A whip “encouragement”
Being one of 9,000 households using solar panels in the net-meter-program with Colorado Springs Utilities, we received notice last month that we are going to be charged a “demand” fee beginning in 2027. They estimate it to cost $50/mo. and justify it by saying non-solar customers are subsidizing us to the tune of more than 5 million dollars a year.
If true, that scary number actually breaks down to $10.25-$26 per year per customer.
So in twisted logic, CSU wants the 9,000 solar customers to pay $600 a year to equal that 5-plus million dollars that was divided among 350,000 customers. In fact, solar customers are not being subsidized; we have been paying the same for electricity as everyone else, on top of the fees required to be solar customers. The problem is that the agreement CSU required us to sign in order to hook up to CSU says they will credit us back any excess electricity we produce for the same amount as what they charge us.
In a meeting with Tristan Gearhart of CSU, we learned that CSU can currently buy electricity much cheaper from commercial solar sources than what they must pay us per the contract (and per law). It is currently cheaper for them to get the solar power from other sources than to honor the contracts. This is why they say we are being subsidized.
We put in solar panels in 2010 with the encouragement of the state and the nation to invest in clean power for the good of the planet. Even with the tax incentives available then, it is a long slow payout for the solar panels.
With the new pricing scheme CSU has proposed for net-meter-customers it is unlikely the solar panels will ever become cost effective. Instead of charging us for our usage like everyone else, they plan to take our highest usage of the 5-9 pm hours to determine the amount of the daily surcharge that will be added on top monthly usage bill. Should any houseguest or family member accidently turn on the dryer, plug in an electric bike or car, finish a project with a power tool, or flip on the Christmas lights during the dinnertime and evening, our daily surcharge will soar.
CSU says the plan is to “encourage” us to take a look at our 5-9 pm power usage. This is calling a whip “encouragement”. Our choices now are to: 1. Pay these penalty fees; 2. Disconnect our solar panels from CSU; 3. Install a power battery storage unit for $20,000-plus to use during the 5-9 pm hours. Tristan told us they just want to make it “fair” for all the CSU customers.
If you really want to make it fair, honor your contract with us, charge us what everyone is being charged and appreciate that solar customers have already invested a lot of money to provide clean energy for the community and electricity back to the city. Yes, you may currently be able to get electricity cheaper than paying solar customers for their extra electricity, but the pendulum will swing back some day, and you’ll wish you had encouraged us to install solar instead of pricing us out of it.
Connie Hill
Colorado Springs
Inflammatory emails
An organization calling itself Danger for D-11 is sending racialized and inflammatory literature regarding school board candidate Charles Johnson to voters in our community. I would encourage every eligible voter in this beautiful district to use their critical thinking skills in order to reject this obvious attempt at contaminating our election with half-baked, blatant bigotry. Our community is definitely better than this organization clearly believes we are.
Raelle Schriner
Colorado Springs
Crime is out of control
Is there any large city in the US where you can walk down the street at night ( and many during the day) without having to fear for your property or your life. I don’t know of any.
However the politicians would have you believe that their cities are safe and everything is under control and crime rates are decreasing. Now talk to the people who live in those cities and you get a totally different opinion.
Crime is out of control and they need help. Cars are being stolen, robberies are common place and violent crime is out of control. Does anyone on this planet think that Chicago is a safe city in which to live, or Portland, Seattle, Oakland, etc.
The one thing these cities have in common is that they are governed by liberal progressive mayors who refuse to accept the undeniable fact that their citizens are under siege. They firmly believe the illegal aliens are being unjustly persecuted.
However, the mayors and in many cases the governors deny there is a problem and refuse to accept help from the federal government. God forbid that they may be viewed as incompetent and not capable of fixing the problem . After all they may be up for reelection. Party trumps (no pun intended) common sense. All is well. So, the way I see the score is politicians 1, citizens 0; criminals 1, citizens 0. Public safety: forfeit.
Barry S. Oswell
Colorado Springs