In Los Angeles, the plan to put solar panels on rooftops and parking lots across the city – a proposal called Measure B – has met with some difficulties in the halls of government. Originally supported enthusiastically by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, new findings indicate that this enthusiasm may be ill-founded, due to higher costs and the release of an analysis that points to risks in going forward with Measure B as it currently stands.

According to The Los Angeles Times, city officials received a top-secret report warning that the solar power plan on the March 3 ballot was “extremely risky.” The next day, the official who secured the analysis delivered it to the City Council. Chief Legislative Analyst Gerry Miller, the council’s top policy advisor, then distributed “confidential” copies of a Nov. 4 memo he wrote to Council President Eric Garcetti, listing 13 warnings about the solar plan.

Foes of the Measure B proposal have criticized Miller and Garcetti for not making the analysis public. Both men countered that the information was informal and, in some cases, inaccurate.

According to the article in the Los Angeles Times, the key complaint against the measure seems to be that “the Department of Water and Power (DWP) had underestimated the cost of the program, lacked the ability to carry it out, and could saddle ratepayers with higher electricity bills.”

When City Controller Laura Chick got wind of the analysis and subsequently reviewed the report, she said, “What this looks like is that there was expert advice requested at a cost to the taxpayers, the advice was rejected, and no one wanted the public to know there was this other opinion because it hurts their case.”

H. David Nahai, the DWP general manager, said he had been kept “completely in the dark” about the consultant’s report. Nahai apparently disagreed with the findings, saying he saw no basis for calling the solar plan risky. The Times’ article quotes another policy advisor as saying that the consultant who created the secret report had failed to consider federal tax credits when it estimated the cost of the program at $3.5 billion. The policy advisor then vouched for the DWP’s estimate of $1.5 billion and said rate hikes were not inevitable under the program.

Nahai said his department intends to come up with its own outside analysis at some point before the March 3 election.
With heightened awareness about Measure B now raised as a result of this newspaper report, it’s anticipated that further developments will be made more public and become part of the public record.

With Los Angeles’ high profile, and the overall increase in interest in issues pertaining to solar energy, there will undoubtedly be much more to report about the progress of Measure B as the March 3, 2009 election date draws closer. Stay tuned.

More on Measure B: Solar savior or shady politics?

Popularity: 2% [?]

Posted on February 11th in Solar Politics by Euphrasia.