Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town board rejects memorandum of understanding on joint electricity procurement after extended debate
Summary
A proposed MOU to set CCA target rates and timeline drew lengthy questions on whether the MOU is binding, historical rate comparisons and opt‑in mechanics; the board voted the measure down and left the door open to revisit the matter in March.
A proposed memorandum of understanding to let the Town of Clinton join other municipalities in a community choice aggregation (CCA) electricity procurement failed after extended discussion and a roll‑call vote at the Feb. 11 Town Board meeting.
The proposal would have authorized the town supervisor to sign an MOU outlining target rates and procedural terms for a joint request for proposals (RFP) for electricity suppliers. Board members questioned whether the MOU is binding on the town, whether differing rate targets among participating municipalities would be reconciled and whether historical performance data for prior CCAs had been made available to the town.
“We were told this MOU is not binding,” one board member said in debate, “but after conversations with the administrator we learned it can become binding if an RFP matches the MOU’s terms — so we need to be careful.” The board also heard that Jewel, the administrator the town would use, had changed how it purchases electricity futures after an earlier supplier went bankrupt in a prior round; board members said they were not fully convinced by the administrator’s assurances.
Members also discussed the program’s opt‑in/opt‑out mechanics. The board asked whether residents who had opted out of a prior CCA would be automatically re‑included; an administrator’s representative said residents who previously opted out would not receive the initial notification postcard and would need to take action to re‑enroll.
Board members said they lacked historical comparisons showing whether prior CCA rates beat Central Hudson’s standard supply rate. One board member said he would vote no, and two other members recorded “no” votes on the roll call; the motion failed. Several board members indicated they would consider a revised MOU or joining the next round after receiving additional historical data or if the MOU’s target rates were changed.
The failure leaves the town outside the current RFP timetable for participating municipalities; board members discussed the option of lowering the town’s target rate and reconsidering participation in March if suppliers’ responses permitted it.
