kent Bulllard: Good day Commissioners.
My name is Kent Bullard.
I live in Ventura, California.
I have invested in having solar on my rooftop since 1994,
which is generated a 100% of my electrical needs.
I am opposed to the proposed NEM 3.0e decision.
There should be no solar grid charge or tax.
Rooftops solar saves all consumers money.
As it prevents the need to construct new power generation
and distribution facilities.
Rooftop, solar places, the generation where it is needed
in our community.
If I have extra electricity and it is exported to the grid,
do not make me pay for that.
Figure a way of letting me donate it to my needy neighbors,
but do not impose charges for us to provide
energy to the grid.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Marlow Wilson.
You may go ahead.
Marlow Wilson: This is Marlow Wilson from Berkeley.
I did my part and installed rooftop solar.
I also agree with everything said so far,
but it's all used my time to emphasize that NEM 3.0
is about PG&E profits.
It parallels PG&E scam decades ago
when they asked foreign, got raid hikes to upgrade
their infrastructure and do maintenance.
They didn't do all the work they agreed to do,
the result, explosions and fires
that have destroyed communities and killed people.
They continue to play the same game.
They've been held criminally liable.
They violate their probation.
They want to renege on their contracts.
The CPUC is supposed to protect the public.
Doesn't the P stand for public?
PG&EO on the other hand is all about their profits.
Supporting NEM is supporting the agenda of criminals.
Who do you wanna support, the public or the criminals?
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Michael Sakamoto.
You may go ahead.
-: [Michael Sakamoto] Commissioners.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.
My basic argument much like those you've heard before,
runs around the fact that in 2017,
my wife and I invested a net $30,000
in putting in a solar system.
And now when we signed that agreement,
we signed it with a understanding that it was an agreement
between PG&E and my family and the CPUC
in the state of California,
that this was gonna be the rules.
And now everybody's trying to change the rules.
It's not fair and it's not right.
Let alone the fact that you're destroying
a viable business in solar energy.
It's not right.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: And our next caller is Mona Kinkle. You may go ahead.
Mona Kinkle: Hi?
My name is Mona Kinkle
and I live in Encinitas, California.
I purchased solar panels for my home in August, 2021.
The panels were an investment of $21,000.
I chose solar primarily due to climate change
and for our planet.
The agreement with PG&E my supplier
was an important part of the financial decision.
Less than six months ago,
PG&E made an agreement with me for 20 years.
Now, I hear that PG&E is requesting
to void that agreement and reduce it to 15 years.
That's wrong.
It should be illegal.
If allowed it ha sends an important message
loud and clear that you can't count on an agreement
with your electric company.
Solar power is the right thing to do.
There should be no tax of any kind.
I want the utility Commission and Governor Newsom
to reject this proposal and to protect rooftop solar,
no solar tax, net metering that is fair
and honor the 20 year agreements.
Anything less is unacceptable.
-: Thank you.
Operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Mellow Leeds. You may go ahead.
Mellow Leeds: Hello.
My name is me Mellow Leeds,
speaking on behalf of the North County Climate
Change Alliance, nonprofit in San Diego.
And I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak
and for igniting a firestorm of public outcry against
efforts to impose the highest solar taxes in the country
through your NEM 3.0 proposal.
Let's be perfectly clear.
Economics and science have spoken rooftop
solar is now the cheapest form of electricity acquisition
for ratepayers at the exact moment in history
when rapid decarbonization is crucial in avoiding
the most catastrophic effects in climate change.
As president Jimmy Carter's dated in 1979,
no one can ever embargo the sun.
Today in 2022, I implore you to cease your attempts
to embargo rooftop solar, and our clean energy future.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Peter stern.
You may go ahead.
Peter Stern: Hello.
I just got off mute.
It's a lie that net metering discriminates
against non-solar ratepayers and that solar
doesn't pay its own way.
The truth is that over a million consumers
have installed solar with their own money in California.
It provides multiple gigawatts of electricity
to the utilities when they need it most during peak hours,
it's a massive electricity infrastructure
that the utility companies didn't invest
a penny into building.
It's free electricity to them that they sell
to our neighbors at a massive profit.
And in fact, the grid would collapse during the summer
if solar didn't exist.
There are only two opponents to solar,
utility companies that are threatened
because their predatory rates and practices
drive consumers to solar and the electrical unions
who oppose solar because the vast majority of the million
plus solar installations were installed by non-union labor.
It's your job to put the best interests
of California's consumers first.
So please do your job and protect consumers from monopolies.
Opposed NEM as proposed by the utilities and the unions.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Steven Pope.
You may go ahead.
Steven Pope: Good afternoon.
When California deregulated electric utilities in 1996
citizens were promised lower rates through competition
and investor supported the infrastructure.
While the utilities quickly reneged on this agreement,
not to raise their rates.
And we're now only realizing how badly
the infrastructure is neglected.
Fast forward into current events.
We see Southern California Edison's rates and fees
increasing to finance infrastructure, Pete,
while their regular stockholder dividends steadily rise.
My tone of OHI was 100% surrounded by the 2017 Thomas fire,
which was sparked by Southern California
Edison's antiquated equipment.
My wife and I live in a senior subject development
where I operate an amateur radio emergency service hub,
and hope to offer a cool house to our neighbors in the event
of another power outage during a heat emergency.
I'd like to stress that widespread solar panels
decrease the cost of long distance power lines,
saving utilities millions of dollars.
And to remind you that the state has set a goal
of a 100% clean energy by 2045,
why would you move in the opposite direction?
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Heather Hoff.
You may go ahead.
Heather Hoff: Hi.
I care about climate change and clean energy.
I want more clean energy
and this here's something different for you.
Adding more solar right now isn't helping.
I urge everyone on this call to clean is look at the ISO
today app from the California system operator,
which clearly shows a huge peak of solar every day.
That's great.
What's not great is the even bigger peak
of natural gas and imports after the sunset.
This time is where we need more clean energy
and solar can't provide it.
We can't fix our climate and lower emissions
with good intentions.
I'm honestly sorry for all those that have built
businesses and careers that now feel threatened.
But as unpopular as this might seem,
the net metering program is broken.
And this is just the start in the right direction.
Removal of the subsidy is not attacked.
I support pane solar owners appropriately
for the electricity they generate.
I also care about social justice and see how everyone,
even those who do not benefit is currently paying for it.
We need clean energy technology that can deliver
when we need it and the solar industry.
It's your chance to prove it.
Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is from Sarah Greenwell.
You may go ahead.
Sarah Greenwell: Hello.
My name is Sarah Greenwell.
I live in San Francisco county
and I'm scared about climate change.
I'm also scared about what will happen
as the crisis gets worse and we're scrambling
over each other to do what has to be done
including improve as what said improve
the storage power that we have for home solar.
But home solar is the gentlest way for us to go solar
without taking a lot of space in the desert for solar panels
or just committing a lot of rushed errors.
So, I oppose the proposed decision.
We don't need a solar tax.
We need to make solar more affordable for working
and middle class households.
We must honor the existing 20 year protection
for solar users.
And by the way, the fossil fuel companies
must start planning, training their workers
to shift to the many other uses that can be made,
must be made of their equipment and knowhow.
There's no getting around it.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator?
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is John spasky.
You may go ahead.
John Spasky: My name is John spasky,
I'm resident of San Lupo.
I'm opposed to the recommended decision that places
an owner grid access charge of solar customers.
Solar should be affordable to working
and middle class households.
rooftop solar has played in a critical role in reducing
California's climate greenhouse gas emissions,
and needs to play an expanded role as California's
to meet its climate change goals.
The recommended decision is based on a recently updated now
floor avoided cost calculated that distorts and understands
the value of rooftop solar.
As a result, the decision is flawed, myopic,
and needs to be revisited.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Dolores Diaz. You may go ahead.
Dolores Diaz: Good afternoon.
Can you hear me?
-: Yes we can, please proceed.
Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
My name is Dolores Diaz and I am a homeowner in Chula Vista.
And the purpose of my comment today
is I want to echo whatever has said.
I like many others rarely practice public comment,
but the proposed decision to impose the solar taxes
compels me to come and address you and the Governor today,
I carefully weigh the crafted arguments
posed by the utilities companies.
And I can assure you that for every utility company
argument, there's a stronger counter from the people.
I'm raising my voice today to plead that you not impose
any solar tax, not a cent.
If you do, you'll hurt me and thousands of others like me,
we don't have the resources to buy the ads
that influence decision makers.
So Governor Newsom, you said more work needs to be done.
It's simple.
Be courageous and say no to solar tax.
Scrap the proposal.
Be the hero we need you to be.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jeremy Pearl.
You may go ahead.
Jeremy Pearl: Hello.
My name is Jeremy Pearl.
I'm the sales manager at Sandbar Solar here in California.
I've been in the solar industry for over 15 years
and Sandbar Solar has been in business since 2004.
The current proposed net metering policy changes
would devastate the solar industry in California
and would decimate our 50 plus person company
along with 60,000 solar jobs including my own.
Growth and survival of solar plus storage market
requires sound and forward thinking leadership
from our policy makers.
The current proposed decision to NEM 3.0
must be significantly revised or rewritten entirely
with honest inclusion of voices and interest from all sides,
your job is to advocate for and create policy
for the citizens of California.
The current PD does not... does the opposite.
The current PD does the opposite.
Here's what we want.
Eliminate the punitive monthly solar fees,
structure a gradual step down across many years
for the rate.
Customers are credited for that solar energy,
scrap the one sided ACC as it is deeply flawed.
Lastly, maintain the 20 year grandfathering period
for NEM one and named customers.
The proposed changes to them will make a rooftop solar
too expensive and unattainable
for low and middle class families.
Making solar luxury only the rich can afford.
This would lead to the demise of our thriving industry.
Is this how the Commissioners wish to leave
their mark on our state?
We need NEM three proposal... (bell ringing)
Thank you very much for hearing my comments.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Mark Hidinger.
You may go ahead.
Mark Hidinger: Thank you.
Yes.
My name is Mark Hidinger from San Diego, California,
and to prepare ourselves for retirement
and reduce our monthly cost 15 years ago,
my wife and I purchased a solar system at a cost
of over $30,000 after all incentives.
Two years ago,
we added an additional $10,000 to purchase batteries.
We have two electric cars, now that we are retired
and on a fixed income,
the electric companies wanna now increase our monthly costs
and charge us for doing the right thing.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Suzanne Saunders.
You may go ahead.
-: [Suzanne Saunders] Hi, my name is Suey Saunders
and I'm with indivisible Ross valley.
The new proposal must include no solar tax
of any kind, not one cent.
My representatives, hus, Huffman and Feinstein,
and many other state and federal politicians
approach of proposal.
They understand that is a utility lie
that lower income residents pay for the energy
provided by rooftop solar.
I borrowed 20,000 to install solar panels
so I could charge my electric vehicle cleanly.
Electric vehicles can act as battery storage
for solar, so they can solve the need
for rooftop solar storage.
Utilities are adding storage stations to harness
this rooftop solar and use this clean power source at night.
The real rise in electricity bills
is due to utility caused fires.
Utilities will need more lines causing these fires
if we depend on distant solar farms to avoid
polluting fossil fuels.
Utilities cannot produce or buy enough clean energy
to replace what would be lost
from a declining rooftop, solar.
California (alarm ringing) when you set aside
a quarter of its plan to clean solar energy.
(indistinct) -: Thank you.
Thank you.
Operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Kevin Moore.
You may ahead.
Kevin Moore: Dear Commissioners,
thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf
of the 1.2 million working class homeowners in California
who have invested in the future of our environment.
My name is Kevin Moore.
I'm a California resident living
in an unincorporated Santa Rosa.
Due to the inconsistency of the power grid.
The rising cost utilities and is importantly
to reduce carbon emissions.
I installed solar panels on my roof last year.
This investment was considerable, considering my income.
I was excited to become more self-sufficient
with my electrical needs,
provide a power source at the point of use
and reduce greenhouse gases to help the environment.
I understand there's a proposal to add a tax
to my utility bill and reduce the benefits
for adding rooftop solar.
This would be a very poor decision on the part
of the Commission and Governor Newsom.
It would contradict the state and federal energy policies
of the last few decades and undermine
our community's efforts to promote rooftop solar energy.
Please don't let all the working class homers
out of pocket investments go to the pocket
(bell alarm ringing) of the poorly managed utility
companies and their shareholders.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your comments.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Earl Hoffler.
You may go ahead.
Earl Koffler: Hi, is that Earl Koffler?
-: Yes, please proceed.
(indistinct)
Earl Koffler: Hello?
-: Yes, we can hear you please proceed.
Earl Koffler: Hi.
I was just about to send an email
'cause I have to get off the line
I've been waiting for over four hours,
four and a half hours.
I'm a retire fixed income who recently invested
in solar in my personal home.
I'm very upset about the proposed law and certainly
would not have invested in solar in this law.
Bottom line, I urge you not to change the regulations
to tax or place fees in solar and in any shape or form.
If changes are made, I urge tax sources
of fuel using fossil fuels to recognize
their environmental impacts and other negative effects.
I think you should find ways so that the utilities actually
pay solar a fair price for their energy into the grid.
The regulation goals should be that the power utilities
become maintainers of the grid rather than making money
on energy production or tax where it came from.
I would like to propose... to point out that the proposed
changes would wish in our state's increasing problem
with rolling blackouts due to peak energy
uses through the summer.
We have been helping this, but the regulation penalizes us.
And finally, please don't retroactively impact me
and the other eight percent or so solar contributors
who justified in the decisions based
on the existing incentives.
Thank you. (alarm ringing)
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Robert Long.
You may go ahead.
Robert Long: Oh, thank you very much
for taking my call and to the Commissioners themselves.
My name is Robert Long with pet California,
and I also represent Gwen and Allen brown
of Apto and with grandkids.
And I would just like to say that with great expense,
both of us have put solar power on our roof.
And I don't think it's fair that PG&E
who has disrespected the state and burned down
so much of our town and cities
and I don't think they should be rewarded.
So thank you very much for listening to me right now.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Mara Felsen.
You may go ahead.
Mara Felsen: I'm a homeowner in San Diego
upset to see the CPuC considering decimating
the solar industry.
Every article, every case study everywhere
that has done what you're considering
has shown to be a massive failure,
unless your intention is to kill the industry.
Government action drives behavior incentives put over
a million for arrays on spawn rooftops in California
and removal of incentives will reverse this progress.
Likewise, the failure of government terrain
and bad actors has compounded the problem.
Year after year PG&E causes one monumental disaster
after another with virtually no consequences,
but rather than maintain their failing decrepit lines
they pay themselves massive multi million dollar
bonuses instead, all the while being saved from bankruptcy.
How many monumental deadly screwups do we
as citizens of California and ratepayers
of this monopolistic utility have to endure?
Or do we just have to keep paying higher and higher rates
to a reckless utility that is apparently incapable
of keeping us safe or managing an ever increasing
pot of money that we all fund.
This is Grotes governmental failure.
Please, reverse course.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Andrew Baskin.
You may go ahead.
Andrew Baskin: Hi there.
I'm Andrew Baskin a homeowner in Menlo park, California.
I urge you to reject the current proposal and any proposal
that taxes people just 'cause they happen
to own solar panels.
We have a small solar array installed in 2007
that provides only about 20% of our total electricity usage.
We can't have a larger system because of surrounding trees,
but we wanted to do what was right for the environment
and to reduce our use of electricity from PG&E.
So, we put a it in at our own expense.
If the NEM proposal was adopted,
the only economic choice for us
and for many others like us with small systems
would be to deCommission our solar panels
and disconnect them.
This is not the right direction for our state.
The best choice for the environment and for utility
ratepayers is to have distributed power generation
and solar on rooftops,
not industrial PV projects covering countryside,
and certainly not fossil fuel plants.
Please reject this proposal and any proposal
that taxes solar panels.
Thanks.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Tom Whitehead.
You may go ahead
Again, Tom Whitehead.
Your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
Tom Whitehead: Yes.
I have a rooftop solar system in San Francisco
and I'm most concerned about the climate implications
of the current NEM proposal.
I will be negatively impacted by the increased punitive fees
for owning a solar system,
but that doesn't bother me as much as the fact
that the proposed NEM structure will disincentivize
new distributed solar throughout California.
We need more distributed solar and not less.
We need the jobs and technology
and manufacturing that this produces.
We will need to maximize solar and make use of all
space available for it rather than focusing
exclusively on big industrial installations
that encroach upon open space.
I feel that the CPUC has been listening too much
(alram wringing) to the IOUs and not enough to citizens.
-: Thank you for your comment.
Tom Whitehead: Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Elena waters.
You may go ahead.
Elena Waters: Oh, wow.
Finally.
So, good afternoon.
Thank you so much for taking my call.
My public comment.
So, I'm concerned about the fact that the public
was not properly notified about this
because it's going to impact us.
And I feel we had a right to be notified prior
to this going through like it is.
I read through the documents.
There's no provisions for medical baseline customers in it,
low income programs,
even though they're meant they're not available.
I've applied three times more recently,
the most recent denial was on 124
that they do not service the PG&E area.
My PG&E bill is between 55 and $90.
The program would cost about $64
for an eight kilowatt system for me.
In addition to that agenda number,
ID number 20295, they're asking for a 26.22 cent
increase per kilowatt,
which is gonna make this substantial.
And it's already gonna hurt people on time of use.
Customers are gonna be left with no choice,
but to go off grid to a hybrid system.
And that means that in the excess electricity
is not gonna be fed back to the grid.
(alarm ringing)
Okay.
Thank you so much.
Have a good day.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Doug Rodman.
You may go ahead.
Doug Rodman: Thank you.
My name is Doug Rodman and I own eco solar in Concuet.
I've been in the solar industry for 42 years
and I'm happy to be on the longest phone call I've ever had.
Aside from all the other reasons
that global warming is a bad idea.
The additional fires that causes
are responsible for the egregious suffering
of all other animal species who don't know how to leave
all their possessions behind and run to safety.
Very few of them make it out alive during a fire,
a baby Fox, Coyote or Wolf is no different than your dog.
Please, can we start to think of the entire ecosystem
rather than just corporate profit margins?
Don't cut solar incentives,
right when the environmental healing has just begun.
Doubling incentives makes far better sense.
Mother nature deserves far more respect
than we have shown her.
She has given us every single thing we have.
Thank you for listening.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please..
-: Our next caller is John Presley.
You may go ahead.
John Presley: Hi.
My name is John Presley.
I live in Monterey and work for solar technologies.
I've dedicated the past 15 years of my career
to helping nonprofit profits,
small and medium business owners reduce
their electricity expenses with clean,
renewable onsite, solar energy.
The rooftop solar and industry has enabled me
to provide for my family,
become a homeowner and know that my efforts
every day help mitigate the worst effects
of climate change ensuring...
-: And it looks like his line is disconnected.
-: Please go to the next caller.
Thank you operator.
-: Next caller is a Patricia Saban.
You may go ahead.
Patricia Saban: I am Patricia Shaban
from Walla Walla, California,
and has had rooftop solar on my home for years.
Commissioners, this grid participation charges outrageous.
We need to continue to support solar clean power,
to slow global warming, to protect open space
and reduce the need for costly investment in the grid.
Burdening solar utility customers with this outrageous
charge will discourage future solar installations
and devastate our solar industry.
Putting California behind in meeting its climate goal.
Californians want clean,
renewable green energy sources
and it's been proven by over 1 million installations
and the many successful solar companies
throughout our state.
Please do not approve the outrageous proposed solar tax.
Thank you for listening.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Julia Lurvusian.
Your line is open.
-: My name is Julia Lurvusian.
I hail from a combo of San Francisco and Sonoma counties.
I have found that there are usually two reasons
why something goes contrary to common sense,
love and money.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and rule out love.
In this case, PG&E wants to cover
present financial deficits,
but charging more will decrease
the use and installation of solar.
Aside from being bad for the planet
and going contrary to California climate goals,
it simply goes against common sense.
Please don't listen to the money.
Go with common sense.
Thank you for taking the time to listen
to all of the commonts.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please..
-: Our next caller is Nancy Recher.
You may go ahead.
Nancy Recher: Nancy Recher from Crockett
and Contra Costa county.
I am strongly opposed to the financially punitive
rooftop solar proposal,
the solar tab and the reneging of the current
net metering agreement both are giant steps backwards.
Not only are they out of line with California Clean Energy
Program, but it is, they are clearly intended
to economically benefit the current California
energy companies and their shareholders
at the expense of a trusting public who like me
voted with their wallets when they purchased rooftop
solar systems and electric cars.
If you are truly serious about helping people
control their energy bills, avoid blackouts
and fight climate change.
You need to encourage more people to install rooftop solar,
not financially penalize them for doing so.
Stop the cold hearted bait and switch.
Thank you.
-: Thank you,
operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is John Lancaster.
You may go ahead.
John Lancaster: Hi, good afternoon.
My name's John Lancaster.
I'm a resident of Oakland, California.
I'm a builder and an urban environmentalist.
And as a builder, I know how many jobs are dependent
on the solar industry and its ability to stay strong
and keep moving forward.
There's good momentum moving forward now.
And many of my peers either have solar
or leaning on adding it, as an environmentalist
I would the need to footprint and continue
towards meeting ourselves off lesser fuel.
California is already way behind a meeting
our climate goals and we cannot don't plan report
or slow downs in California, signed up and board.
Please don't let sports and Jerry vision a ForSight
to lead the way in solar,
be derailed by the CPUC in our current Governor
and being a long fighter for environmentalism.
I just have to wonder whether or not one
of the previous callers was correct,
and that this is a smoke screen so that they can step back
after the sun ranges at really is demand.
(indistinct) (alarm ringing)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Pam Willette.
You may go ahead.
Pam Willette: Hi.
My name is Pam Willette.
I live in Los Soso.
The best thing I ever did was putting solar panels
on our roof 10 years ago,
that solar system was worth the cost to me
because we all need to do our part to combat climate change.
I'm a middle class, retired person living on a fixed income.
Net metering allows people like me to afford solar.
Cutting the solar credit 80% and adding a solar tax
to my monthly bill will hit me hard
and kill the state solar industry,
hurting businesses and costing thousands of jobs.
Solar rooftops like mine generate excess power
that shared locally,
and it actually saves millions of dollars
in maintenance costs on the long distance power lines.
Contrary to what they'd like you to believe.
Rooftop solar preserves land resources
by cutting the need for more solar farms.
If California wants to meet its goal,
of carbon reduction, electric cars by 2035 and preserve
its natural resources in the state needs residential solar,
the CPUC NEM three proposals will kill these goals
and harm the environment.
NEM 3.0 benefits utility companies not Californians.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Gavin Rodriguez.
You may go ahead
Again, Gavin Rodriguez.
Your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
-: Mr. Rodriguez?
Operator, let's go to the next caller.
-: Our next caller is Becken Feehu,
You may go ahead.
-: Hello Commissioners.
My name is Becken Feehu,
and I'm a Davis president since 1986.
I agree with all advice today and again,
the solar tab CPUC need to encourage
more rooftop solar, not to discourage it.
I want to focus my one minute time
on one aspect of the purpose change.
Moving from yearly to monthly to this
is not hashing as a sun cycle is yearly not monthly.
We need to consider all 12 months combined when designing
the most efficient of top solar system
to a specific location.
Doing otherwise will give efficiency and hence California
clean energy goals combined with the purpose
energy success generation credit.
This will have a significant impact
on rooftop solar return and investment.
Rooftop solar has much lower on environmental impacts
and large solar, also by shedding the dwelling
under reduce the need for in the living space
below this increased conservation and energy efficiency,
it has not been properly accounted for in the analysis,
push by the IOUs.
(alarm ringing)
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
-: Thank you,
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jessica Cravin.
You may go ahead.
Jessica Cravin: Oh my God.
Wow.
Hi, my name is Jessica Cravin.
I'm a member of the California democratic parties,
environmental caucus.
I'm the you look, climate collective
and a bunch of other groups.
I've been waiting on hold for five hours to make comment.
And you know what?
I don't need to say what every other person except for one
out of 400 has said so far, but I will say it again.
I deeply oppose what you guys are trying to do.
And I find it heartbreaking that 400 of us had to spend
five hours of our day on a phone call to tell you
the incredibly obvious,
which is that we are in a climate catastrophes.
It's not even a crisis anymore.
We are experiencing climate collapse and we are here
on a beautiful sunny day,
begging a Commission that is supposed to be protecting
the public in California,
to not give into the lobbyists who are obviously
calling the shot in the situation.
I am asking you to not tax rooftop solar.
I am a rooftop solar owner,
like everybody else on this call,
I did it because it's the right thing to do.
And also because I figured that eventually
it would become, we would break even on it.
(alarm ringing)
It's heartbreaking.
I'm done.
Thank you. -: Thank you very much.
Operator next caller please.
-: And we have John Presley back online.
He was disconnected earlier, sir.
You may go ahead.
John Presley: Thank you just to finish my comment.
The proposed decision would decimate our industry,
prevent California from meeting its climate goals
and mortgage our next generation's future
in exchange for boosting utility profit margins.
I urge you to reject this decision and rewrite
a new solution that protects the rooftop solar industry
and my family's future.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: And our next caller is Dave Chukla.
You may go ahead.
Again, Mr. Shukla, your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
Dave Shukla: Hello?
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can.
Dave Shukla: Oh, great.
Hello, CPUC Commissioners.
Thank you for your time.
Dave Shukla resident and ratepayer
on record for the past 24 years in Long Beach.
One of the funniest highlights of 2022 so far
was Governor Gavin Newsom's budget proposal on the 10th.
It must be said that seeing the Governor flex on everyone
and tell the world we want your dollars.
We want you to open clean energy economy
businesses in California.
That was pretty cool.
It's thing I wanna hear.
I also wanna hear from you the CPUC about NEM four
rules that work for all Californians.
For the past 24 years, we've been living across
the street from these people.
Edison has knowingly profited off of climate change
that they now want you the CPUC to discriminate
against me and my family's ability to do something.
Anything science based about don't want that noise.
Don't want no tax, no retro aggressive tax.
Why don't you put lean on Edison instead?
(alarm ringing)
Why don't we open their book?
-: Thank you.
Dave Shukla: Reject them three.
Make it better.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Dan Campbell.
Don Campbell, I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
Don Campbell: Yeah.
Hi and thank you for staying around for all of this.
I appreciate all the people that have been on this call
and I just want to echo everything and the brilliant
stuff that have been said in opposition to this
it is regressive and it will do no good for Californians
and please take care and everybody stay online
and keep the comments coming.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Prety Mather.
You may go ahead.
Prety Mather: Hi, I'm a, my name is Prety Mather.
I'm a passionate solar system homeowner
from Irvine, California.
I'm a customer with SCE.
My family house has a large solar system already.
However, we are in the midst of installing and purchasing
another large solar system with power wall batteries
to be installed in a few weeks.
My extended family members own five houses
with solar system in Orange county.
We have several electric vehicles in our family
that we charge at our houses.
Please encourage largest solar systems and batteries
for all Californians.
Please give incentives to California,
to increase solar energy.
Please vote for California in terms
of solar energy environment,
climate changes and green earth.
Please encourage solar systems
and batteries for Californian.
Please vote for homeowner solar companies,
solar employees in all Californians.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Kristen Bement.
You may go ahead.
Kristen Bement: Hi there.
Good afternoon.
My name's Kristen Bement calling in from LA county
on behalf of Zero solar, where I work
and on behalf of my partner and our children
who hope to continue living and thriving
in this great state.
I've worked in the California solar industry
for over 15 years.
I wanna echo everything on this call as well.
Amazing, all the comments here.
I just wanna say California's rooftop,
solar succeeds due to a huge diverse community
throughout California, coming together in many ways
to invest in solar power with their money,
with their hard work.
Why?
Because the right thing to do for a planet
and because it makes reasonable financial sense.
I urge you to unanimously reject this terribly
foreign proposal.
It is designed to decimate the ability for a consumer
to invest in benefit from rooftop solar in California
and beyond and it passed it on questionably well,
it is not designed to capitalize on the oppotunity
we have to move clean energy from our abundant
sunshine hours to the evening hours
where greenhouse gas emissions are largest.
We as a state should be focused on making more clean energy
and moving into the evening.
We should not be putting up financial barriers
to clean energy. (alarm ringing)
We should continue to leave this fire.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Seth Debbie.
You may go ahead.
Again, Seth Debbie, your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
Seth Debbie: Yeah, this is Seth Debbie
with green day power.
I employ 150 people in Sacramento,
Fresno in Southern California,
and we strongly oppose the new from NEM 3.0,
I think the public has spoken.
I've been on this call for five hours
and it's pretty unanimous that people
are not in support of this.
And we are the public.
We hope you listen to the public and this would decimate
the jobs of my people and our employees.
And it would decimate the customers,
the thousands of customer as we set up
over the last six years in business.
And we hope that you'll reconsider and make proper
adjustments to make this more equitable for everybody.
Thanks.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Ted Dunning.
You may go ahead.
Ted Dunning: Hi. My name is Ted Dunning
and I'm a Professor, political science
at UC Berkeley and the California native.
I'm calling to register my extremely strong
opposition to the proposed regulation,
governing rooftop solar in California.
My wife and I have installed a solar panel system
and battery back capacity at our home.
And we drive electric vehicles.
We have been so proud of California's national
and global leadership on the environment.
So, I'm absolutely horrified and ashamed
to see the CPUC proposal,
which takes a gigantic step in the wrong direction
for climate change.
I'm asking you CPUC Commissioners and Governor Newsom
to fix this proposal.
There should be no solar tax,
not even a cent.
In political science we call regulators
who pass a proposal written at the heist
of the very utilities they regulate captured regulators,
CPUC Commissioners, please don't let yourself be captured
by PG&E and the other utilities.
Do the right thing for Californians
for the environment and for our world's future.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Carol Hart.
You may go ahead.
Carol Hart: Hi.
My name is Carol Hart and I'm a registered voter in Ventura.
I have been a customer of three California utility companies
and a shareholder of one of them.
I purchased a grid tide solar system for my home
in Mariosa county in 2012.
I, along with my neighbors who leased their solar panels,
did our part to ease the grids energy burden,
but would not have justified this expense without tax
incentives and the low monthly minimum charge
by my utility company at $10 per month.
Now that I have moved to Ventura,
I would like to invest in solar power and battery storage,
but your potential actions are making me
and countless others reconsider.
I cannot justify the personal cost
of another solar panel installation.
If you act in favor of utility company budgets
over my rights as a California taxpayer,
please help us help you do the right thing
for our environment and for clean energy jobs
by fixing or eliminating your solar tax proposal.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is David Born.
You may go ahead.
David Born: Hi. My name is David Born
from San Francisco, California,
and I do not work in the solar industry
but I do work in sustainability strategy at Google
and like so many other people on this call.
I strongly reject the NEM 3.0 proposal.
I think it is crazy, but instead of repeating
what everyone else has said,
I did wanna address the two out of hundreds
of people that I heard commenting for
in favor of NEM 3.0 on this call.
And then one was talking about a social equity issue.
And I think, beyond the bait and switch for a existing.
So owners like myself, the fact that you were,
discouraging new homeowners from getting solar
many of whom will be lower income families
that we need to join the fight on climate change
is really antithetical to what California
needs to be doing to address these climate goals.
And of course the second, comment
was about the solar energy spike during the day.
And to that effect, we need to really be incentivizing
badly storage in addition to rooftop solar.
So that once everyone has it,
we can of course have renewable energy at night as well.
So, strongly recommend the CPUC reject this proposal.
And in fact, if you're gonna do anything--
(alarm ringing)(indistinct) Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Cheryl Reynolds.
You may go ahead
Again Cheryl Reynoldsm your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
Cheryl Reynolds: Can you hear me now?
-: Yeah.
-: Yes, we can please proceed.
Thank you.
Cheryl Reynolds: Okay.
Thank you.
Sherry Reynolds, out of Oceanside, California,
I have a lot of reasons to be discouraged by the tax.
I recently became a solar consultant sold my first job
and I love this industry.
I have five grandchildren who three of which
are in California, and my concern is about their wellbeing.
If we are not able to clean up our environment,
I hope you do vote against NEM three.
And I appreciate the time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Marisa Woodard.
You may go ahead.
Marisa Woodard: Hi. My name is Marisa Woodard.
I work at Hot Purple Energy in the Coachella valley.
I've been in the solar industry for about four years.
I love my career because solar and energy storage evolves
with our lifestyle and demand for energy
is always on the cutting edge of technology
and the best part, it's renewable sustainable energy.
That's good for our planet.
Tens of thousands of Californians, including myself,
depend on our jobs for the livelihoods of our families.
NEM three would kill the solar industry,
leading many of us jobless and without the means
to support our families.
It is also out of line with California's
clean energy initiatives and it will lead
to a decline in people going solar
and as seen as a penalty to those who have already
gone solar, please reject the NEM three proposal.
Thank you for your time and the opportunity to contribute.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is James Miller.
You may go ahead.
James Miller: Hello.
Thank you for taking my call.
Commissioners, I live in Sherman Oaks
and I work in the television industry
and I strongly oppose this job killing utility
enriching solar tax 3.0,
which violates every tenant of the regulatory fairness.
And it's likely illegal under federal law.
I installed pollution free stable 21 solar panels
on my Sherman Oaks house and drive an EV.
Whatever excess energy I use, I sell back to the grid
which helps stabilizes the grid while I produce
clean, renewable energy to others.
The state of California is known as the leader
and trend centered, sustainable, renewable energy,
and provides the path for other states to follow
the CPUC proposal advocated by the utility, monopolies
and fossil fuel industries is nothing but a big business
profiteering Wolf and Reynolds clothing scheme,
and must be rejected.
(alarm ringing) This is a time to--
-: Thank you very much Operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Mike Roe.
You may go ahead.
Mike Roe: Hi, I've listened to everybody on here
and I have the same concerns.
I say, let's take this fight to Twitter
and get everybody to retweet a tweet I put together.
My identity is @MikeRoe912.
I'm like the dirty jobs guy,
except without the w @MikeROE912.
I've got the Commissioners copied on there
as well as Gavin Newso and other influential folks
do the same, retweet my tweet and add yours
and hashtag no solar tax hashtag CPUC.
And let's get this trending on Twitter.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Megan Chumley.
You may go ahead.
Megan Chumley: Yes.
This is Megan Chumley.
I'm a retired public health nurse
from the Arden-Arcade area of Sacramento.
I'm also a member of climate health now.
Commissioners, if you are making the wrong decision
to side with the corporate greed and their distortions
of the facts and impose an owner's tax
on rooftop solar owners, as well as unfair compensation
for the electricity they provide to the grid,
you will be setting back decarbonization of our society
at a time when we have maybe less than eight years
before runaway global warming will cause us
all irreparable harm.
Communities of color and the poor will fill the harm first,
but make no mistake.
All of us, including you and your defendants
may face extinction.
We can't meet our clean power goals without encouraging
fair and equitable rooftop solar.
I beseech the Commission to make a wise decision
about increasing the need for clean power
for the 21st century.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Steven CDO.
You may go ahead.
Steven CDO: Steve CDO retired.
I do not agree with this change in policy.
In San Diego, gas and electric electricity,
our gasoline electricity among our largest monthly expenses.
Those of us on fixed income invested in solar in EVs
unaware 20 years of net metering
was a whim of the utilities.
This goes beyond solar will cause people to pause
before installing batteries for fewer
punitive CPUC changes applies the same to electric cars.
When the rate goes over a 25c/kwh
without rooftop solar, gasoline is cheaper.
It's clear the utilities wanna make solar go away.
The proposed changes increases my monthly charge
for electricity by several 100% disincentivizes,
new solar instalations,
therefore killing the rule rooftop solar industries,
reestablishing the utility monopoly with NEM three,
the utilities win the consumer
and the solar industries lose.
47 states have lower electric rates
is the public utilities Commission
or just (alarm ringing) utilities Commission.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you very much, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Arthur pinnet.
You may go ahead.
Arthur Pinnet: Hello.
We're lifelong residents in the city of Lakewood
with rooftop solar on a retired crane operator,
not rich by any stretch.
We're middle class family in a humble home.
We wanted to trade, try to save money
on electricity and stop climate change.
Five years ago, we replaced our roof and added solar.
It was expensive for us.
We couldn't afford it.
If not for the incentive rebate.
The savings from our solar eventually helped pay
for a used plugin hybrid.
If this rule gets voted in with the monthly threes,
plus the 80% cut on our excess energy onto the grid,
mine would be economic solution will consider
going off the grid.
Edison meter could be disconnected.
This won't be my preference, but for this ruling passing
if this proposals pass I'll certainly scare off,
it will certainly scare off future solar customers
and lose solar jobs.
Governor Newsom, Commissioners don't force us
to make tough decisions to leave the grid.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Ryan McGuire.
You may go ahead.
Ryan McGuire: Hi.
Yeah, Ryan McGuire here of Claremont in El county.
I have solar on my roof and also a solar installer
for source solar.
And I'm just, I'm grateful for everybody on this call.
It's been, well over 240 minutes.
who like those that over 240 years ago stood up
against unfair taxes and rules that preceded
the birth of this country.
I just appreciate those that are doing the same thing today.
Standing up against unfair tax and rules
that seek to kill California solar.
So, I trust we'll have the same outcome
and this great solar industry in the state
will live on and prosper.
And I like the guy's suggestion that we double
the incentive for solar.
Anyway, that's my vote.
Definitely, please reject NEM 3.0,
thanks for supporting and standing on.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jeanette king.
You may go ahead.
Jeanette King: Good afternoon.
This is Jeanette king live in Livermore
in the San Francisco bay area.
I do not (indistinct) on rooftop solar.
I am a retired teacher and have rooftop solar
on my home since 2006,
which has produced all the electrical power that I use.
I have recently installed a heat pump
to replace my gas furnace.
Rooftop solar is important for citizens like me.
Net metering is financially sound for ordinary citizens.
The state should honor the promise to people
who have rooftop solar.
Rooftop distributed solar is important for combating
climate change without compromising open space
in agricultural lands or desert areas with industrial solar.
Thank you very much for taking my comment.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is John Taylor.
You may go ahead.
John Taylor: Thank you.
I have absolutely no ties to rooftop solar industry,
but the biggest cost is not them.
It's the billions a month in transmission
and distribution charges.
The utilities reging in and that price is going up,
but like cell phones, solar TV is a disruptive technology.
It can go anywhere.
It does not need to be tethered to wires.
If CPUC kills rooftop solar,
that will cause more unnecessary transmission over build
to deliver remote energy,
the can and should be or generated at load
that will compound the already outrageous charges.
Customer will be stuck with on, in an item.
And we'll all miss the benefits you've heard
about local generation.
The POC is legally morally obligated to ensure
the growth of distributed solar.
So instead of gutting any NEM,
maybe it's time to revamp the revenue allocation
for these hugely lucrative of utilities.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is from Ray Vargas.
You may go ahead.
Ray Vargas: Sorry.
I was on mute.
Good afternoon.
As a C two EJC4W member, I say stop NEM three.
Today's meeting was opened with an acknowledgement
to black history months.
While any support of NEM three is continued oppression
by a systematically racist agenda
by ways of policies like NEM three,
which target the middle class and disadvantaged communities.
I would like to echo all of the previous speakers today
and their persuasive talking points as a layman.
It is not hard to glean the NEM three benefits,
PG&E and perpetuates support
of monopolies and conglomerates.
My indigenous ancestors are the stewards of the stolen land
and is evident how the current system has managed our planet
with greed based motivations.
It's time to choose mother nature instead of pimping her out
for a profit over our climate depends on it.
Please embody the year the tiger reference this morning
and choose courage to take steps towards dismantling
the patriarchy and the corporate agenda.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller has Benard Summers.
You may go ahead.
Benard Summers: Good afternoon,
president Reynold, Commissioners.
Thank you for your service and stewardship
and thank you to my fellow,
solar brothers and sisters on this call.
My name is Benard Summers
and I've been a leader in the solar industry for 17 years.
I've helped create that thousands of jobs
and thousands of homeowners I've helped by going solar.
By the way, four kids, three grandkids,
third generation army.
I'm currently a CEO of Redemption Energy at blue based
in San Diego, but we operate all over the US.
Our current team focuses on well,
Latino and Asian American communities.
These are mostly disadvantaged families,
many military and veterans like me,
first responders and retirees.
Many of these workers and the homeowners have ascended
from the disadvantaged class to the middle class
because of solar to propose NEM 3.0
order will put these middle class families
back into the disadvantaged class.
It will reverse the progress that we
have been together in the past decade.
Let's not let that go backwards now,
if this order passes after more than 20 years
of California residency, I will be relocating.
There'll be next to this of California's talent
to other parts of this great country
to more so friendly states.
I'll have to inform my team members to(indistinct) with me.
-: Thank you.
Benard Summers: You looked up.
Push pause Been revised.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Philip Yamo.
You may go ahead.
Philip Yamo: Hello.
My name is Philip Yamo.
I'm directing producer of Collaborate Productions
in Stockton, California.
Member of the CEEE,
I fail to agree with the decision made by the CPUC NEM 3.0,
I believe this is detrimental to the low income communities
abroad the state of California.
I find it difficult to have confidence
in the cost shipped.
Our infrastructure system and grid
is at a critical stage I believe.
Green energy and the economy is the beginning
of environmental justice in our communities.
Solar and energy storage should be our goal to begin
the process and completely deCommissioned peaker plants,
Why pay higher taxes for the hardworking Californians
wanting to go green in the future.
Everyone should have the opportunity to help clean up
their polluted neighborhoods.
Keep the public mind of the positive change
in the solar is not the agenda.
We need to support stopping equity in California.
And thank you for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Carlos Bacar. You may go ahead.
Carlos Bacar: Hi, can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can.
Carlos Bacar: Excellent.
Carlos Bacar, Fresno
work in marketing at energy concepts,
a solar company here in Fresno.
I am brand new to solar, probably the newest.
I joined the industry just over a year ago,
but I was a solar consumer many years before that.
I am super excited about this industry.
It really didn't exist in this current
form just 30 years ago.
I would like to urge the Commission to throw out
the proposed NEM three decision and release
an alternate proposal.
With NEM three, I did what I've done many times
in the past with difficult topics.
I showed it to my wife.
She manages our finances anyways and thank God for that.
And I asked her, would you have installed solar
if these were the rules?
I'm going to paraphrase her because I can't use
her language, but she said,
heck no, she thought it's actually happening.
And I told her not yet.
It's up to the utilities Commission.
She got mad at me.
I'm afraid too many average consumers will come to the same
conclusion and kill our industry as we know it,
I urge the Commission to please
throw out the proposed decision.
Please help me save my marriage, my job,
and please save the solar industry as we know it today.
Thank you, thank you very much for your time today.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is from Susan Aposky.
You may go ahead.
Susan Aposky: Hi.
Thank you for taking my call.
I'm a registered voter and tax payer and solar panel owner
in Berkeley urging you to reject NEM 3.0,
it takes us backwards instead of forwards,
please say no to the solar tax.
Make solar more affordable, not less for all of us.
Please honor the existing 20 year protection
for solar users.
NEM 3.0 is nothing but a giveaway to the big utilities
who's been frowned, criminally negligent
and responsible for hundreds of wildfires.
Please do not pub punish hardworking Californians
for putting solar on their roofs.
We're trying to prevent climate change,
wildfires and blackouts.
Not add to the problem as the utilities have been doing.
Please put the public back in the California public
utilities Commission and do the right thing.
Thank you so much.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Theresa Wynn.
You may go ahead.
Theresa Wynn: Good afternoon Commissioner.
My name is Theresa Wynn in San Jose.
This is an issue.
This issue very went to meet my family
and all the residential and the consumer.
I didn't know about the affordable solar for low income.
So, I apply for personal loan for $15,000
to purchase a solar panel for my house.
And I am the only sole provider with income 48,000 per year.
Solar panel has helped me a lot.
You know, like I say every penny account.
So they do save my energy bill.
And I also believe that to teach my kids
to be go green and clean air and savior,
please do not adopt proposal for the solar tax.
And just one quick request.
Do you have a winning lottery numbers?
Just a joke. (laughing)
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Don Lebarake.
You may go ahead.
Don Lebarake: Yes.
-: Please go ahead.
-: And Don your line open.
We're not able to hear you.
Please check your mute button.
Don Lebarake: Doesn't open.
-: Mr. Lebarake, please go ahead.
-: It looks like Don's line has disconnected.
Our next caller is Sasha Champlinter.
You may go ahead.
-: [Sasha Champlinter] Hello. My name is Sasha Champlinter.
I'm the owner of Harmony Air
and we are a local family owned company in Lake county,
California have been around for 15 years
and we providing jobs for local people and their families.
And I'm strongly opposed NEM three,
because it's gonna kill our business.
It's gonna take away the ability of our workers
to have ability to provide their families.
There is no mystery or doubt that NEM three
is there to support profit for utilities,
and it's certainly against people of California
and climate and planet.
Please do not support NEM three
besides the economic problem.
The distributed solar is the only way to support
the local community over here during the power outages,
due to fire, utilities have a certainly no way whatsoever
to provide energy when the grid collapses
during the(indistinct)(alarm ringing)
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jackie Eckland.
You may go ahead.
Jackie Eckland: Hi, Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
Jackie Eckland: Hi, Jackie Eckland residence of Torrance,
please do not adopt the proposal for a rooftop solar tax.
A couple years ago, I installed solar panels
to protect the environment.
I've always conserved.
I was brought up that way to protect
the environment, conserve energy.
And when I was a customer of Southern California Edison,
I paid no more than $35 a month.
This new proposal would charge a higher fee
than my old Southern California Edison bill.
People will not be encouraged or able to afford
to install solar panels if this passes.
We've seen the effects of climate change in our state,
this proposal does not help in this effort.
It only rewards the utility companies.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Faye Johnson.
You may go ahead.
Faye Johnson: Hi.
I live in Santa Cruz in the Santa Cruz mountains
and we are in the highest tier for wildfire risk.
And we're also in the CZU lightning fire complex area.
Although to be fair, this is not one that PG&E caused.
So, we get a lot of those public safety power shut off.
And when they shut off our power,
we are at the end of the transmission line and PG&E
has to travel over a 100 miles to check out
elderly miles of transmission line.
So, the local solar and storage batteries are just about
our only chance to keep our medical appliances working
and medications and food safe.
Please do not tax us for having done the right thing.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Gary Brown.
You may go ahead.
Gary Brown: Thank you.
And thanks to the president and the Commissioners and staff.
My name's Gary Brown.
I'm a working class resident located in California
and I've devoted a great deal of financial resources
towards solar energy and the cars
installing rooftop solar and electric vehicle
and dealing with the finances.
And I find it's shockingly disappointing
that our Governor and the California Public Utility
Commission would undercut and penalize working class
Americans that invest and promote efforts
to fight climate change, to stop the proliferation
of air pollution by fossil fuel power plants.
You know, this ruling runs contrary to the historical
California clean air efforts to achieve
sustainable energy goals.
Not only is it disingenuous and bad faith regulatory policy,
but it violate the principles of fairness
to impose fixed charges on customers
and who choose to install solar systems.
This--(indistinct) (alarm ringing)
-: Thank you very much.
Gary Brown: Okay, bye.
-: Thanks for your comments.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Ahe Ginsburg.
You're not, line is open
Ahe Ginsburg: Can you hear me?
Can you hear me?
-: Yes we can, please go ahead.
-: My name is Ahe Ginsburg and I'm involved in our family
owned startup company GizmoPower.com.
Gizmo power is spelled with an S and we created Gizmo power
to support our daughter Antonia
develop at market her invention,
a powerful portable solar car port on wheels
is integrated EV charger.
With the current rate proposal and the solar tax
we would not be able to grow our business in California.
Net metering is a just compensation rate
for renewable electricity generation,
close to the location where the renewable
electricity is needed.
Distributed PV installations avoid significant upgrade costs
to the electric grid in comparison
to utility owned solar bonds,
which are located far away from the users.
As the California Public Utility Commission
you should honor this reality and reject the distorted
narrative of cross subsidy to derail
the just compensation rate for are an effective technology.
The current net metering compensation rate is not too high.
(alarm ringing)
The current net metering rate is too low
if you take the additional real estate cost--
-: Thank you very much
Thanks for your comments.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jim Shaw.
You may go ahead.
Jim Shaw: Hi, my name is Jim Shaw.
I'm with O'Connell Solar Consulting.
Our primary business is representing farmers in agriculture.
Agriculture is one of the cornerstones of our economy.
It's one of the only industries that pays
sickly pays retail for everything,
and then sells at wholesale everything it produces,
which still we faced with additional costs of doing business
and hedging our electrical costs with solar
is the only overhead we can hedge with
to be both environmentally and financially sustainable
because the majority of agricultural is seasonal
were highly dependent on export credits.
The proposals under consideration will destroy
the economic feasibility of solar
for our seasonal pumps and processors.
The result, lost jobs in both solar
and agricultural industries
and higher food costs for everyone.
Please rule against the proposed rate changes
in their present form and continue to support
customer side distributed energy.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Tom Thompson.
You may go ahead.
Tom Thompson: I just...(indistinct)
-: Again Tom Thompson,
your line is open.
You may go ahead.
Tom Thompson: I'm a loader.
I work...(indistinct)
-: Mr. Thompson, we're ready for your comments.
Tom Thompson: Hello, I'm here.
Thank you.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
My name is Tom Thompson and I'm the vice president
of sales for the Solaria corporation,
a renewable energy, solar energy technology company
headquartered in Fremont, California.
Solaria establishes global manufacturing
and R&D base in the bay area over 20 years ago
based on California's leadership in the public policy arena
and the role that smart energy policies play
creating viable competitive markets.
It has worked during our two plus decades
here we have employed thousands of Californians
while contributing billions of dollars
to California's economic engine.
We are speaking an opposition to the proposed
NEM three decision, what has become known as the solar tax.
The NEM three proposed decision is extreme.
It would quickly cut California's rooftop market
by as much as 50% quoting to billions of dollars
of economic activity.
For me and my colleagues at Solaria,
the NEM three proposed decision puts our jobs
and our family's like security at risk,
but the job killing effects of the NEM three solar tax,
as you have heard from many today,
extend well beyond solar area.
(alarm ringing)
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you very much.
I encourage you to consider it.
-: Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Operator Nick caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Stephanie Brown.
You may go ahead.
Stephanie Brown: Hello.
Stephanie Brown representing TWW Indivisible Los Gatos
OCI orchard city indivisible,
which is in Silicon valley and myself.
I'm a resident of San Jose and I'm thrilled
to be participating in this amazing
demonstration of democracy.
I'm honored to join these people as I'm sure
the Commission is honored to be listening.
And I also wanna welcome the two new Commissioners.
I only wanna say join in with the other voices,
but say that we need solutions
for the climate crisis today.
Not tomorrow, it's starting to be too late.
So we really need the Commission to please
lead our state in finding really good solutions.
Let's not change the current incentive.
As a matter of fact, please, I plead with you
lead the Governor, lead the state,
lead our citizens in increasing the incentives.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Addison marks.
You may go ahead.
Addison Marks: Yeah.
Hi everybody.
20 years ago, I started selling to home builders
'cause I thought it was a good idea when a new home
was being built to put solar on and now approaching
19, 20 years later, we've done about a 100,000 homes
that service, moderate single family
multi-family homeowners with solar.
Our team at Sun Tower has grown
about 250 employees in our business unit.
If NEM three passes, it's gonna undermine
the value proposition for new homes.
And it's actually gonna cause homeowners more
to pay for energy than if they did not have solar at all.
So, the result of this would be less affordable homes
and an already expensive market in California.
And will decrease California's residence,
the ability to own an afford a home in our great state.
So, I urge you on behalf behalf of California homeowners
and new constructed homes that are being mandated
to have solar to reject this proposal.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Marcy Snyder.
You may go ahead.
Marcy Snyder: Yes.
Good afternoon Governor Newsome
and members of the Commission.
My name is Marcy Snyder and I live in Fort Bragg.
I think the voters are speaking really loudly to you
and I want to thank all the people
that have called in opposing this proposal
by the investor owned utility.
I have been a rooftop solar person.
I've had rooftop solar for over 30 years.
I urge you to please fix this proposal
in the following ways.
No solar tax, no one should be penalized
for having solar on their rooftops.
Net three metering.
It has to be penciled out and to honor the 20 year contract
with that you have with solar users scraps this proposal
from the IOUs rooftop solar saves taxpayers money,
rooftop solar directly mitigate addresses,
California wildfire.
(alarm ringing)
-: Thank you.
Marcy Snyder: Rooftop, solar direct--
-: Operator.
Thank you.
We need to move to the next caller.
Thank you.
-: Our next caller is Angelica Vale
You, you may go ahead.
Angelica Vale: Hello.
Hi, my name is Angelica Vale
and I live in TLE, California.
I'm against the proposed solar penalty fee
and I'm against slashing the value of rooftop solar by 80%.
Nobody should pay a penalty for putting
solar panels on their roof.
Rooftop solar empowers homeowners and prevents harmful
developments of solar fields by the utilities
and extension of supporting grids, California
should be doing more, not less to promote rooftop solar.
Please show us your serious about the rate hikes,
blackout, inner pollution saying no to the utilities
profit grab and say yes to helping millions
of working class people to get solar.
Please support the expansion of solar
and the battery storage by expanding tax rebates,
state rebates, and making solar more affordable.
Please end the support for NEM 3.0,
please help reduce the ROI for the utility.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jennifer Tanner.
You may go ahead.
Jennifer Tanner: Yes.
Hi Jennifer Tanner, invisible California green team.
Thank you all for hanging in there
and letting all of us speak.
There is a consortium of fossil fuel funded groups
with the same agenda to Kill top solar all over America.
And I see you're wondering about the similarity,
as we speak, Florida legislature is considering a bill
eerily similar to what the CPUC is proposing.
Is that a coincidence.
All over America, there are special actions
in various states to kill top solar at the behest
of the IOU'S for their profits at the expense
of clean energy and climate resilience.
Alec, a fossil fuel funded tank is notorious
for promoting ideas to kill all of rooftop solar,
is that who we listen to?
120,000 people over 600 groups,
cities and schools have already told you
what the right thing is.
And 450 people today.
Please listen to them.
Not fossil fuel funded interests,
under your new leadership Commissioner Reynolds
and the other two new ones.
Can we please go back to California leading way?
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Linda Hemingway.
You may go ahead.
Linda Hemingway: Okay.
Hi, my name is Linda Hemingway.
I live in Santa Rosa, California.
15 years ago, we put solar panels on our house.
We are retired teachers by definition not rich.
We have, we are not part of the problem.
We are part of the solution.
We do our part.
We brag about our solar panels all the time
and encourage everyone we know to get them.
We lived up to the deal we made 15 years ago.
Now this proposed change breaks the rules
and hurts folks like us.
Please reject this proposal.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Dana Smith.
You may go ahead.
Dana Smith: This is Dana Smith.
I've been in solar for 11 years.
I sell residential commercial, nonprofit, solar.
I'm old enough to witness when tobacco companies could buy
reports in white papers saying smoking didn't cause cancer
and witness people that should know better believe them.
I learned a new term today, captured regulator.
Now I'm witnessing utilities buying reports
that shift blame away from real problems.
These reports have a few true facts about solar,
but they're mostly misleading and untrue.
A librarian would not know whether to file
'em under fiction or comedy.
The cost shift is true,
but it's when consumers give too much
hard earned dollars to the utilities.
That's the true cost shift.
Californians pay way too much,
much higher than other places in the country in the world.
It is the CPUCs responsibility.
Fix that problem.
Fix the utilities.
Please leave solar alone.
Consumers are fleeing these high rates.
That's the problem.
Fix high rates, please don't kill solar and close
the only exit consumers have.
Thank you. (alarm ringing)
-: Thank you.
Operator our next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Andrew Hoopers.
You may go ahead.
Andrew Hoopers: Hello?
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can hear you please go ahead.
Andrew Hoopers: Okay.
Last name is actually pubs.
I'm a resident in SIM valley, California.
And let me remind you, this is the CPUC mission statement.
The California public utilities Commission
serves the public interest by protecting consumers
and ensuring the provision of safe, reliable utilities,
service, and infrastructure reasonable rate
with a comment, commitment, excuse me,
to environmental enhancement
and healthy California economy.
I have to say, if you approve this,
you are derelict in that mission statement.
That's all I have.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Cindy Bailey.
You make, go ahead.
Cindy Bailey: Hi, I'm Cindy Bailey.
I live in Culver city, California.
And I'm on this call to plead with you
to oppose this proposal.
It is flawed on so many levels
for those people who called in to say they thought
it was a good idea because we have our peak hours
on some, not during the sunshine.
Those of us who have batteries have a solution for that.
We do the battery storage with our extra solar
throughout the day, and then we give it back to the grid.
So, the answer to that problem is to get
more people and give more incentives for battery storage.
I would absolutely agree with everyone else
that is on the call.
What they've said, I was a forestry major to begin with
and ended up as a healthcare per professional
and a first responder.
So, I put on solar a year ago and with...
I will not break even for two, three or four more years.
And now if this goes through, I will never break even.
It will have cost me to put solar on.
I do pay grid fees every month on my adjusted bill,
just like everyone else. (alarm ringing)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Richard Scaff.
You may go ahead
Again, Richard Scaff, your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
-: Mr Scaff, Please go ahead.
Richard Scaff: Hello.
Can you hear me?
-: We can hear you now, please go ahead.
[Richard Scaff: Okay.
Thank you, I apologize.
My name is Richard Scaff.
I live in Sonoma county, one of the Northern California
counties devastated by PG&E caused wildfires
that has destroyed communities and killed
numerous residents.
I am calling to ask that you reject the for-profit electric
utility proposed solar penalty tax.
And instead ask that you ensure that solar and battery
storage becomes more affordable for low income working
in middle class households,
but especially for vulnerable seniors
and people with disabilities,
many of whom are medical baseline customers
and are 20% of the California population.
And our rooftop solar and battery storage
is the best and proven way for people
to protect themselves from power outages.
This is especially important for vulnerable seniors
and people with disabilities who depend on consistent
electricity to operate life supporting medical
and mobility equipment.
The portable batteries that the electric utilities
have funded for a few vulnerable seniors
and people with disabilities have proven inadequate
and for the rest of the state's vulnerable ratepayers
permanently installed residential batteries
and solar to recharge those batteries as the only
mitigation that will assure that vulnerable
seniors and people with disabilities have the needed
consistent electric use electricity
during electric utility DE energy events.
Thank you very much. (alarm ringing)
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Pete Marsh.
You may go ahead.
Pete Marsh: Hi, good afternoon Commissioners.
I'm Pete marsh, founder and owner
of Vector Green Power in Long Beach.
I'm a veteran having served 30 years
in the US Coast guard and the defense industry.
When I learned about the harm we're doing to our economy
and public health through fossil fire, global warming,
I committed to transitioning into a renewable career
as my third career.
I self apprentice in solar construction earned a C46
contract years license and founded a small business.
I could see as soon as I entered the industry
that the original them was not sustainable long term,
it was designed to create an important industry
at which it has succeeded wildly.
I acknowledge it needs revision,
but this PD is a complex clumsy misdirected policy
that would decimate my company,
just like all the other business owners
and solar employees you've heard from today.
I proudly marched in the LA rally two weeks ago,
wearing my hard hat and my fall protection harness,
carrying a sign that explained it was because CPUC
was threatening to push my business off the roof.
My three amazing granddaughters and I employ you
so please, don't do that.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jason Scott.
You may go ahead.
Jason Scott: Hello, my name's Jason Scott.
I'm a volunteer board member of the school
for children with autism.
These children have behaviors that prevent them
from attending a typical public school in district.
Our program is essentially a last chance for many
of these children who have autism
from being institutionalized.
Schools have been hit with egregious rate increases
and are forced to pull funds from educational programs
to pay their elected bills.
One of the ways to schools are able to reduce their costs
through their rooftop is through rooftop solar.
Schools can afford or can't afford to fund solar.
So, these are funded through PPAs where a bank funds
the project and they charge the schools substantially
less than what the utility does.
The PPAs are modeled on 20 year agreements
from the utilities proposed by the banks and models as such.
The proposed changes are gonna nullify
all of these agreements and change
all of the terms retroactively.
The financial model used for these agreements
will be thrown out the window and the schools
will be hit with even higher costs than before.
If this is the bank rates and terms(alarm ringing)
(indistinct) mortgage changing every bank owner--
-: Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Lionel Rodriguez.
You may go ahead
Again, Lionel Rodriguez.
Your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
-: Operator.
Let's move to the next caller.
Thank you.
-: Our next caller is GN. Caroline Park.
You may go ahead.
-: [GN. Caroline Park] Hello.
My name is GN. Caroline Park from Tom land Los Angeles.
I'm an executive board member in the California
democratic party for identification purposes only.
I strongly urge the Commission to reject
the proposed decision and make solar more affordable,
not less affordable for renters like myself.
So we too can contribute to a clean
and sustainable energy grid.
This move is the opposite of climate action.
It would pull the rug out from under clean businesses
and existing solar infrastructure
and cause us to rely on finite energy sources.
This move would be the opposite of a just transition
and you would be signing off on assured climate disaster.
Please do the right thing and give Californian
a sustainable future instead.
-: Thank you.
Operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller, is Thereser Chestmore.
You may go ahead
Again. Thereser Chestmore.
Your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
And shall we go to the next caller?
-: Yes, please.
Thank you operator.
-: Our next caller is Ryan Christensen.
You may go ahead.
-: [Ryan Christensen] Hi, my name's Ryan Christensen
I'm marketing director at Renew Solar in Hanford.
We serve a four county footprint and the NEM three proposal.
Would've a terrible impact on our company
and the communities that we serve.
Over the last 15 years, renewable solar
has returned hundreds of thousands of dollars
to our communities.
If this passes we won't be able to continue that support
we give to at risk youth and recovery programs,
law enforcement, local schools,
and community centers, student health,
and or student leadership programs and health organizations.
We employ recovery addicts and former inmates
who need a second chance and they might
not otherwise get those.
This proposal will reduce us opportunities for these folks
to reenter our communities and become productive members.
We counted a privilege and responsibility
to support our communities.
This proposal won't just harm our business.
It'll harm our communities.
We encourage you to reject this version and write a proposal
that benefits all California constituents,
not just the utilities.
Thanks much.
-: Thank you.
And I would like to let everyone know
that we will be taking a 15 minute break at 4:00 PM.
We'll take a few more callers, before four,
and then start a 15 minute break.
Operator, please call the next...
Please announce the next caller.
-: Our next caller is Caroline leaving.
You may go ahead.
Caroline: Hi, my name is Caroline leaving
and I'm in Santa Cruz, California.
Eight years ago, we invested in the solar system,
installed on the roof of our home.
We feel good helping out by reducing our dependency
on fossil fuels and helping the environment
at the same time,
we also feel good helping to produce good clean,
renewable energy that can be shared with our neighbors.
Now PG&E wants to penalizes for are doing this
by charging us a huge tax each month
for producing free electricity for everybody
to use through the grid.
I can't believe that Governor Newsome would support
such an outrageous assault on homeowners
that are using our rooftops to create clean, renewable,
energy for everyone to use instead of encouraging PG&E
to start investing and supporting others
to do the same thing.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Nicholas SandMom.
You may go ahead.
-: [Nicholas SandMom] Hi, thank you for hearing me
I'm president's Reynolds and Commission.
I work in San Francisco for an independent
solar company called Luminol.
We're about 45 people and I got into solar to do my part
to combat climate change.
This proposed decision is strongly in opposition
of what our company's designs do.
And I strongly oppose the decision as written.
I take care of my father financially,
I have a good paying solar job.
And this job will likely not be in existence
if the proposed decision goes forward.
As stated, the bullet points in the proposed decision.
Number one states that any changes to net metering
must be done to allow for the sustainable growth
of solar in the California market.
From a practical example over the last year,
I'm on the sales team and I've seen leads and sold systems
drop precipitously.
And since the proposed decision was released early January,
we've sold practically no system.
So, it is clearly not going to work for Californians.
Despite what the bogus reports from the utilities say,
thank you so much (alarm ringing) for your consideration.
Please reject this decision.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Jill Easterday.
You may go ahead.
Jill Easterday: Hello everyone.
My name is Jill Easterday and my grandma Dolores Davis,
who's 89 years old, wanted to talk but then she got tired.
So she needs to go take a nap.
We ask that solars stay affordable for everyone
like the speakers before us have stated
solar power is good California residents,
including my boyfriend's parents so have rooftop solar.
It will benefit California's businesses
like Tiger where my brother works
and it will benefit the planet on which we live
and which the next generations will inherit from us,
which include my five nephews and one niece.
We ask that the proposed net metering change be rejected.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Scott WeCh.
You may go ahead.
Kyle Joaquin: Good afternoon, president Reynolds
and Commissioners, one moment, please.
This is actually Kyle Joaquin speaking
on behalf of Scott WeCh representing a 100,000
members of the state association of electrical workers.
Additionally, the 55,000 members comprising
the coalition of California utility employees.
We would like to first and foremost
acknowledge the Commission for their time and effort
regarding the proposed decision.
Originally we had scheduled hundreds of callers for today,
but when the agenda changed,
we canceled in deference to the Commission's time
and their very demanding schedule.
With that mentioned, I have two brief comments.
First, the NEM cost shift will approach $8 billion by 2030,
which is simply unsustainable.
And that reality cannot be omitted.
The state cannot continue to pay billions of dollars
annually for diminishing resource.
Those monies could be better directed to expand the state's
energy portfolio while providing green job opportunities
and access to renewable energy resources.
Secondly, the opposition is fond on sighting,
(alarm ringing) Arizona, Nevada, and Utah as models.
Those current proposed decisions exceeds
in the Aion states--
-: Thank you.
Kyle Joaquin: Thank you.
-: Thank you, thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jim bunch.
You may go ahead.
Jim Bunch: Thank you.
Hi, this is Jim bunch, San Diego of California,
I am husband of 20 years of proud
dad of a high school student is right now
learning about climate change in the deadly future
that they're about to inherit.
And I'm asking you to reject this proposal.
I'm also chairman of the US Green Chamber of commerce,
and I'm here representing my company that I co-founded
eight years ago named Power,
which is a public benefit coroperate of solar company.
We have over 5,000 passionate sales reps in solar
with 187 employees, 200 installation partners
in 20 states and an army of tax paying homeowners
who are saving thousands of dollars every year.
But they're tired of being stuck with these never ending
escalating costs of the utilities, just 48 hours ago
was on the phone with SDG&E.
They have another rate height coming into effect
from 34 cents to 54 cents in the next few months.
So let's work together, focus on three things
number one more renewable and affordable energy
for all households.
Number two more jobs, at least no job destruction
and number three decarbonization
for all of humanity sakes.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Dennis Defas.
You may go ahead.
Dennis Defas: Hello, my name's Dennis Defas
and I'm a homeowner in Cypress California.
I retired in July, 2020 now living off of a fixed income.
I convinced myself and my wife that if we purchased
a solar and energy storage system from our savings,
it would help us by first lowering our monthly
expenses for the next 20 year.
Second, keep us safe and from unplanned power outages
and third help California be green.
I received permission to operate my system
in September, 2021.
My carbon offset is 3.04 tons so far.
Now I am forced to fight against any changes or any tax
increases to my NEM 2.0 sold agreement
because a deal is a deal.
As California sold system owners,
we cannot afford changes to our existing NEM agreements.
We cannot afford to be charged new taxes of any kind,
and we do not deserve to have our NEM's deals broken.
So, please do the right thing.
Stop hurting Californians like me and my family.
(alarm ringing)
Please, please totally reject the current NEM 3.0 proposal.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
We are now gonna be taking a 15 minute break
before we break.
I would like to remind all of our callers
of the email address.
If you are unable to stay on the line,
you can send your comment by email.
The email address is public dot advisor,
ADVISOR@CPUC.ca.gov.
Thank you.
We will be breaking on a break until 4:15.
-: Thank you all for standing
by to these conferences resumed.
President Reynolds you may proceed.
-: Thank you.
First, we need to establish a quorum with the clerk.
Please call the role.
-: Commissioner Houck?
-: [Commissioner Houck] Here.
-: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: [Commissioner Shiroma] Present.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: [Commissioner Rechtschaffen] I'm here.
-: President Reynolds.
-: [President Reynolds] Here.
We have a quorum.
We're now to resume the public comment portion
of our meeting.
Operator, Would you please call the next caller?
-: Our next caller is Ruben Lee.
You may go ahead.
Ruben Lee: Hello, president Reynolds and Commissioners.
So you're all super smart and you've heard all the facts,
but I haven't heard much today about the impact on renters.
I'm a solar employee.
My mom still lives in the rent control apartment
in San Francisco that I grew up in.
And here's the way she sees this issue.
Power companies are trying to charge people 60 bucks a month
to put solar panels on their roof, plain and simple.
That's like a gas charging you because
you got an electric car and you don't buy their gas anymore.
Only 6% of the state currently has solar on their roof.
Most of those people are homeowners.
So the power companies think aha!
Now is the time to divide and conquer the voters.
But with better public policy,
renters could have solar right now.
Virtual net metering is here.
The only barrier is policy, economists Amod Faruki
and others have clearly shown rooftop solar
is actually cheaper for ratepayers, including my mom.
So do the right thing please,
and focus your efforts on expanding solar,
low income people and renters.
Thank you and sorry for being out of breath.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jerry WaTech.
You may go ahead.
Jerry WaTech: Good afternoon Commissioners.
My name's Jerry WaTech
and I'm with the Public Power San Diego.
A crew NEM three proposal before you places the burden
of maintaining California's electrical grid on the backs
of low and middle income people,
homeowners and businesses who have already spent
tens of thousands of dollars installing rooftop solar
on their homes and buildings,
but the goal of reducing their dependence on fossil fuel
and helping to combat the present climate emergency
in instead consider reducing the guaranteed
10% profit margin of the IOU monopolies.
IOU customers in California pay the highest
utility rates in the continental US
while the utilities profit...
While the utilities profits increase eight percent annually.
In San Diego, where I live SUGE makes million dollars
a day in net profits.
While the rate payers here are charged the highest rates
in the state, please eliminate the regressive
grid access tax on solar, rooftop solar
in the current NEM proposal and side with the people
of California and our planet.
Thanks so much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next is Alan Truex, you may go ahead.
Alan Truex: Yep.
Hey, thank you very much.
This is the first time I haven't had to compete
with solar companies as we all await to speak
on the same topic that we all agree on.
Commissioners my name's Alan Truex the Sales Director
of Vibe Solar at a Lancaster, California.
We've been in business for 20 years and our veteran owned
we've even created in a nonprofit organization
called buy before to aim, to assist our community.
It was to my understanding years ago that the solar industry
would be sustainable due to the efforts of California
to thrive in renewable energy.
NEM 3.0 will affect my family, my children,
and the family of my employees.
NEM 3.0 will burden the environmental future
we have pushed for for years will not be a clean energy
state by 2050 if this program continues in place,
our company will lose thousands or hundreds of thousands
of dollars for this proposal and effect.
Solar will no longer be a benefit to homeowners.
We will have to consider moving our business to a different
state than welcome solar with open arms,
please reject this proposal to keep
solar companies in business.
California's one of the best states in the United States.
Let's not impact our reputation.
Thank you for your patience as we express our concerns.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Katherine Boberg.
You may go ahead.
-: [Katherine Boberg] Katherine Boberg
CEO, of Center-fied Power California manufacturers,
state safe energy storage systems for 11 years in 2020,
California had approximately 9,800 fires
with devastating losses.
Some of the worst fires have been
caused by utility infrastructure.
Over 80 years old, the result of years of utility negligence
to invest in their own infrastructure
and meet their mandates, deliver safe, reliable power,
Residents are paying for installing
distributed clean generation infrastructure
because the utilities are not, do not penalize citizens
that are solving the environmental and economic disaster
that you have created through decades of negligence.
California utilities, and the CPUC need to reduce
the increasing CO2 and methane levels that are driving
climate change, drought, heat, wind, and fires.
With rooftop solar generation achieves the utilities
and CPUC need to incentivize not tax residents
that are using their hard earned dollars
to install distributed, clean solar generation
and batteries in their homes,
businesses and communities that create a resilient,
(alarm ringing) safe, and prosperous economy.
It is criminal to charge a solar tax or residents
who are paying for the infrastructure and technology
that solves for these issues--
-: Thank you--
-: [Katherine Boberg] Resilience, clean energy
and CO2 reduction.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your comments.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next call is Christopher Ward.
May go ahead.
-: [Christopher Ward] Under NEM three.
My cost savings for solar would be reduced by 80%.
The slow level of cost savings would end the financial
benefit of future residential solar installations.
The biggest cost impact is from instantaneous metering,
which ignores the diversity benefits of 1.3 million
California solar installations.
If all solar residences were connected to a single meter,
hourly metering data would substantially match
instantaneous metering data.
Consequently hourly metering for residential
solar should continue.
The fixed grid participation fee is substantial
and no other residential electricity users
are subject to such a fee in its present form.
The grid participation fee should be rejected
using electricity export rate that is less than
the tariff generation rate is unfair and inconsistent
with charging the full tariff rate for electricity use.
It is unfair to impose additional cost risk
on current solar customers by shortening
the committed any end term to 15 years.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operate next caller, please.
(audience laughing)
-: Our next caller is Weston McGill.
You may go ahead.
Rustin McGill: That me that's me.
-: Yes, we can hear you.
Rustin McGill: Hello.
Hi.
Yeah, my name is Rustin McGill.
It's my 12th year in energy.
33 years old, California native installed
my own solar system.
I really just hope everybody actually reads
the text and then applies it to how a system
logically works and realize that it it's just
gonna kill solar for everybody.
We've been talking about 55,000 jobs.
I think it's in the neighborhood of a hundred thousand jobs
because I'm not talking about today's jobs.
I'm talking about tomorrow's jobs,
jobs that don't even exist yet.
When I got into solar my job didn't even exist yet
that exists today.
So, I want you to think about that.
I want you to think about what it means for the future,
not for us today, as we make these decisions,
but people 20 years from now,
my children who will be adults and have financial
and fiscal responsibility to be into NEM 15,
where rates for an electric car now far exceed
gas costs today.
So, just think about more than what we're looking at today.
The policy makes sense.
It does need some changes, but it's really one sided.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Lawrence Chapman.
You may go ahead.
-: [Lawrence Chapman] Yes, I'm a San Diego homeowner.
I'm retired on a fixed pension and I installed solar
12 years ago at a cost of $50,000.
So I would not face increasing utility costs on retirement
SDG&E has since then added a fixed monthly charge
and moved the time window.
So, I do not get full credit for my production
during the day.
I'm now seeing a bill of $2,000 a year.
Whereas my previous bill,
when I first installed the system was zero.
If you approve 3.0, I will be completely removed
from NEM in three more years.
Instead of the full 20 years I was promised,
allowing the utilities to renege on their promise to me
is outrageous and un-American and I hope
you will prevent it.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Courtney Corda.
You may go ahead.
Courtney Corda: Hi, good afternoon.
I'm the co-owner of Corda solar in Danville.
I'm just a little guy.
I'm not a powerful union lobbyist and I don't have
an assistant who could wait on hold on my behalf
for nearly seven hours.
I've done that all myself.
Today's my birthday.
So, while I have been on hold for seven hours
for the chance to urge the CPUC to reject this horrible
NEM three plan, I've missed birthday calls
from my family and my friends.
I can't speak for thousands of union members,
but I can speak for my four installers
who have helped hundreds of people in Contra Costa county
go solar since 2007, please don't put us outta work.
I'm not just worried about my company and my workers.
I'm worried We've all lost sight of the big picture.
Our state needs more solar, more storage
and more innovation to reach our clean energy goals.
We don't need more Cow toing to the utilities.
Let's not make a dramatic and risky change
to a working NEM policy.
Please reject it, make it fairer and more gradual
with no per kilowat solar tax.
Please don't kill 60,000 solar jobs right now.
Let ordinary Californians keep investing in solar.
These four profits. (alarm ringing)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Robert Hunt.
You may go ahead
Again, Robert Hunt.
Your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
-: Mr. Hunt, please go ahead.
Operator, let's move to the next caller.
Thank you.
-: Our next caller is Milton Mogada.
You may go ahead.
Milton Mogada: Mogada, a good afternoon everybody
with my two KW system, I'll end up paying PG&E
you need to be connected feeding the grid for PG&E.
My name is Milton Mogada and I worked
for roof tech in Summerville.
I'm in the solar field since 1997, being that the CEC,
the California Energy Commission by down program
to incentivize solar PV began in 1998.
So, I've been mostly involved in training this workforce.
So on behalf of myself and all the solar contractors
and installers of California,
you must reject the current NEM proposal.
Search proposal will negatively affect them
and their families livelihood.
You also must reject the current NEM three proposal
in order to protect our consumers
and make a positive impact on climate change.
Thank you for your consideration.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Michael Zimerman.
You may go ahead.
-: [Michael Zimerman] I too excited,
While NEM two is not fair beyond that punitive
in the industry and near term.
-: Mr. Zimerman, we're having trouble hearing you.
-: [Michael Zimerman] Can you hear.
-: That's better.
-: [Michael Zimerman] (indistinct)
Acknowledging that we're on them too is not fair.
The replacement is beyond unfair.
It's punitive killing the industry in the near term,
in the midterm, able to exacerbate shrinking rate bases
as off grid for the determined going off grid
is an option today while politics isn't the purview
of this and the energy consumer has collected memory.
And if past is written, I can assure you
this won't be button.
The idea that dually executed NEM one and two agreements
will be put and retroactively changed to 15 years
is simply the most ill-conceived policy I've encountered
in over 12 years of talking that such nonsense
made into this California needs to encourage
investments and economic activity.
But if regulators get in the habit of breaching
the market principles,(alarm ringing)
in my opinion, norms of the rule of law
any chilling effects on inward investments or even--
-: Thank you.
(indistinct) -: [Michael Zimerman]
Flood cap, we completely--(indistinct)
-: Thank you for your comment.
-: [Michael Zimerman] Thank you.
-: Thank you.
We do need to move on.
Thank you for your comments.
Operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Karen Perkin.
You may go ahead.
Karen Perkin: Hi, (clearing throat)
I'm a retired teacher on a fixed income.
I'm not in the solar industry
and I don't have solar panels on my house,
but I would assume I'm speaking for millions
and millions who can't take seven hours out
on a Thursday to talk with you.
And NEM three would make rooftop solar unaffordable for me,
and I'm assuming millions of others,
PG&E shouldn't even exist.
It's a monopoly.
It's for profit.
And you know, energy is a life and death matter,
just like fire are life and death matter.
We don't have a for-profit fire department to go around,
putting out certain people's fires and not others.
We should be supplying energy to people
at an affordable rate,
and certainly should not be making solar less affordable
because climate the climate crisis is an emergency.
I'm a member of fossil fuels,
Fossil Fuel Free California Members are teachers
a group that's trying to get our pensions divested
from fossil fuels. (alarm ringing)
Also support many other environmental organizations
that are not for this.
And they want to see clean energy,
not dirty energy.
That's poisoning communities of color
and poor neighborhood in our area.
-: Thank you very much.
Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Andy McIlroy.
You may go ahead.
Andy McIlroy: Hey, my name is Andy McIlroy.
I work for sunlight financial.
I've been in the solar industry for nine years
and I live in Berkeley.
I got on this call at nine o'clock
thinking I would be slick and get in early in the queue,
but I got kicked off a few times.
And honestly, I couldn't be happier
that it took this long to get on.
'Cause there's so many awesome people making killer points
and only like one or two people who are for the proposal
and also happy birthday to the previous caller.
So anyway, solar is much more than just a job for me.
It's a career that I'm super proud of.
It's green.
It saves people money.
It creates jobs, with this proposal
it's like the utilities we found this clever,
a totally dishonest way to pit ratepayers
against each other while they benefit.
It's gonna kill thousands of awesome solar jobs overnight,
and homeowners will lose the valuable option
of being able to go solar.
And that just makes me really sad.
So, rooftop solar is not the bad guy.
Please reject the proposal entirely.
Do not compromise on it, reject it entirely.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Alex Feeder.
You may go ahead.
Alex Feeder: Good afternoon.
My name is Alex Feeder.
I've worked in the solar industry for 10 years.
I work for sun green systems in Pasadena.
We need more solar and storage to curb the impacts
of our climate emergency.
The NEM three proposal as it stands,
would destroy the solar industry.
Reducing the NEM terms from 20 to 15 years
for existing solar customers ruins the trust
we have in any future CPUC decisions If you can change
your mind in the future.
The fact that this and the monthly solar fees made it
into the proposed decision is shameful
and a profit grabbed by the utilities.
You're supposed to regulate the monopolies,
not help them profit off Californians.
Personally, I rent an apartment in Southern in California
and the way to help renters like me and 45% of Californians
is to get solar is to empower the virtual net metering
program and community solar program.
Cal property owners justify the solar
and benefit their tenants.
The promo does nothing to help the 45% of Californians
who are renters go solar by devaluing exported energy.
(alarm ringing)
Thank you all for taking the time.
-: Thank you.
Alex Feeder: Thank you.
-: Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is PR. T Neil.
You may go ahead.
PR. T Neil: Yes.
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
PR. T Neil: Okay.
I wanna thank you for that...
First and foremost Commissioners.
I know this is one heavy agenda and I appreciate
the opportunity to speak today.
On behalf of my nonprofit that I founded 19 years ago,
embracing the community leadership alliances.
And if I'm winded it, 'cause I ran to the phone right now.
I've been on it all day, but I help.
What I wanna say is that the nonprofit addresses
the greater Long Beach in Los Angeles areas
and it focuses on underserved underprivileged communities,
giving them resources in scaffolding
they don't have in their daily lives.
And it's all pursuing higher education
and environmental stewardness.
With that said, I would also like to expand
my appreciation on what the Commission has proposed.
The decision has began to address the net energy metering.
However--(alarm ringing)
-: Thank you.
PR. T Neil: I'll read--
-: Thank you for your comment.
PR. T Neil: Bye--
-: Operator, next Caller please.
-: Our next comment is from Joanne Helvig.
You may go ahead.
Joanne Helvig: Hi.
Thank you so much Commissioners.
My name is Joanne Helvig and I live in Oakland, California
in a mostly low and working class neighborhood.
I'm a single mother of two due to rising PG&E costs,
I started looking into rooftop solar recently
and I was very shocked to learn about that metering 3.0,
I can tell you that my decision as the head of my household
is a financial one and I would not be getting rooftop solar
if I would have to fall under 3.0,
which is a very difficult decision for me because
I am an environmentally conscious person
and I'm keenly aware of the state of our environment.
What is happening in California, my family
was only six miles away from the fires in near
Plasterville California and they were evacuated.
I like everyone else on this forum have seen
sky turn to the color of blood in the late summer.
We are alarmed at, I'm sure all of us are alarmed
at the rising sea levels.
And--(alarm ringing)
-: Thank you.
Joanne Helvig: So I urge you to vote no
on three point 'O'.
Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Seth Tilley.
You may go ahead.
Seth Tilley: Yeah.
Hi, my name is Seth Tilley.
I've been in solar since 2006 and I work
for San Diego county solar live in San Diego, California.
I not only feed my family with my career in solar.
I'm also very proud to have a career
that aligns with my values.
And as my one year old grows older,
I wanna be able to look in the eye
and tell 'em that I did my part.
So, I'm happy to be in this industry
that meter NEM 3.0 as it was initially ruled
would essentially kill the industry
and make it impossible for California to achieve
our zero carbon goal.
So, I strongly urge the Commission to vote no
on NEM metering 3.0
and lastly I'll say that in the last years,`
recent years solars become more achievable
for middle and lower income people
and NEM metering 3.0 would eliminate
the opportunity.
So, thank you very much.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jesse Elliot.
You may go ahead.
Jesse Elliot: Hi.
My name is Jesse Elliot.
I live in Sanless Ville, California.
I've been working in this industry,
solar industry for the past 18 years.
I currently own and JEBEL Engineering Construction
and co-owner of solar motion.
I helped grow one of the largest solar companies
in the nation for 17 years.
And let me tell you, no one is getting rich in our industry.
We are all just making a living,
providing jobs for Californians.
And completely opposed to the current NEM three proposal.
This is in asinine proposal and if you vote
to move forward with it,(clearing throat)
then you are admitting to all residents of California
and many others that are actually watching this issue
around the nation that you are incompetent
and compromise corrupt.
Do you really want that to be your legacy?
It is simple, shred the current proposal
resisting them one and two customers or to be left alone
should be no new charges on customers
for having producing solar energy.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Michael Luber.
You may go ahead.
Michael Luber: Yes.
My name is Mike Luber and I'm a retired
civil engineer living in Orange county.
My wife and I are strong supporters of California's
environmental goals to combat climate alteration
and to safeguard California's species
and undeveloped places.
One of the best ways to meet these goals
is to encourage rooftop solar systems.
Consequently, I ask the CPUC to not impose new fees
on rooftop, solar connections to the grid
or reduction in net metering rates
and certainly not reneging on existing compacts
between existing rooftop, solar owners
and the state of California.
Rooftop solar is superior to large distance solar
installations because excess energy goes into the local grid
and it's consumed locally avoiding
the need for long transmission lines.
That ruin (alarm ringing) the electric grid.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Next caller, please operator.
-: Our next caller is Janice Barnett.
You may go ahead.
Janice Barnett: Hi.
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can go ahead.
Janice Barnett: Oh great.
Yes I think I've been on since 10 o'clock this morning.
My name is Janice Barnett and in 2020,
I bought a brand new home in Sacramento, California,
and because it was a new build,
it was mandated by the California law to have solar.
There are many hundreds of home is currently being built
right now in this area.
And we're all forced to buy solar at our expense.
Well, many of us are making house payments
and still paying for our solars.
And this proposal fee will be a very hardship on a lot of us
that have to make ends meet in their...
I don't believe that the state of California,
could mandate the purchase of solar and turn around
and penalize the homeowners for putting solar on their home.
This bill will hurt future generations.
We're happy. (alarm ringing)
(indistinct)
-: Thank you.
Janice Barnett: Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Melissa Cahoun.
You may go ahead.
Melissa Cahoun: Hi.
My name is Melissa Cahoun and I'm the head
of marketing for SolarEdge Technology in North America.
SolarEdge started of in 2006 and is the largest solar
convert manufacturer with our us headquarters
located here in California in Silicon valley.
And I'm calling on behalf of the hundreds
of California SolarEdge employees,
as well as the thousands of large to small family owned
solar businesses and homeowners serve
to implore you to reject this proposal.
Not only will this be devastating for solar jobs,
but it will destroy the rate of new solar adoption
betray the almost one and a half million health tools
that have already gone solar and take California
a huge step backwards in the fight for climate change.
So, please don't erase environmental progress.
Do not jeopardize the livelihoods of so many
and continue to let California be the progressive leader
for renewable energy.
We're counting on you to do the right thing.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Mary Lynn Round.
You may go ahead.
Mary Lynn Round: Yes.
This is Mary Lynn Round.
I am calling because at PG&E's apparent request,
you are considering implementing a utility profit grab
at the expense of the majority of California
citizens and a plan that is not in alignment
with California's clean energy goals.
How sad that California's who have in good conscious
started what is right for the planet by installing
solar panels are now going to be cheated out
of their Goodwill investment because PG&E a company legally
responsible for loss of life and billions of dollars
of property is going to request it of you.
And the loss was done because of their negligence.
I live in Northern California,
where we have for season I after season inhaled smoke
that contributes to health issues
and our climate crisis every summer,
a major reason, PG&E a failed to bury transmission lines
and instead left the bus poorly maintained
(alarm ringing) transmission lines.
Thank you.
-: Thank you very much, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Joshua Resnick.
You may go ahead.
Joshua Rednick: Hello.
Thank you.
It's been waiting a while.
My name is Joshua Rednick and I work
for sun gauge in Oakland.
I was born and raised in Berkeley
and I've worked in solar for 11 years.
I love my solar career because we are democratizing energy
independence, working towards a cleaner future
and contributing to job growth in California.
The proposed decision would kill the value proposition
for homeowners and my job and nearly
70,000 other California solar jobs along with it.
The current NEM three proposal is a disaster
for the solar industry and for California,
you must reject this, please.
Thank you very much for listening and have a good day.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Sarah Ruth.
You may go ahead.
-: Hi. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can please.
Sarah Ruth: Thank you.
And I really wanna thank the Commission for this hours
and hours long exercise and democracy.
It's really very heartening.
There have been hundreds of amazingly smart comments.
I can't begin to touch.
Thank you for letting them be said.
I want to point out and speak to what a mayor
said about how their work was...
She was addressing her comments to the Governor
that she'd been working for him and his agenda,
'cause she believed in it.
I'm struck by the fact that we're sitting here right
on the phones of two initiatives that everybody wants.
This and also the guaranteed healthcare
for all that 80, 1400.
Everybody wants that.
Everybody here thinks this net metering
proposal is ridiculous.
I'm not sure what kind of productivity waste
has been recognized here by all these people
hanging on the phone all this time.
It isn't good for us.
Let's not do something that is done.
I'm also concerned with the implication on schools.
They're schooled across the country--
(alarm ringing) Okay, sorry.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jan Ellen Dietrich.
You may go ahead.
-: [Jan Ellen Dietrich] Hi.
Yes, Jan Ellen Dietrich is Ventura.
I have small agricultural business.
That's been saving to expand our solar system
with the recommended battery storage
and our net motivation is to help cut peaker use
and GHG's, a young consultant helping people
buy systems told me that if the news of this PG&E
spread those calling him have how that have previously
been confident and hopeful are now anxious and confused.
They ask, should I hurry up because
rules will change or wait.
His valuable time is going to mitigate your confusion
and not satisfying customers by selling systems.
That's just crazy.
So, I'm asking you to stop the disruption of these lives.
Reestablish stability with ample incentives,
for storage and equity for all.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Bill Binal.
You may go ahead.
Bill Binal: Good afternoon Commissioners, Bill Binal.
I live in San Diego county ground zero for solar.
I've been involved in the renewable technology interest
suite since 2009 I second and third,
the motions to oppose this one sided net meeting NEM 3.0
recommendations and echo all the arguments statistics
previously given by my esteemed colleagues
and concerned citizens.
California has led the way in the worthy goal
to create a renewable and sustainable world.
Let's make a better world for our children,
our grandchildren and future descendants.
Don't turn back the clock.
Let's move forward to creative technology.
There is enough energy in the sun in two hours
to power the entire for a year.
Paraphrasing Thomas Edison even stated back in 1910,
I put my money on the sun and solar energy.
Let's hope we don't have to wait until all the coal,
gas and oil are used up until we harness the sun.
Please break it up.
-: Thank you.
Bill Binal: Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Take our next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Shirley Shelanski.
You may go ahead.
-: [Shirley Shelanski] Okay.
Hello? Can you hear me?
-: Yes we can please go ahead.
-: [Shirley Shelanski] Oh, okay.
Hi, this is Shirley Shelanski I'm opposed
to the proposed NEM three measure.
I'm a retiry and pleasant hill who had to fight
for solar three years ago because I'm in an HOA
of a private unit development.
I chose solar to do my part in fighting climate change
and improving air quality.
If I use more energy than I get PG&E reimburses me
at four percent or four cents.
But if I use too energy, it true up,
I pay 28 cents or more of whatever the going rate is.
I feel like that's my role and I don't need
to be further penalized by a tax.
I also charge my hybrid plugin with clean energy.
I don't wanna deal with dirty energy.
I'm asking you to honor the 20 year agreement
as well as making solar affordable to low
and middle class residents.
Solar provides good clean energy jobs
and help us meet our climate goals.
Rooftop solar will free up open space
by having to, so we don't have to place
large solar and wind projects.
Please-- (alarm ringing)
Please pass this--
-: Thank you.
-: [Shirley Shelanski] Thank you.
-: Thank you for your comments.
Operator, next caller please.
-: President Reynold.
Our next speaker is Elester, Elester you are on muted.
Go ahead and speak.
Elester: Yes, can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
Elester: Okay.
Ladies and gentlemen of the CPUC
this is a very serious issue.
NEM three is an attack on our democracy
and this is the real insurrection
that's occurring in our country.
Not November 3rd, like the former president said,
and not January 6th, like the current one is saying
this CPUC decision is the fight of our time.
The corporate and monopolist utility companies
are pushing this to make solar inequitable.
Inequitable means not equitable.
Contrary to the utilities, jargon
and intentional misunderstanding
and use of the word equity.
It is inequitable for the working and middle class
to go solar with NEM 3.0 because it is way too expensive.
The Paris climate Accords,
which we are now part of thanks to president Biden
and push is made by Governor Newsom demand action
to prevent the media threat of climate change.
CPUC Commissioners, I'm talking to you right now,
do not be a cohort in this interaction.
If you do and vote for this,
you'll be participating in economic treason,
and you'll be labeled to domestic terrorist.
Please understand (alarm rings) the way behind your vote.
-: Thank you very much, Operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Charlie.
(clearing throat)
Excuse me. (coughing)
Excuse me, Charlie Popper.
Charlie Popper: Yes.
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
Charlie Popper: Okay.
I'm a retiree.
I installed solar 15 years ago with the intent
of reducing our impact on global warming.
I live in, if you want to know exactly where I live,
it's in Plumas county.
It's the part of Plumas county with the big hole
where the Dixie fire did not burn.
And if I had never had any questions
about how important it is to have solar
for climate change this year, as I watched the fire burn
all around us, I am very opposed to this proposal.
I think it is going to penalize us for doing the right thing
15 years ago, and it is going to have just the opposite
effect on our impacts on global change.
Thank you, please oppose it.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Tomlind.
You may go ahead.
Tomlind: Hello.
Thank you for hanging in there all day.
I appreciate the intention of the CPUC
and some of the parties to improve equity
and to encourage storage.
But I wanna talk about unintended consequences.
I'm concerned that this tariff proposal will not solve
the problem of rate payer equity,
but rather will likely make it worse.
Even if the proposal of economous
in the solar energy industry, there's one group
that will be incentivized by this proposal.
All of you on from know more better than most
how much anger there is at private utilities in this state.
As this proposed tariff makes grid tied PD uneconomic,
just as battery prices are coming down.
I expect the new tariff will likely lead more wealthy people
to get batteries and take their solar off the grid.
Leaving poor ratepayers,
holding the bag to support the grid.
Exactly what you were trying to counter.
I'm not wealthy and I'm considering it.
This takes those solar and storage
resources inefficiently off the grid,
just when the climate crisis calls on us
to employ all the renewables and storage resources
we can as effectively as we can.
Unfortunately, the rate bases system is regressive
and broken and private utilities seems up
to the job of saving us. (alarm ringing)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jan Warren.
You may go ahead.
Again, Jan Warren your line is open.
Please check your mute button.
Jan Warren: Can you hear me now?
Hello.
-: We can hear you now, please go ahead.
Jan Warren: Okay, I'm sorry.
Nevermind.
I'm with the Interfaith Climate Action
Network of Contra Costa County
I live in Walnut Creek and we
have rooftop solar on our home.
Faith congregations have been putting solar
on their rooftops to reduce their carbon footprints
and many are adding battery storage to provide resilience
hub in their communities.
Interfaith Climate Action Network of Contra Costa County
supports state funding through cap trade,
and other state funding sources for low income households
to install solar and reduce their energy financial burden.
California can't meet their 2030 goals
without rooftops solar.
We are against the proposed solar penalty fee.
Please save California jobs.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Kathy Rowling.
Please, go ahead.
Kathy Rowling: Hello, yes.
And thank you for taking my call.
My name is Kathy Rowling.
I'm a school board member in city of Carlsbad,
and we have written resolutions as well as other
school districts in San Diego county.
And the biggest issues that I see per schools
is that we've had taxpayers invest millions
and millions of dollars in solar arrays in school districts
and this proposal penalizes those districts.
And then again also discourages other districts.
So, basically this really penalizes taxpayers
and taxpayers are the same people as ratepayers.
And the other thing to realize is that there is a school
district and a school in every neighborhood,
including disadvantaged neighborhoods.
So, it's important to understand that schools
can play an integral role.
And that's a big part of fixing this net metering 3.0.
So I highly encourage you to get rid of this proposal
and start over with climate change
and education schools in mind.
Thank you. (alarm ringing)
-: Thank you, operator next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Oeded Vogo.
You may go ahead.
Oeded Vogo: Hi, my name is Oeded Vogo
I'm with All Valley Solar in the Los Angeles area,
and I've been in our thermal industry for 42 years.
My reflection today on the international Holocaust day
that we've all lost some things,
and hopefully we will have some hope beyond
loss of family members.
It's about 77 plus years ago on December 31st, 1985.
We lost the thermal solar industry as we know it
with the killing of the tax credit,
took over a decade to recover.
Please don't approve the NEM three and make it
solar death 2.0, thank you for listening.
And I'm sorry for my breath walking here after seven hours.
Bye, bye.
-: Thank you very much Operator.
Next caller please.
Audience: Okay.
-: Our next caller is William Dawson.
You may go ahead.
It looks like Williams line disconnected.
Our next caller is Frank Fratus.
You may go ahead or Fratus.
Frank Fratus: Hello.
My name is Frank Fratus.
I believe this policy goes against US public policy,
California public policy, and it doesn't make any sense.
I think what will happen from this is maybe not a intended
consequence is that these companies,
rather than leave the state,
they will come to come together and design and build systems
that convert current systems to off grid.
And I would be willing to participate in that.
I'm not in the business.
I'm retired.
I do have solar panels and I do have a battery.
And my net usage for the year last year was negative.
So this public policy requires this rule to be denied.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is there Theresa Chesmore.
You may go ahead.
-: [Theresa Chesmore] Hi.
Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
-: [Theresa Chesmore] Oh yes.
Hi, my name's Theresa Chesmore
and I live in Fort Bragg, California,
and my husband and I are retired and we just put
solar panels on this month and we are connected.
I wasn't fully aware of this,
what was going on and we took the money and paid it out
in full out of our meager savings.
We have very little, because we couldn't keep up
with the cost of the PG&E bill.
And we've had it checked out by PG&E how do we come
and look up the meter, blah, blah, blah.
If this turns passes and we are not gonna get from these,
the money that we put into the solar panels,
who do we go to to get our money back to these solar panels
that PG&E's going to benefit from not to mention
why are they gonna put taxes on solar owners
when I'm not sure, but I think PG&E themselves
don't pay taxes.
Thank you.
Have a great day.
Hope it doesn't pass, bye.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next call please.
-: Our next is Leor Milligram Garner.
You may go ahead.
-: [Leor Milligram Garner] Hi. Yes.
Thank you so much.
I'm so happy.
I stayed on the line for one extra minute.
My name is Liore Milgrom-Gartner.
I am the Norther Director for California Interfaith
Power & Light, I'm a renter and a multifamily
dwell and a trained economist.
I come to you on my own behalf and that of over 800
individuals of faith, committed to climate justice
who signed onto our action alert.
Rooftop solar must remain affordable.
We ask for you increased incentives for the poorest among us
and for batteries for a fall.
The earth is calling on us to ask on climate.
We need a SWIFT about clean energy while fortifying
communities with microgrids,
our congregations enabled by strong
them are doing just that.
Please continue and strengthen these policies
so we can answer our call to care for the earth
and one another.
Thank you so much for this very long day.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is John panic.
(indistinct chatters)
Our next caller is John Panic.
You may go ahead.
John Panic: Yes.
This is John panic from Long Beach, California.
I'm against this proposal.
There's a lot of things that really haven't been said,
and I apologize in advance if I insult anybody.
But this egregious proposal is based
basically on greed, if not entirely on greed.
The lack of integrity is very evident
and most people think there is collusion going on.
I would hope you'd be able to prove contrary
and be able to eliminate this proposal
and actually give credits to net generators.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Adam Bagnall, may go ahead.
Adam Bagnall: Thank you.
Hi, my name is Adam Bagnall.
I'm a solar engineer for Solar Rebel
and I've been working in solar for about nine years.
I worked at Solar City in 2012 when Arizona public service
gutted none and added steep monthly fees
for solar customers.
As a result, several solar companies pulled out
of the state overnight leading to immediate job losses
and effectively eviscerating the industry
there for several years.
Since California is the national
trend center for clean energy.
Not only will this cost as jobs,
but it'll create a domino effect of other states
having the same misinformed idea.
I'm confident there's a solution that won't increase costs
while maintaining price equity for non solar customers.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is David Erickson.
You may go ahead.
David Erickson: This is David Erickson.
I'm a homeowner in Scotts valley, California.
We urge you to reject NEM 3.0.
This current solar tax proposal before you
seems like a step backwards.
We are currently in the midst of solar
or electric power installation at our home.
As an attempt to do our part for clean,
renewable energy for lower ongoing energy costs
and for maintaining electric energy during
public safety power shutoffs.
Additionally, excess power generated
also feeds back to the electric grid,
lowering the demand on fossil fueled powered generation
plants and thus reducing pollution.
It's unclear to me what theorY collected fees are for.
Does the utility like PG&E retain them
as revenue of profits?
Are they collected for the state?
If so, what is this Tax fund?
Legislatures have passed measures for incentives
for solar installation.
This proposal counteracts those measures.
We urge you to reject NEM 3.0, including any compromises.
Thank you for listening.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Missy Simpiino.
You may go ahead.
Missy Simpiino: Hi, this is Missy Simpiino.
I'm with the rooftop solar.
I've been in North Solar Industry for nine years
and I live in Roseville, California,
and I appreciate you taking the time to listen to me,
and I did wanna make two points.
First of all, just say thank you for passing the initiative
on California solar mandate, which was in massive
in January, 2020, that all homes
have to be built with solar.
I do wanna say that with that in mind,
every person that goes solar after the NEM three has passed,
is gonna pay more for their utility costs than a customer
that's connected directly to the grid.
So, definitely will kill solar and putting every new
homeowner at risk of paying
more for their utility, which is crazy.
The second thing I'd like to say is if you can,
I implore you to go back and look at what happened
in NEM one to NEM two, where you added transmission fees.
Teaching E rates are 80% higher than any of the other person
or any other utility company in the US.
And therefore they buy more power than anyone else
because there territories are so large.
They buy at a lower rate than anyone else
and charge more than anyone else.
It's not the solar companies that are charging more money
for the rates to go up-- (alarm ringing)
or the solar utility companies mismanagement--
-: Thank you.
Missy Simpiino: Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Allis Druffel.
You may go ahead.
Allis Druffel: Good afternoon Commissioners.
My name is Allis Druffel.
I'm the Southern California Director
for California Interfaith Power & Light.
We're excited by a recent survey that shows over
300 houses of worship in the golden state employee solar,
these faith organizations,
more than and 800 Californians of faith
and two dozen state and national faith organizations
have signed onto our petition and support a revised
net metering that does not have a monthly solar tax
that honors the 20 year net metering protection
for current solar customers and a net metering credit
that works for working middle class families.
We reject the false cost shift narrative and urge
in them that protects solar jobs, public health,
and the ongoing transition to a clean energy economy.
Thank you so much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Justin.
You am I go ahead?
Justin: Hi, this is Justin
I'm in the solar industry here in the Bay area.
I just wanna comment on some of the people
that have been talking.
It's great to hear them.
That sounds like people are a little more educated
and truthful this time around
couple interesting points is the guy I was talking about
having to disconnect solar,
'cause it's not gonna be worth it anymore.
Also the guy talking about the builders and the new bills
that hasn't been addressed,
what's gonna happen with, solar once it's deemed absolute
for a lot of current customers and customers
that are installing it, PG&E makes plenty of money
off of so customers, other customers don't have to pay
high rates because of solar customers.
PG&E isn't gonna drop their rates.
If there is less solar or if NEM three is passed,
unions are not gonna be affected.
The talk of so fields has nothing
to do with anything in California.
People have solar, mostly just have lower bills.
They're not living off the grid
and they're not stealing for PG&E.
(alarm ringing)
Please reject the NEM three and any of its amendments.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Yvette DeCarlo.
You may go ahead.
Yvette DeCarlo: Hi, my name's Yvette Carlo.
I'm a rooftop solar owner and former air resources board
employee who worked on various climate change programs.
And I can confidently say this is a distant
and generous and harmful proposal.
Rooftop solar helps utilities reduce the amount
of energy they must generate or purchase themselves,
Last March, PG&E boasted about exceeding
their renewable compliance requirements.
Thanks in big part to so to rooftop solar.
And then a week later,
they initiated this campaign to start blaming
rooftop solar owners for not paying a fair share
and as scapegoat to raise rates.
So, basically big utilities are already starting to address
and invest in large storage projects in changing their
operational practices to lessen that duck curve challenge.
Solar energy, it's arcing towards more affordability.
So, I strongly urge you to vote no,
one's proposal is to consider this, that if any utility
can't survive on healthy profits versus enormous profits,
they've come to the end of their useful life.
Thank you so much for your time today.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Denise Al Halabi.
You may go ahead.
-: [Denise Al Halabi] Hello.
My name is Denise Al Halabi.
I work at Sungage Financial LLC in Oakland.
Thank you, president Reynolds, the Commissioners and staff,
although I've only worked in solar financing for a year.
I absolutely love my solar career because I helped
residential solar installer is provide the lowest monthly
payment, financing to their customers
in Southern California, Arizona, and New Mexico.
What this August body of Commissioners plan to do
when they agree to net energy metering 3.0
is to drastically change my job as it functions today,
destroy the livelihoods of many rooftop solar,
their workers, how they care for their families
and the communities they live in and essentially steal
yes, steal their customers and potential customers
ability to enjoy clean energy and all of its benefits
like eliminating the ever tightening yolk of unrelenting
utility bill escalations,
please vote against this proposed criminal act.
Just say no to NEM 3.0, are you listening to us?
Thank you so much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Lionel Rodriguez.
You may go ahead.
-: [Lionel Rodriguez] Thank you for the time Commissioners.
I really appreciate you.
I know it's a long day and we've been waiting for some time.
My name is Lionel Rodriguez currently employed with solar
optimum servicing the greater state of California
in the city of Glendale.
I've been in the California solar industry
for over eight years.
I'm currently married with five children
ages from 17 down to seven years old.
I'm proud to say that my oldest is gone
into college this fisical year,
and truly one of the most gratifying things as a father
is to be able to put your child into college
for a good education, for my oldest daughter.
This opportunity to go to college has set a great example
for her younger siblings.
And it's bringing her some great joy as well as I,
for as a parent, my job has allowed me to financially
support my family as one income provider
and also to pay for my daughter's college.
(alarm ringing)
Please don't pass NEM 3.0,
it's gonna affect my family
and many other Californians.
Thank you so much for your time
and God bless you and with the decision--(indistinct)
-: Thank you.
Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Ian Cohen.
You may go ahead.
Ian Cohen: Can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
Ian Cohen: All right.
Good evening on Commission.
I'm in high school reform Brentwood in county
in the bay area, and I'm a passionate environmentalist.
I have been working on an anti oil campaign successfully.
I am fully against this measure because I personally
have solar panels and I believe that and many attacks
and solar panels will ruin the future of solar panels.
It will not just her job,
but it will hurt the Californian people.
That's all I have to say.
Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator next caller, please.
-: And our next caller is Alexandra Massey.
You may go ahead.
-: [Alexandra Massey] Hello.
My name is Alex Massey.
I'm 18 years old from Ventura county and a member
of California youth versus big oil.
I strongly oppose the CPUC proposal to taxes rooftop solar
because there should be no penalty of solar, of any kind.
Look at what you're planning on doing.
You're allowing polluting industries like PG&E
to monopolize the energy and industry and allowing them
to catalyze the climate crisis,
which affects my future and my generation and frontline
communities in California,
California must move towards solar energy, not away from it
and use rooftop solar to allow residents
to get their own energy.
CPUC you need to be on the right side of history,
which is not the side of a fossil fuel industry
that tries to penalize solar in California.
You should also make these comments
more accessible for people who want to express
their opinions on these issues.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator next caller, please.
-: And President Reynold,
we have no additional callers at this time.
-: Thank you.
I'll just ask if there's anyone else on the telephone
who would like to make a public comment.
And if anyone would like to make a comment,
please unmute your phone and press star one.
A caller from Robert Hunt.
You may go ahead.
Robert Hunt: Last meeting, I commented on why
MSPD is flawed and listen to callers in favor today.
You've heard the opposite from People all levels
of the industry, current PD customers,
but only a few who don't have rooftop solar.
And if they were here today,
they would be even more furious.
Additionally, today you do not get the same packing point
repeated over and over.
You heard amazing real world examples and a wide
variety of reasons to reject this PD.
I understand that current program is causing disadvantage
rate repairs about $13 a month.
If that is true, increase the access fee to no participants,
which is about $10 to whatever it takes to offset that cost,
which I heard would be about $16 a month.
This PD will not only kill rooftop solar in California.
It will result in the utility companies being free provider
of renewable energy with remote solar farms requiring
more transmission minus increasing prior danger
are reducing good reliability.
We instead should be moving toward distributed
energy production and begging you to come up
with other ways to promote rooftop salt while not negatively
impacting disadvantage communities.
Another possibility could be a of the California climate
credit, but only for disadvantaged communities.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
One more time checking to see if there's anyone else
on the telephone who would like to make a public comment.
-: Our next caller is Bill Conley.
You may go ahead.
Bill Conley: Yes.
Hi bill Conley here from Stockton, California.
I'm an independent consultant with power energy.
And I ask Commissioners that you reverse the decision
of NEM 3.0 as it will devastate my personal business.
And so many others in the solar industry in California,
the distributed rooftop generation of solar
is a very economically viable solution
to achieve our net carbon neutrality goals.
And I would just suggest Commissioners that you consider
your legacy in this decision process.
Do you wanna consider yourselves those who carried on
the relatively good NEM policy that currently exists?
Or would you like to be remembered as the ones
who destroyed solar in California?
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you, operator.
Do we have additional callers on the line?
-: We do have several, Nicole Braynky is our next caller.
Go ahead.
You gonna go ahead.
Nicole Braynky: Thank you.
My name's Nicole Braynky and I'd like to thank and echo
everybody that's spoken out in opposition today.
I've worked in the solar industry for over nine years.
I've helped over 650 homeowners go solar
for obvious reasons.
Those families, they put their faith and their trust in me
and now their solar savings and their 20 year
grandfathering is in jeopardy.
If this is approved, I don't see how I'm gonna be able
to sleep at night thinking that I ultimately
put all of those families in our terrible position.
Let's not forget that California incentivized
all these people to go solar.
And it's incredibly unfair and unjust to change the terms
of their existing net metering agreements
that are already at play.
The argument that low income families are suffering,
increasing utility rates,
that the hands of the solar industries simply
doesn't hold up.
We all know that California utility companies
are not gonna to lower their rates
even if this proposal is approved.
So, this won't help anyone except
the utility companies and their profit grabs.
I urge you to go back to the drawing board,
find a way to assist all homeowners,
to obtain solar regardless of income level.
So California can continue to chart its path toward
a 100% renewable by 2045.
Please reject this proposal.
(alarm ringing) Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator.
Next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Dominic Driscoll.
You may go ahead.
-: [Dominic Driscoll] I think that's myself,
Conrad Driscoll, Commissioners, Governor Newsom.
I'm a small business owner of go solar pros
in Modesto, California.
Half of our employees are of Hispanic heritage.
I've been in solar industry for 13 years
and from my heart like hundreds of other commenters
and only two or three that were supporting
this ma'am I'm against it.
I think that we need to relook at the whole package
of what you're proposing.
Understand this has been a long day.
Appreciate your patience with all these comments,
but like all of these commenters,
I am a small business owner.
We do not make millions or billions, is laughable to suggest
that we do by these false ads.
This proposed P' and the reduction of NEM credit is wrong.
I will not only destroy...
It will not only destroy the solar industry,
but still severely reduce the positive direction
on climate impact as you've heard.
The similar awful decision in Nevada,
very similar was reverse--
(alarm ringing) Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Thank you, operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Harry Walker.
You may go ahead.
Harry Walker: I am a retired school teacher
for (indistinct) California,
and I urge you to reject NEM three
and support rooftop solar Instead.
I've been NEM two customer since 2019.
I made sacrifices and went into debt
because I thought it was important to put rooftop,
solar and batteries on my house.
I wanted to keep my PG&E bills affordable my pension
and to support the grid during critical high demand Use.
California now leads the US in protecting our
environment and fighting climate change.
To keep that lead rooftop solar should be cheaper,
not more expensive.
And Californians said every income level need access
to solar powered homes, businesses and transportation.
PG&E keeps raising rates.
NEM three would let the corporation squeeze
even more profit out of ordinary citizens.
It's not fair.
It's not as if we had a choice to go without lights or heat
or the little guys please support us ordinary consumers.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Bob Irwin.
You may go ahead.
Bob Irwin: Hi. My name is Bob Irwin.
I represent solar unlimited for a veteran own company
outta solar, out of Acadia, California,
and represent my 15 employees or families.
The over 12,000 customers we've served
over the last 42 years and all the other workers
who are affiliated with the solar industry,
this would've a cascade effect on so many other businesses,
other than solar, marketing, financing,
distribution, supply roofers.
There's just countless people whose whose jobs
are really in your hands.
It's been a long day and I appreciate your time.
I know you're good people trying to reach a fair
and equitable decision, but I want you to consider this,
that this decision has far reaching ramifications.
This is something maybe one of the largest or biggest
decisions you make in your entire lifetime.
So, please opposed this net metering three proposition.
This is your legacy and you can be the hero
or the villain in your own story.
I ask you to please be the guiding light that sends
solar on its way through California,
the United States and the rest of the world.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Next caller is Dan Ebnar, you may go ahead.
Dan Ebnar: Yes.
Hi, can you hear me?
-: Yes, we can please go ahead.
Dan Ebnar: I appreciate everybody's comments.
And I think that there's been enough said to the CPUC
so far, my comment is directed towards Governor
Gavin Newsom, and I hope you hear this.
You aren't a nice buddy.
The state is already tired of you.
You barely skated by with this recall election.
If you allow NEM 3.0 to go through, I promise you.
You will not be reelected.
Whether it's we will take to social media.
We will take to the streets.
You, your political career will end
if you allow this to happen.
And I will do everything in my power to help that happen.
So do not allow this.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Julie Mills.
You may go ahead.
Julie Mills: Hi, this is Julie Mills.
I oppose NEM three.
I put solar and a battery in one and a half years ago
on my house at a cost of $21,000.
My electric bill prior to solar averaged about $40 a month.
So I'll never get back the cost of installation
and break even without out NEM three,
we put it on for climate change to come back climate change.
If NEM three goes through,
I will pay significantly more for electricity with solar
than I paid before I had it.
The utilities say we need NEM three
because low income people pay more
to allow wealthy people to have solar.
This isn't true.
Home solar installation has saved money for everyone
by reducing the need for more power plants.
In addition, low income people are more impacted
by climate change around the world.
So, this will help everybody,
including low income people.
We need more solar to do everything we can
to combat climate change.
This proposal will make so solar prohibitively expensive
for all, but the billionaire class and dramatically
reduce new solar installation needs to save our planet.
(alarm ringing) Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Esperanza Vielma.
You may go ahead.
-: [Esperanza Vielma] Hello.
Good afternoon.
My name is Esperanza Vielma and I am
the Executive Director of the Environmental Justice
Coalition for Water, and also the co-founder
of the Statewide C triple E along with Green the Church.
And I wanna state that the fact is that this CPUC's
mission is to serve the public and not the IOUs.
We therefore trust that you as public servants will serve
the public interest with a revamped equitable NEM policy
with input from our environmental justice communities,
our small solar companies, and other interested parties.
Please keep California a solar leader in sustainable
green energy while equitably serving the public.
And please do not be the Commission
that has killed rooftop solar.
And again, I wanna thank you for your time
and commitment to this effort.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Jeff Rogers.
You may go ahead.
Jeff Rogers: Jeff.
This is Jeff Rogers.
I'm gonna comment on NEM three.
The simple and fundamental question
is in addition to being required,
to support the generation of clean and removable
solar energy as a matter of California government
public policy, do you as the CPUC regulating California
public utilities represent the people of California or not?
As required by law, do you act
in the people's interests or not?
Moreover, do you really want to act in the interest
of the criminal PG&E as a California judge
recently commented PG&E has pled guilty to 84 manslaughter
charges for its ignition of the 2018 camp fire
in Butte county is facing five felony and 28 misdemeanor
counts arising out of the 2019 Kincade fire,
in Sonoma county is facing pending involuntary manslaughter
charges arising out of the 2020 Zog fire in Shasta county
and is facing a civil suit by five counties,
arising out of the 2021 Dixie fire.
(alarm ringing) All this love is on five year
probation for earlier crimes.
-: Thank you.
Jeff Rogers: Thank you.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Next caller is Ellen Weir.
You may go ahead.
Ellen Weir: Good evening.
My name is Ellen Weir.
I'm a homeowner and rooftop solar owner in Sacramento.
We installed our solar panels at a cost of about $18,000,
and we were hoping to get that back over the course
of the 20 year lifespan of the panels.
We were incentivized to do so by our local utility
SMUD and by federal tax credits,
but it's still barely penciled out
for us to install our panels.
We cannot afford to install battery storage
to offset our solar generation,
and we don't think we should be the ones to pay for it.
We don't think rates going up across the state
are necessarily from us as solar users,
and we urge you to reject this proposal.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Liny Water.
You may go ahead.
Liny Water: Hi.
So I read through the 204 page document,
and I was noticing there was a lot of inaccuracies,
including the price of what it would cost
per kilowat to install.
I got 20 bids recently,
and my lowest was $2 and 80c/kwt.
And that is not what was mention in the document.
I did sign a solar contract to get solar installed,
but there's a delay in PG&E in order to get the...
'cause I need my electrical panel upgraded
to get that put in,
and there's a 40 day period of time.
So I end up having to cancel my solar contract
because I couldn't get the drop done
in time by PG&E and there's a three to six month
backup in some of theirs.
And then the good thing is you can pull out,
you can opt out at any em, it sounds like,
and it sounds like I would have to a purchase a battery
backup and be off grid in order to even put solar in.
At this point, there are hybrid inverters
that are being developed right now in prep for this.
But I don't think that's the intention,
but I just wanted to put that in to re-look
at those numbers 'cause if you look at the numbers
on PG&E's website for installers--
(alarm ringing) Okay.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is I'm sorry.
Shaza Shere, you may go ahead.
Shaza Shere: Yes. Hi.
My name is Shaza Shere and I work at mosaic
where we've empowered thousands of residents to go solar.
This proposed NEM three would not only break
the promise of beneficial paybacks to all previous residents
who thought they are controlling their household costs
by moving towards renewable and energy,
but it will also stop solar in its track
by flashing the economic benefits.
It will kill any further adoption within our state.
When I speak to friends who already have solar
on their roof, I find that they're not aware
of these proposed changes.
I can bet once they see how their utility bill
will be affected by these changes,
there will be many angry residents in California.
We aren't even hearing of today.
We are just the first wave you are hearing
from so many of us today.
Not only because NEM three will shutdown our floor
to the solar industry, putting all our jobs at risk,
but more ethically to each of us.
We will have broken our promise of savings
to our homeowners-- (alarm ringing)
Take this seriously.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Michael Peck.
You may go ahead.
Michael Peck: Hi, apologize for delay.
I'm calling in from Los Angeles where my wife and I
bought a home after my mother-in-law passed away in 2017.
And it's important to us then and now to make our home
as environmentally sustainable as possible.
When we installed solar panels,
we chose to max out our available roof space with panels,
even though we didn't need that much power
today, I feed enough power back to the grid
to power an additional home,
but we're not paid for this excess production
because Los Angeles water and power doesn't allow
ratepayers to cash out their net metering credits.
So, essentially what happens is LEDwP
gets my excess power for free power.
That's sustainable, well distributed throughout the grid,
local to rate payers and resilient because we made
the decision to install more panels than we need.
And we were aware of that at the time.
The California Public Utilities Commission would punish
shoulder generators like me for maxing out my available
roof space by charging me a fee based on installed capacity,
which is just insanity for a state looking to promote
a green energy transition.
This is yet an another example of how the new net metering
proposal is fundamentally flawed.
My strong plan--- (alarm ringing)
Thank you for your time. -: Thank you.
Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: Our next caller is Seth Pearson.
You may go ahead.
Seth Pearson: Sorry about that.
My name is Seth Pearson.
I live in San Louis Obispo, California.
I work for a company called Wicks roofing and solar's.
I've been in the solar industry since 2008
and I've personally hunt helped hundreds
if not thousands of people go solar in my career.
I think I'm speaking on behalf of everybody in the solar
industry, as well as residents in the California,
that the mentor proposition would be absolutely horrible
to everyday homeowners as well as people working
within the industry such as myself,
the combination of the fixed rate charge the solar fee
and the reduction of the export rate drive down
the return and the payback period goes way up.
Also a as California being an industry leader
in solar would be setting a precedent
for every other state.
They all watch us.
Whatever happens here, the subject
to happen elsewhere throughout the country.
And I just think it's very shortsighted decision
to weigh in behalf of the utilities.
I think we need to think about the job losses
(alarm ringing)
and the other things that be impacted as a result.
-: Thank you
Seth Pearson: Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you for your comments.
Operator, next caller please.
-: And our next caller is Jane Pearson.
You may go ahead.
Jane Pearson: Hi, my name is James Pearson.
I'm retired and I live in Gilroy.
I got bumped out the first time
'cause of my fungul finger on the phone,
but I've had rooftop solar for 10 years.
It reduced my electric bill.
So I'd say at this point,
even with the continual rate increases,
my initial investment in solar should soon break even.
That's only part of the reason I got solar.
Climate change is real.
The destruction of our wild spaces
and the natural world is real
action and not words is needed.
This proposal by the Commission is a step back.
Not a step forward, no solar tax, none,
any changes in net meetings
should be to make it more
affordable not less.
Keep the promise for 20 years of no changes to those rates.
We've got millions of rooftops that could utilize solar.
There's no need to increase our footprint
on the desert wild spaces or to take up
thousands more acres with long distance side
transmission lines and electric car needs
a solar roof and a solar home.
Thank you.
And thank you for all your time and patience today.
This has been a long day.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, next caller please.
-: We have no more callers on the public
telephone line at the time.
-: Thank you.
Can we take a minute to check, to make sure
to see if there's anyone else on the telephone
who would like to make a comment?
-: Yes.
To make a comment that would be star one.
My next caller is Miss Avila.
You may go ahead.
Rosario Avila: Hi.
My name is Rosario Avila.
I live in Southern California
and I just have two quotes
I wanted to say today,
but this first quote is from somebody
in Canada who also faces the same issue in Canada.
He says paying people to generate at equal
or higher rates than utility.
And I do get it.
I paid and have solar rooftops,
literally subsidizes the wealthier members
of our society to the detriment of the poor.
The left is upside down on this issue
and needs to get it straight.
These Robert Barons are stealing from the commons.
The commons is reliable grid electricity.
Another one is from the book,
shorting the grid by Meredith Angwin
the catch in general,
the utility must pay for the retail price
for the net meter power it purchases.
And yet if net metering were allowed
for everyone without a cap,
we would have a tragedy of the commons.
Prices would rise for everyone.
And I just wanna say to the CPUC, thank you.
This is a very difficult issue,
but at the end of the day,
we are talking about the commons,
(alarm ringing)
which we all share.
Thank you very much for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller please.
-: And we have no additional callers
on the public comment telephone line at this time.
-: All right.
Well, I know folks waited a long time,
so I'm gonna check one more time
press star one if you are on the line
and would like to make a comment.
Operator, do we have anyone else?
-: We have no additional callers at this time.
-: Okay. With no more callers on the line.
The public comment period is now closed.
I did wanna take a moment to acknowledge
members of the public who are very patient today.
Waited on the line for many people,
waited for more than seven hours.
Thank you for your patience.
We really appreciate your participation
in the Commission's public process.
With that, I will now turn to the public agenda.
And we'll start with the changes to today's agenda.
Item number two, three, and 15
will be held to February 10th, 2022.
Item number 19 will be taken up with the Consent Agenda.
We will now take up the consent item.
Is there a motion?
-: So moved.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen has made a motion.
Do we have a second.
-: Second.
-: Second by Commissioner Houck.
Agenda clerk.
Could you please call the role.
-: Commissioner Houck?
-: Yes.
-: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes. Yes.
-: President Reynolds?
-: [President Reynolds] Yes.
The, Consent Agenda items have passed unanimously.
We'll now take up the regular items,
starting with item number 16,
order extending line for reviewing PG&E's request
to recover gas transmission
and storage capital expenditures.
I will present the first item.
This order extending statutory deadline
is for the proceeding considering
PG&E request to recover gas transmission
and storage capital expenditures
that we're audited by our safety and enforcement division.
Pursuant to decision 16-06-056.
This order would extend the statutory deadline
of this proceeding to July 30th, 2022.
This extension will allow time
for the Administrative Law Judge
and the new assigned Commissioner
currently myself to consider
the proposed settlement that was submitted
as well as the full extent of the record.
I request your support.
Go to questions from the Commission
Hearing none, I'll ask whether
there is a motion on item 16.
-: I'll make move item 16.
-: Motion by Commissioner Shiroma.
Do we have a second?
-: Second.
-: Second from Commissioner Rechtschaffen
with a motion and a second for item 16,
agenda clerk, please call the roll.
-: Commissioner Houck?
-: Yes.
-: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
-: President Reynolds?
-: Yes.
The motion passes four zero.
The next item on the regular agenda is item number 17,
order extending statutory deadline,
Fred Shahadi individually and as a trusty
for the Fred Shahadi revocable living trust
versus San Jose water company.
Commissioner Houck, would you like to present?
-: Thank you, president Reynolds,
item 18 is a complaint case CC1904005
Mr. Fred Shahadi versus San Jose water company.
And on March 8th, 2021,
the case was reassigned to my office
on August 5th, 2021 the presiding officer's
proposed decision or pod was served
on the parties and the complainant
filed an appeal of the pod
on September 7th, 2021 on September 22nd, 2021
San Jose water company filed its response.
The complainant's appeal will be addressed
in the very near future and this request,
statutory deadline to March 31st, 2022
to resolve the matter.
And I ask for your support on this extension.
-: Thank you.
Do we have any comments or questions
from Commissioners on item 17?
Hearing none, I'll ask for motion.
-: I'll move.
-: Second.
-: Motion from Commissioner Shiroma
second from Commissioner Rechtschaffen
agenda clerk, please call the role.
-: Commissioner Houck?
-: Yes.
-: Commissioner shiroma?
-: Aye.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
-: President Reynolds?
-: Yes.
The motion passes four zero
turning next to regular agenda
item number 18 order extending statutory deadline,
utility telecom group, LLC versus bandwidth.com.
CECLECLEC, Commissioner Rechtschaffen,
Would you like to present?
-: Thank you, president Reynolds, excuse me.
Item 18 concerns a dispute.
As you mentioned, between utility telecom group
and bandwidth.com and it regards the porting of customers.
Telephone numbers term porting
refers to the process of transferring a phone number
from one communications company to another
when a customer changes providers.
Utility telecom group is in mediation
in a federal case that concerns
the numbers that are at issue in this complaint,
the parties is requested a continuance
for the proceeding to allow time
for the resolution of that federal litigation.
The Administrative Law Judge granted a continuance
and is receiving status updates from the parties.
This order would extend the proceeding deadline
to October 4th, 2022, to allow the parties
the time needed for the mediation
to continue and be resolved.
I asked for your support.
-: Thank you Commissioner Rechtschaffen,
any comments or questions from Commissioners.
Being none, is there a motion on item 18?
-: I move.
-: Motion by Commissioner Houck
seconded by Commissioner Shiroma.
We have a motion and a second on item 18
agenda clerk, please call the role.
-: Commissioner Houck?
-: Yes.
-: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
-: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
-: President Reynolds?
-: Yes.
The motion passes four zero.
Turning now to management reports,
item 20 management report and discussion
on recent consumer protection and safety activities.
We are postponing the presentation
scheduled for today to a later date.
And we have no report on item 21
management report and discussion
on administrative activities.
The next item on the agenda is the Commissioner reports.
Who would like to go first?
Commissioner Shiroma.
Thank you.
-: Yes, thank you.
I know the hours late.
I'll be brief, President Reynold.
You announced the February black history month.
And so February 1st is June new year
and I wanted to share that the CPUC's
African American coalition for unemployment and equity
is launching the black history month theme
of the past present and future representation
I could see in diversity matters
with a noontime discussion on February 1st,
featuring Paul Henderson,
director of the San Francisco
department of police accountability.
You'll be giving opening remarks
and I'm pleased to be in seeing that kickoff event.
The African American coalition
is putting together a full month of activities
events to celebrate the month and staff
should keep an eye out for further announcements by email.
I want to thank the planning committee members.
Savan Martin, Bridget ON, Nicole Proper,
Andrew Johnson, Lynn Moley,
Ramon MoMA, Jamira Godley and Luan Testfy
employees interested in joining AAC
can email Ramon Moma and speaking
of lunar new year, there is a new resource group
called Hawaiian Asian Pacific Islander
employee resource group or HAPI.
And anyone interested in new more about HAPI
can email assistant chief administrative law,
judge passing McDonald,
more information you need to be celebrating
on February 1st as well.
And then finally on next week,
Thursday on February 3rd,
I have a pleasure of speaking
at the next pucks Toastmasters.
Virtual open health pucks is a CPUC Toastmaster chapter,
which has been in existence since 1972
and has achieved the president's
distinguished status for the last three years
at the virtual open health.
I share health public speaking
has helped advance my career
and I will share how I prepare for a public speech.
And I'll take questions from attendees,
anyone interested in improving
their public speaking skills
should check out the pucks and meanwhile,
we can register for the February 3rd event @houck.org.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma.
Commissioner Houck, Would you like
to make a Commissioner report?
-: I have no report today.
Thank you, president Reynolds.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: I have no report.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
I do have a brief report.
I will keep it brief.
Given the late hour, just two items to report on.
I wanted to report that last week I attended
the monthly middle mile advisory committee meeting.
The committee plays an important oversight role as a state
builds out the historic statewide open access middle mile
broadband network created by SB156.
At the meeting the committee received
updates on the development of the initial
middle mile projects announced in November.
Caltrans reported that the state network
can potentially leverage 700 miles
of existing highway projects
and our own communications director
Rob Osborn presented on the impressive mapping
that has been accomplished by our staff
since the legislation was enacted in July.
I also wanted to note that the resource
adequacy reform workshops have concluded.
There were a total of nine workshops that were held
over the last five months under the leadership
of former President Batjer together
with the energy division team whose members
have worked thoughtfully tirelessly on this effort,
the workshop co-leads are now working
to develop the workshop report
that will be filed on February 28th.
That concludes my report
and that concludes the Commissioner report.
The public meeting is now adjourned
and the Commission will go into closed session.