Leominster committee hears municipal aggregation pitch; recommends petitioners withdraw for revision

Leominster’s joint Legal Affairs and Ways & Means committee on March 5 heard a detailed briefing on municipal aggregation from Malboro City Council President Mike Oing and debated a petition asking the mayor to pursue aggregation contracts for the city.

The petition (30‑26), read into the record by the legal affairs chair, asked the mayor to “research, develop, and participate in a contract or contracts to aggregate the electricity load of the residents and businesses in the city.” Brandon Robbins and Susan Shallop Zepper were identified in the petition as the petitioners. Malboro’s Mike Oing told the committee municipal aggregation allows a city to competitively buy supply and offer residents a fixed supply price while leaving participation voluntary.

"All it is, it's a process to buy electricity," Oing said, adding that "customer participation is voluntary." He described three broker options commonly used in the Commonwealth (Colonial Power, Good Energy and Mass Power Choice), said plans are submitted to state review (Department of Public Utilities) and said municipalities can set contract length and renewable‑content choices.

Oing described Malboro's two‑decade program history, saying the city has run longer multi‑year contracts in recent cycles and that the program had saved roughly $37 million over its life. "We sleep good at night knowing the city's done well to help our residents safely," Oing said, citing fixed rates and predictability as chief selling points compared with National Grid's six‑month basic‑service swings.

Committee members pressed on practical protections. Oing emphasized that residents who already have third‑party supplier contracts remain exempt and that anyone automatically enrolled can opt out by submitting an account‑based opt‑out request; the timing of the meter read determines the effective date. He also described multilingual notifications, a phone opt‑out and a one‑month opt‑out timeline tied to meter reads.

Several councilors said they supported the idea of exploring aggregation but stopped short of granting the mayor unreviewed authority to sign contracts that would automatically enroll residents. One member said they would review any contract brought by the mayor before agreeing to enroll residents; another expressed concern about older residents and people who might not notice enrollment notices.

After extended discussion about oversight, outreach and contract mechanics, the legal affairs committee voted to recommend that petition 30‑26 be given leave to withdraw so petitioners or the administration can refine the proposal and return with clearer contract language or a mayor‑sponsored contract for council review.

What happens next: The committee’s recommendation permits the petitioners to withdraw and revise their request; councilors asked the administration to present any negotiated contract to the council for consideration before automatic enrollment occurs.