County hears electric-aggregation presentation outlining multi-year buying strategy, possible short-term rate pressure

A representative of the county's aggregated electricity purchasing program briefed the Freestone County Commissioners Court on a planned procurement strategy intended to lock in annual retail electricity prices beginning in 2026.

The presenter said the aggregation group—comprised of 99 members including 46 Texas counties—has historically delivered savings versus the open market. Using the program's methodology the presenter said Freestone County saved about $100,000 against market prices since joining in 2015 and that, under the Public Utility Commission (PUC) methodology, the county's participation saved $34,625 in 2023 alone.

The presenter said the current three-year contract expires at the end of 2025 and that the group plans to shift from a multi-year fixed-price contract to an incremental, year-by-year purchase strategy for 2026 and beyond. Under that approach the group would set nonbinding “ceiling” rates for each year and lock in annual slices at or below those ceilings as market conditions allow. For 2026 the presenter showed a proposed ceiling of 7.16¢ per kilowatt-hour and an “expected” target of about 6.3¢; the current locked-in contract rate is 5.774¢ per kilowatt-hour.

The presenter described the planned procurement process: an open request for proposals to all PUC-registered retail providers, an initial credit and experience screen that typically reduces responses from roughly 50 registered retailers to 20–30 viable bidders, and multiple rounds of indicative pricing before final negotiations. He said the aggregation fee that members pay to the program is 99¢ per megawatt-hour and that the group does not take commissions from retailers.

Commissioners asked about the shape of the long-term price curve and what underlies an expected price decline after the first few years. The presenter described increased new generation, more solar and battery resources, and prospective new technologies as drivers that could lower wholesale prices over time, but he stressed that the near-term market is “backwardated” and that 2026–2027 prices are currently higher than later years. He also warned that the first two years are the principal procurement risk window.

The presenter noted budget implications: using the ceiling rate would increase costs by an estimated 1.4% for the first year compared with current prices, while projected pricing further into the contract could reduce county energy costs by roughly 6.3% by 2029 if the expected curve materializes. He said budget projections would be supplied once ceilings are set so commissioners can plan FY2026 budget assumptions.

The presenter said the program expects to complete procurement work during the summer and to present recommended contract terms to the aggregation's technical committee and to a P3 board made up of judges and commissioners for final short-listing of retailers. He told the court no action was required at the meeting and that participation continues under the existing management agreement unless the county opts out.

The county asked follow-up questions about staff capacity, the number of participants the aggregator manages, and comparisons to broker fees; the presenter reiterated that the aggregation has awarded contracts to many different retailers historically and aims for broad competition.

Ending: Commissioners did not take action during the meeting; the presentation concluded with an offer to supply further data and to return with procurement recommendations and budget projections when the team has competitive responses and proposed ceilings.