Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Models And Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Publicly owned utilities and CCAs say governance, financing explain lower rates; CalCCA details $19B tax‑exempt bond program
Summary
Representatives of California’s municipal utilities association and the California Community Choice Association told the Little Hoover Commission that local governance, access to tax‑exempt bonds and joint procurement explain why many publicly owned utilities and CCAs have lower retail rates than investor‑owned utilities.
Derek Dolphy, director of energy for the California Municipal Utilities Association, told the commission that public power utilities are locally governed, not‑for‑profit agencies that directly answer to elected officials. He explained the four main POU types — municipal departments (for example, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power), municipal utility districts (SMUD), public utility districts and irrigation districts — and said there are 49 POUs serving about 25% of the state’s load.
Dolphy said POUs typically access tax‑exempt bonds and can pool resources through joint action agencies such as the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) and the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA). He argued those financing structures, local accountability and differences in what regulatory programs apply contribute to lower retail rates in many public power service territories.
Beth Vaughn, chief executive officer of the California Community Choice Association, explained community choice aggregators’ (CCAs) role: CCAs are local government entities that take charge of the generation component of the customer bill within investor‑owned utility (IOU) service territories; IOUs keep responsibility for transmission, distribution and billing. Vaughn described CCAs as public entities that must meet CPUC procurement and resource requirements but are governed locally and can pursue joint procurement and financing.
Vaughn highlighted a financing tool created by a group of CCAs: the California Community Choice Financing Authority, a joint powers authority that issues tax‑exempt prepayment revenue bonds to finance power purchase agreements. “In just 4 years, the finance authority has issued $19,000,000,000 in tax‑exempt prepayment revenue bonds,” Vaughn said, and the authority’s transactions have produced accelerated procurement savings for member CCAs. Vaughn and other witnesses said those financings can lower the cost of PPAs by double‑digit percentages for the participating CCAs and produce multi‑hundred‑million dollar savings over time.
Commissioners asked whether POUs and CCAs still face affordability issues despite lower baseline rates and pressed on differences in oversight: Commissioner Jose Hernandez noted that POUs are subject to POU code provisions and that CCAs are required to provide low‑income programs. Witnesses said all retail models face procurement and deliverability challenges and that differing regulatory mandates — and how those mandates are funded — are a major driver of interjurisdictional rate differences.
The CCMUA and CalCCA testimonies framed the rate difference as the product of governance, financing options and which programs are embedded in ratepayer charges versus other funding sources.
