CA state mandated rate restructure July 2024

[J.P.M.]

what cant you understand about the fact that the state wanted to have x% of all power generated in the state coming from rooftop solar.As a result, the STATE OFFERED EARLY ADOPTERS INCENTIVES to reach their goals. So some of us took them up on their offer. The offer not only paid for part of the system it came with a 20 year deal.... not a 5 year deal, not a 10 year deal, but a 20 year deal.You just seem to think that rooftop solar owners are making it more expensive for non users, and there is zero evidence of that. The benefits of rooftop solar are many. But even if there were ZERO benefits, it still doesnt change the fact that it was the state coming to us with the deal...... now years later they dont like the deal and want to change the terms of the deal we signed. Is absolutely going to result in multiple lawsuits. I will never apologize for not staying low income for my entire life and relying on govt handouts.

I understand this: The 20yr. NEM 1.0 agreement that SDG & E has with me and my system started 10/13/2013. As of this writing that agreement is good until 10/13/2033. So far, nothing of that part of the agreement has changed although the fine print of my agreement in the NEM says it may be rescinded or changed by appropriate legislation. There's no guarantees in life or contracts and I live with that However, my guess is that the political ****storm that will happen if the POCOs are allowed to renege on earlier agreements would be onerous enough to them to make them very reluctant to try to crap out on it, but I'm under no illusions that it might happen. I'm not quite that naive or simplistic.

Also, I never wrote, nor do I believe residential PV owners are making it more expensive for the less financially fortunate to buy electricity. They (the less fortunate) like all of us bear the responsibility for their actions. They, like all of us can use less electricity. I know it can be done because I've been forced to do it in the past and now prefer it that way. For their part the I.O.U.s might try to emulate the municipal utilities a bit more and maybe get their costs more in line, but I expect that will happen about the same time elephants fly out of my butt.

BTW, you and foggysail are not the only one's around here with a past.
I just know that - for me only - life can be a bitch but it's made worse by whining and moaning about how unfair the world has been and can be to me, so I don't - I just get on with it.

I also understand, probably better and with more detail than most that the state's renewable goals were partially met and incentivized by mandated NEM legislation that forced the I.O.U.s to buy NEM customers' non excess product at the same prices they (the I.O.U.s) charge their customers for that very same product.
Last time I checked, that's not how capitalism is supposed to work - that is - buying back your product for the same price you sell it at. I don't think that's a good way to make a profit.
So, in one way of looking at it, the gov. mandates a program and the I.O.U.s administer it and then have to eat what they claim is the cost to them (the I.O.U.s) of lower rates paid by often/usually wealthier PV owning rate payers.
Meanwhile, the I.O.U.s continue to get rate increases from the CPUC slugs that they then pass along mostly to (what they claim with some justification are) their less well to do, non NEM customers and try (with some justification and success) to put the blame on rich NEM customers.

Look, I'm no fan of the I.O.U.s but it seems to me like the whole thing is FUBAR - the I.O.U. robbers, the crybaby fat cat PV owners, the non NEM customers who won't as much as turn off a light or educate themselves on how to lower their electric bills, legislators who are complete assholes and self-serving crooks, and all the rest of us who are getting dumber, lazier and less informed by the minute.

As for the state offering some incentives to early adopters, they did, but those incentives were separate from NEM legislation, and they ran out a long time ago when the 5% generation capacity targets were reached. The incentives and NEM were separate deals. I was one such adopter and got $928 from the state from that program as well as 30% of the balance of my system cost after that from the fed. gov.
I suppose it wasn't so much the state that paid for that program as the rest of the state's taxpayers who were expected to fund the difference through budget allocations or taxes in some way(s) to make up the difference.
But that's separate from the state mandated NEM program that has cost the state little to nothing except maybe some admin. and advert. costs.

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

Rant mode off.

[foggysail]

Just deleted a post that belongs elsewhere

[foggysail]

Kind of the inverse of well off CA PV owners no longer having their electric bills subsidized by the usually less well-off non-NEM customers huh?

Now, can we leave the politics and mortgages out of it ?

Yeah, I thought about that last night and was going to try deleting it this morning or ask to have it deleted

[Reid1boys]

Yeah... I had to quit high school in my junior year for work needed to help feed the family. Later in life with a wife and two kids, I made up for those school deficiencies, sold our house and matriculated into URI's College of Engineering. Yeah.....4 hard years of study for my BSEE while I worked almost a full time job supporting my wife and kids. Yesterday's WSJ told that our illustrious President is about to force those who take mortgages with good credit scores to pay an additional ( $40/month for $400K) fee to help those with poor credit get mortgages. This is scheduled to start on 1 May! CRAZY!!!

I have been a lifelong democrat, but these politicians that keep coming after my families pocket book with stuff like this will have me voting GOP soon. We already have huge property taxes, and pay a pretty decent amount in federal and state income taxes.... Im ok with that as it applies to most of us equally. Our tax dollars go to a ton of things... again, Im ok with that. But when you come after me just because of our income and add a tax to us specifically to transfer it over to low income... thats just going to push me over the edge.

[Reid1boys]

Kind of the inverse of well off CA PV owners no longer having their electric bills subsidized by the usually less well-off non-NEM customers huh?

Now, can we leave the politics and mortgages out of it ?

what cant you understand about the fact that the state wanted to have x% of all power generated in the state coming from rooftop solar.As a result, the STATE OFFERED EARLY ADOPTERS INCENTIVES to reach their goals. So some of us took them up on their offer. The offer not only paid for part of the system it came with a 20 year deal.... not a 5 year deal, not a 10 year deal, but a 20 year deal.You just seem to think that rooftop solar owners are making it more expensive for non users, and there is zero evidence of that. The benefits of rooftop solar are many. But even if there were ZERO benefits, it still doesnt change the fact that it was the state coming to us with the deal...... now years later they dont like the deal and want to change the terms of the deal we signed. Is absolutely going to result in multiple lawsuits. I will never apologize for not staying low income for my entire life and relying on govt handouts.

[J.P.M.]

Yesterday's WSJ told that our illustrious President is about to force those who take mortgages with good credit scores to pay an additional ( $40/month for $400K) fee to help those with poor credit get mortgages. This is scheduled to start on 1 May! CRAZY!!!

Kind of the inverse of well off CA PV owners no longer having their electric bills subsidized by the usually less well-off non-NEM customers huh?

Now, can we leave the politics and mortgages out of it ?

[foggysail]

Correct, nobody ever said NEM was a forever deal.... just a 20 year deal, and we arent even close to our 20 years.
As far as me not having to decide what bills to pay.......well, when people say I have white privilege, I say yep. My food stamps came to us in books when I was a kid... it was awesome.

So yea, I know all to well about being poor, so poor I missed 2 weeks of school in 7th grade because I couldnt replace the shoes that were stolen from me. That experience caused me to work so I would NEVER know what that was like as an adult. I have little empathy for those that are simply to lazy to do what I did. Work 2 jobs and go to school full time AFTER I did 4 years in the Marine Corps to help pay for school.

I should not be taxed additionally because I worked out of poverty.
Oh, no lifestyle change can have any impact on this equity tax.We already produce as much electricity as we use. So reducing my electrical use wont benefit me at all. I currently pay 30 dollars per month for electricity... thats it. I never owe them after we true up. Now, Ill owe them an additional 85 a month (on top of the 30 connection fee)no matter how much I use.

I do agree with you..... this isnt over just yet.

Yeah... I had to quit high school in my junior year for work needed to help feed the family. Later in life with a wife and two kids, I made up for those school deficiencies, sold our house and matriculated into URI's College of Engineering. Yeah.....4 hard years of study for my BSEE while I worked almost a full time job supporting my wife and kids. Yesterday's WSJ told that our illustrious President is about to force those who take mortgages with good credit scores to pay an additional ( $40/month for $400K) fee to help those with poor credit get mortgages. This is scheduled to start on 1 May! CRAZY!!!

[J.P.M.]

Correct, nobody ever said NEM was a forever deal.... just a 20 year deal, and we arent even close to our 20 years.
As far as me not having to decide what bills to pay.......well, when people say I have white privilege, I say yep. My food stamps came to us in books when I was a kid... it was awesome.

So yea, I know all to well about being poor, so poor I missed 2 weeks of school in 7th grade because I couldnt replace the shoes that were stolen from me. That experience caused me to work so I would NEVER know what that was like as an adult. I have little empathy for those that are simply to lazy to do what I did. Work 2 jobs and go to school full time AFTER I did 4 years in the Marine Corps to help pay for school.

I should not be taxed additionally because I worked out of poverty.
Oh, no lifestyle change can have any impact on this equity tax.We already produce as much electricity as we use. So reducing my electrical use wont benefit me at all. I currently pay 30 dollars per month for electricity... thats it. I never owe them after we true up. Now, Ill owe them an additional 85 a month (on top of the 30 connection fee)no matter how much I use.

I do agree with you..... this isnt over just yet.

Reid:

Understood, 5 X 5.
We have some similar background.
I'm Clear.
Semper Fi.
J.P.M.

[bcroe]

Choose your place, and live with it. No water, sewer, garbage, mortgage
bills here in the country, real estate is cheap(er). OK we have several cold
months, we are used to dealing with that.

The electric bill here was already under 5000 KWh a year, but experience
going back to 1971, was that the heating bill would keep increasing. Only
needed it those cold months, but just the monthly connect fee kept getting
bigger.

So the solution in 2013 was, generate heat as well as electric from solar.
How long to break even, not a primary concern, but lately it looks to be
sooner than I thought. And eliminating fuel charges is really quite satisfying.
Bruce Roe

[Reid1boys]

As far as I am concerned if you can afford solar you can pay for the increases on your electric bill.

I am done arguing with you so have a nice day.

who is arguing.... but why stop with electric bills. You know what, since I can also afford it, lets double all of the registration fees for my cars, after that, lets double my water and garbage bill, add a couple more thousand to my property taxes, add 30% to all of my insurance premiums, and lets move that 2.5% mortgage rate up to 7.... good, now I am close to living month to month and can finally have some equity in our world.

Your comment makes ZERO sense, but Im gonna guess this equity tax wont apply to you?

[Reid1boys]

Well Reid, I guess in the eyes of maybe a lot of folks this may flush out as one of those times when life is just unfair.
Others may see it as payback time.
Opinions vary.
As for the idea of paying more for anything based on more income being unfair in a capitalistic society, it seems no one has relayed that information to the IRS yet.
Maybe you could do us all a favor and get them in the loop.

Many of us said yes to the NEM deal you write of (and it was - and still is - a deal) but without exception, every actual and potential PV owner I spoke with - and I've spoken with most of the 150+ NEM customers in my HOA - cited potential future bill reduction as the overwhelming and usually only reason for considering PV. None of them give as much as the north end of a southbound rat about saving energy, duck curves, stressing the grid, the poor or anything else.

I do remember hearing (and still see/hear) a lot of solar peddlers and their media shills saying, or at least implying, PV would save the planet and eliminate out electric bills to boot. A lot of us drank that Kool-Aid with a lot of uninformed wishful thinking, particularly those of us of the landed gentry that have access to the capital to handle the upfront cost for reduction of future electric bills, but I don't recall anyone saying or thinking it would be for zero upfront cost.

I think we on this forum would be time and effort ahead if we waited until all the dust settles around this issue of the latest CA efforts to deal with PV and the I.O.U. electricity rates before we attempt meaningful dialogue about the issue.

Maybe folks not as financially well heeled as you seem to be might find it a bit easier to choose what to do with limited resources if they were to get a break on their electric bills.
Not everyone qualifies for CARE rates.
Sounds like you've never had to decide which bill to not pay. Some folks are not quite as financially fortunate as you and I.

At this time, the bill's implementation (or even survival in the courts at this point) has not been determined so it's all a matter of jaw jacking right now.
The final outcome will most likely look a lot different than what we all might want to infer from what we've seen so far.

Whatever the outcome, most NEM 1.0 customers like you and I have had at least 6 years, and most a good deal longer to wring cost effectiveness out of their decision.
For a lot of NEM 2.0 customers, time to breakeven may have been achieved my now or soon will be. Folks that miss the boat and get NEM 3.0 have some education and decision making to go through.
Anyway, no one ever said NEM was a forever deal.

And too, there are always the most cost-effective methods of electricity bill reduction - lifestyle changes and energy conservation - available for all of us. You pay nothing for what you don't use.

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

Correct, nobody ever said NEM was a forever deal.... just a 20 year deal, and we arent even close to our 20 years.
As far as me not having to decide what bills to pay.......well, when people say I have white privilege, I say yep. My food stamps came to us in books when I was a kid... it was awesome.

So yea, I know all to well about being poor, so poor I missed 2 weeks of school in 7th grade because I couldnt replace the shoes that were stolen from me. That experience caused me to work so I would NEVER know what that was like as an adult. I have little empathy for those that are simply to lazy to do what I did. Work 2 jobs and go to school full time AFTER I did 4 years in the Marine Corps to help pay for school.

I should not be taxed additionally because I worked out of poverty.
Oh, no lifestyle change can have any impact on this equity tax.We already produce as much electricity as we use. So reducing my electrical use wont benefit me at all. I currently pay 30 dollars per month for electricity... thats it. I never owe them after we true up. Now, Ill owe them an additional 85 a month (on top of the 30 connection fee)no matter how much I use.

I do agree with you..... this isnt over just yet.

[SunEagle]

and low income cant afford the vacation I went on in Cancun either, or the car I drive.... so what is your point? The state of California told all of us.. hey, we have a deal for you if you put these panels on your house, thus helping the residents of the state by reducing the stress on the grid. Many of us said yes to that deal. Now a few years later after the state has met its goals for rooftop solar they want to change the terms of that deal.

Beyond solar, the idea that you should pay more for the same product based upon your income level is criminal in a capitalistic society.
Low Income people already get reduced rates in the CARE program that lowers low income people's bill.

As far as I am concerned if you can afford solar you can pay for the increases on your electric bill.

I am done arguing with you so have a nice day.

[J.P.M.]

and low income cant afford the vacation I went on in Cancun either, or the car I drive.... so what is your point? The state of California told all of us.. hey, we have a deal for you if you put these panels on your house, thus helping the residents of the state by reducing the stress on the grid. Many of us said yes to that deal. Now a few years later after the state has met its goals for rooftop solar they want to change the terms of that deal.

Beyond solar, the idea that you should pay more for the same product based upon your income level is criminal in a capitalistic society.
Low Income people already get reduced rates in the CARE program that lowers low income people's bill.

Well Reid, I guess in the eyes of maybe a lot of folks this may flush out as one of those times when life is just unfair.
Others may see it as payback time.
Opinions vary.
As for the idea of paying more for anything based on more income being unfair in a capitalistic society, it seems no one has relayed that information to the IRS yet.
Maybe you could do us all a favor and get them in the loop.

Many of us said yes to the NEM deal you write of (and it was - and still is - a deal) but without exception, every actual and potential PV owner I spoke with - and I've spoken with most of the 150+ NEM customers in my HOA - cited potential future bill reduction as the overwhelming and usually only reason for considering PV. None of them give as much as the north end of a southbound rat about saving energy, duck curves, stressing the grid, the poor or anything else.

I do remember hearing (and still see/hear) a lot of solar peddlers and their media shills saying, or at least implying, PV would save the planet and eliminate out electric bills to boot. A lot of us drank that Kool-Aid with a lot of uninformed wishful thinking, particularly those of us of the landed gentry that have access to the capital to handle the upfront cost for reduction of future electric bills, but I don't recall anyone saying or thinking it would be for zero upfront cost.

I think we on this forum would be time and effort ahead if we waited until all the dust settles around this issue of the latest CA efforts to deal with PV and the I.O.U. electricity rates before we attempt meaningful dialogue about the issue.

Maybe folks not as financially well heeled as you seem to be might find it a bit easier to choose what to do with limited resources if they were to get a break on their electric bills.
Not everyone qualifies for CARE rates.
Sounds like you've never had to decide which bill to not pay. Some folks are not quite as financially fortunate as you and I.

At this time, the bill's implementation (or even survival in the courts at this point) has not been determined so it's all a matter of jaw jacking right now.
The final outcome will most likely look a lot different than what we all might want to infer from what we've seen so far.

Whatever the outcome, most NEM 1.0 customers like you and I have had at least 6 years, and most a good deal longer to wring cost effectiveness out of their decision.
For a lot of NEM 2.0 customers, time to breakeven may have been achieved my now or soon will be. Folks that miss the boat and get NEM 3.0 have some education and decision making to go through.
Anyway, no one ever said NEM was a forever deal.

And too, there are always the most cost-effective methods of electricity bill reduction - lifestyle changes and energy conservation - available for all of us. You pay nothing for what you don't use.

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[Reid1boys]

And low income people will never be able to install solar and get any deal. So as I have said before. If you can afford solar then suck it up and pay for it or get out of the place that you end up paying high electric rates.

and low income cant afford the vacation I went on in Cancun either, or the car I drive.... so what is your point? The state of California told all of us.. hey, we have a deal for you if you put these panels on your house, thus helping the residents of the state by reducing the stress on the grid. Many of us said yes to that deal. Now a few years later after the state has met its goals for rooftop solar they want to change the terms of that deal.

Beyond solar, the idea that you should pay more for the same product based upon your income level is criminal in a capitalistic society.
Low Income people already get reduced rates in the CARE program that lowers low income people's bill.

[SunEagle]

It is funny how they try to distinguish between what you pay for electricity and your final bill. Like I give one damn that I pay zero for electricity, but have 85 dollars per month in a flat fee attached. They will say, but look, we have not hurt you at all as we kept your NEM 1.0 in place, so you therefor get to continue to see a basically no charge for your electricity. BUT.... here, pay us 85 dollars each month anyways, just because.

WTF?
And yes, people with NEM 1.0 will be hurt the most and that is the exact reason the bill was written in this way. They want to extrapolate more money out of us that took advantage of the deal they were offering us..... because it simply isnt "Equitable," that low income people didnt get the same "Deal," that we got.

And low income people will never be able to install solar and get any deal. So as I have said before. If you can afford solar then suck it up and pay for it or get out of the place that you end up paying high electric rates.