Florida Supreme Court hears arguments on proposed energy choice ballot initiative
The Florida Supreme Court held oral arguments last week to determine whether a proposed constitutional amendment that would deregulate the state’s electric utility industry should appear on the 2020 ballot.
Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody has asked the justices to render an opinion on whether the text of the proposed amendment titled “Right to Competitive Energy Market for Customers of Investor-Owned Utilities; Allowing Energy Choice,” complies with Florida law and meets two legal requirements by containing only a single subject and having a fair ballot summary.
Citizens for Energy Choices (CEC) is the Florida political action group defending the ballot summary before the court.
According to GateHouse Capital Bureau, the judges assertively questioned the proponents about whether the ballot language was misleading. “In terms of whether or not its misleading, wouldn’t an average person reading this ballot language, the reasonable voter out there, see that I can’t choose my current provider if I’m happy with them?” asked Justice Robert Luck.
The justices did not specify when they would rule on the subject. However, Alex Patton, CEC spokesperson, said, “We remain confident in our legal footing and we look forward to the court’s ruling.” So far, CEC has collected 400,000 petition signatures and will need 766,200 by Feb. 1, 2020 for ballot access.
Dozens of state organizations oppose the ballot initiative, including the Florida Chamber of Commerce, which was among groups that filed briefs agreeing with the attorney general. The Chamber has said the CEC’s initiative could cause great harm to Florida’s economy. In a financial impact statement conducted by the organization, it suggested the proposed changes to the electricity market would burden state and local governments with more than $1.2 billion per year in increased costs and reduced revenues.
The CEC says otherwise. The organization purports if the initiative is adopted that residents and businesses could save $5 billion each year in energy costs.
“Regardless of what the amendment’s sponsors say, the truth is if the initiative were to pass, nobody knows who will own the power plants, poles, power lines and equipment that today reliably serve Florida’s homes and businesses,” said Mark Wilson, president and CEO, Florida Chamber of Commerce, in a written statement. “Additionally, while they call the initiative ‘energy choice,’ the fact is that 75 percent of Floridians would be forced to change electricity providers and would not be allowed to choose to keep their current electric companies.”
Four large electric companies provide Floridians power and are against the initiative: Florida Power and Light, Duke Energy, Gulf Power, and Tampa Electric.
The Florida League of Cities has also come out against the proposal, arguing that abolishing agreements for power generation could result in the loss of more than $700 million in local government annual revenue. The group says the proposal would also remove local government’s ability to determine who provides electricity in their jurisdictions.
In July, 24 Florida members of Congress, among them 12 Democrats and 12 Republicans, wrote a letter to the Florida attorney general asserting that the proposed amendment would dismantle the power grid, lead to complete energy deregulation, guarantee higher rates, and pose problems for clean energy adoption.
Concerns by Florida officials stem from experiences other states have had with similar measures, including Texas, which deregulated its electricity system in most parts of the state in 2002. The CEC has touted Texas as a model of success, but its system is not without its problems. In August, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), that state’s grid manager, sent out emergency alerts because power reserves were in short supply, calling on customers to conserve power. It was the third such emergency in five years. And this summer there were power-related data errors that increased electricity costs for Texas consumers by millions of dollars. ERCOT says it should not be forced to fix the errors.
As for Florida, data show residents are not sold on the CEC’s efforts. A recent statewide poll commissioned by Floridians for Affordable Reliable Energy (FARE) demonstrates that support for the energy choice initiative falls far short of the 60 percent threshold for passage when voters are given the actual language as it will appear on the ballot.
“It’s clear that the initiative’s fiscal impact statement, which warns about significant cost increases and the loss of revenue for state and local governments makes voters think twice about this misleading proposal to dismantle Florida’s existing electricity system,” said FARE board member Scott Arceneaux in a press release.
