Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Choice Aggregation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Freedom Energy outlines community choice aggregation option to Weare committee
Summary
Freedom Energy told the Weare Energy Committee how community choice aggregation (CCA) could pool local buying power, how opt‑out launch rules work, and how their supplier model compares with CPCNH and default utility rates, answering questions about municipal meters and rooftop solar eligibility.
Freedom Energy representatives presented a community choice aggregation (CCA) proposal to the Weare Energy Committee, saying a CCA bundles local demand to seek competitive, fixed‑price electricity supply contracts for residents and small businesses.
The presenter, identified in the meeting as a Freedom Energy representative, told the committee that a CCA lets the community “pull together the purchasing power for the community to go out for competitive supply bids, and receive the best rates possible for the residents,” and described the firm’s role as administering launch, running RFPs and monitoring market prices.
The company contrasted its multi‑supplier, fixed‑price approach with a single‑supplier model it said CPCNH has used. The presenter cited published rates in the room: “CPCNH’s rate for Eversource customers right now is 14.663¢,” compared with the Eversource default rate of “around 11.03¢,” and pointed to Salem as an example: a two‑year contract the presenter said was about 11.18¢ and “for those nine months, Salem saved close to $4,000,000 collectively.”
On launch mechanics, the presenter said state law requires that an opt‑out CCA begin with a starting supply rate below the utility default: “we cannot start an opt‑out program unless you’re actually starting with a savings below the utility,” and reiterated that if indicative pricing is above the utility the program could only begin as opt‑in.
The presentation addressed who would be included in a town CCA. Freedom Energy said municipal accounts on existing third‑party supply contracts would not be automatically included, and that rooftop solar customers receiving net‑metering credits would be excluded unless the customer chose to opt in because suppliers cannot recover those behind‑the‑meter credits through the CCA.
Committee members asked about contract lengths, supplier selection and risks. The presenter described a competitive RFP among “three or four” vetted suppliers and said they seek fixed retail contracts so long‑term price stability is the supplier’s responsibility, not the town’s. The presenters also discussed an ISO New England ancillary charge (referred to in the meeting as the DAISY charge) that CPCNH said contributed to recent large losses when market conditions spiked.
Why it matters: the choice between an opt‑in program, an opt‑out CCA, or remaining on individual third‑party supply affects how much purchasing power the town can leverage and whether residents automatically receive the negotiated rate. Committee members signaled interest in educational outreach and in reviewing a Freedom Energy slide deck and sample warrant language that the presenter said could be used before any town vote.
Next steps: Freedom Energy offered to provide a slide deck and to present to the Board of Selectmen; the committee said it would post the presentation materials to the town website and consider public informational sessions before moving toward a consulting agreement or warrant article.
