Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Choice Aggregation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
LAFCO advances CCA procurement, asks PUC to study city-run option
Summary
LAFCO heard that four firms responded to the CCA supply RFP, directed staff to ask the PUC to study whether San Francisco could run the CCA internally, and set a timetable for follow-up materials and a joint SFPUC–LAFCO meeting in December.
San Francisco’s Local Agency Formation Commission on Monday heard an update on the Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) procurement and voted to ask city staff to request that the Public Utilities Commission study whether the city could operate the CCA itself rather than relying on a third-party supplier.
Mike Campbell, director of Clean Power SF and the SFPUC’s CCA program, said the RFP was reissued Sept. 30, responses were due Nov. 3 and staff received four proposals. He identified the respondents as Power Choice Incorporated; Noble Americas (formerly Sempra Energy Solutions); Constellation; and Shell Energy North America. Campbell said staff would meet with all four firms the following Monday, request supplemental documentation to confirm minimum qualifications and aim to have follow-up materials by Dec. 6 so staff can complete scoring and, if appropriate, select a primary responder in December.
The motion that LAFCO approved directs staff to ask the California Public Utilities Commission to analyze the feasibility of a city-run CCA. Commissioner Campos made the motion; Commissioner Ambulos seconded it. Chair Ross Mercurini called for objections; there were none and the motion passed without objection. The motion also requested that the PUC study be agendized at the joint SFPUC–LAFCO meeting tentatively scheduled for Dec. 10.
Why it matters: proponents and staff said the inquiry responds to recurring concerns about investor-owned utility behavior and limits in state law. Campbell and interim executive officer Nancy Miller recounted a recent senate hearing where participants highlighted challenges such as utilities’ uneven cooperation, exit fees, and the allocation of energy-efficiency funds. Campbell warned that wholesale power contracts typically require significant credit support or collateral; a third-party supplier commonly posts that collateral, while a city-run program would likely need to provide financial assurances itself, which could affect the program’s scale and financing.
Public commenters urged the commission to prioritize local renewable generation and job creation in procurement. Eric Brooks of the San Francisco Green Party and Joshua Arce of Brightline Defense Project urged larger procurement packages and early investments in local generation capacity (citing a 360 MW figure discussed in prior planning documents) to strengthen the city’s bargaining and resilience against pricing tactics by investor-owned utilities. Arce and others also asked that the San Francisco Electricity Resource Plan (SFERP) be coordinated with the CCA study and paused or opened to broader stakeholder input so the PUC analysis can inform resource planning.
What’s next: staff will meet with the four respondents; Campbell said follow-up materials are expected by Dec. 6 and the matter will be discussed at the joint SFPUC–LAFCO meeting scheduled for Dec. 10. The motion directs staff to request PUC analysis of a city-operated CCA and to return findings to the commission.
Attribution: Comments and direct quotes in this report are attributed only to speakers recorded in the LAFCO transcript. The commission’s recorded actions and the list of named respondents are drawn from the RFP update delivered at the meeting.
