Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Energy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Consultant outlines risks and communications needs for Ironton energy aggregation

Ironton City Council · September 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Mark Hollinger of Straight Line told council capacity and market pressures are raising energy costs and recommended short-term contracts and clearer resident communications; he emphasized opt-out mechanics and filing requirements with PUCO before supplier communications are released.

A consultant advising Ironton on energy aggregation warned council that recent capacity-rate changes and market volatility are increasing costs for customers and complicating third-party-supplier offers.

Mark Hollinger of Straight Line Energy Consultants spoke to the council on Sept. 11 about the city’s aggregation program history and current market conditions. Hollinger said the city’s utility generation rate was about 7.64¢/kWh while a recent comparison showed 10.52¢/kWh on a utility billing line, and he noted that capacity charges and supplier adders can create confusing bill presentations for residents.

Hollinger recommended issuing an RFQ to solicit suppliers and favoring short-term contracts (commonly one year) to avoid locking the city into a long-term deal during volatile markets. He also urged plain-language resident communications showing a side-by-side comparison of typical bills with and without aggregation and highlighted that aggregation enrollments are opt-out (consistent with the ballot language used when voters approved aggregation). Hollinger emphasized that any supplier correspondence must be filed with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) 10 days before going out and suggested coordinating messaging with suppliers so residents can clearly understand generation versus delivery charges.

Council members pressed on customer service and opt-out processes, asking whether suppliers can guarantee no resident will pay more than the standard offer and whether the suppliers can handle high call volumes during enrollment mailings. Hollinger said many established suppliers have systems to manage volume and that the city can request clearer billing comparisons to reduce confusion.

Next steps: Staff will consider an RFQ and coordinate with the mayor’s office and supplier representatives on plain-language communications and PUCO filing timing.