Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge choice, data and grid resilience in debate over Utah Renewable Communities
Summary
During public comment at the April 21 Cottonwood Heights council meeting, residents, engineers and health advocates urged the council to preserve resident choice and publish program data ahead of a May 21 decision on joining the Utah Renewable Communities program; speakers included calls both to opt in and to preserve opt‑out options.
Dozens of residents addressed the Cottonwood Heights City Council on April 21 about the Utah Renewable Communities (URC) program, with multiple speakers urging the council to leave the choice to individual residents and to provide better program performance data before a May 21 city decision.
Shannon Haley told the council the program has broad bipartisan support at the state level and said a council rejection would remove residents’ ability to choose whether to participate. "If this council votes no, you make the decision you take the decision away from all Cottonwood Heights residents entirely," Haley said.
Ken Gardner, a licensed electrical engineer, framed the program as part of a grid‑resilience strategy. Gardner said the state faces asset‑loss risk and called renewables and storage a faster path to new capacity than building thermal plants. "We can do solar in 1 year. We can do storage in 2 years," he said.
Other speakers asked for more data on air‑quality benefits and program costs. Karen Roylance, a first‑time meeting attendee, asked the council to publish results and clarify whether the city would require an opt‑in or impose opt‑out enrollment. "We want to make sure that we can opt in... I would prefer to see an opt‑in," Roylance said.
Rochelle Kaplan, who said she has respiratory issues, expressed support for renewables while endorsing an opt‑out provision to preserve individual choice. Several speakers stressed the program’s review by the Utah Public Service Commission and the governor’s endorsement as evidence the program is sound.
Council members did not take a formal vote at the meeting; the council noted a related city decision is scheduled for May 21. Residents on both sides of the debate asked the council to publish performance data, clearly explain the enrollment mechanics (opt‑in vs opt‑out), and explicitly state how program costs and air‑quality benefits will be measured before the council acts.
