To:

U.S. Senate

Re:

King-Reid Amendment to Senate Energy Bill

As a broad group of organizations that represent our nations low income electricity consumers
we commend Senators Lisa Murkowski and Maria Cantwell for their leadership in producing a
bipartisan energy bill. We are closely following the Senate floor debate on this bill, and we are
concerned that an amendment offered by Senators Angus King and Harry Reid would unfairly
harm those in historically low-income and minority communities.
The King-Reid amendment establishes punitive and prescriptive one-size-fits-all federal
standards that do not take into consideration the needs of many in our communities. By dictating
the specific underlying economics of state net energy metering programs, the amendment
promotes an inequitable policy that benefits customers with residential rooftop solar systems at
the expense of electricity customers who do not have these systems and who, as a result, will pay
more for their electricity.
Today, many states and localities are reviewing the need for and impact of their net energy metering
policies. While net energy metering policies vary by state, customers with residential rooftop
solar systems typically are credited at the full retail electric rate for any excess electricity they
generate and sell to their local electric utility via the grid.
Under most net energy metering policies, utilities are required to buy this power at the full retail
rate, allowing net energy metered customers effectively to avoid paying for many of the fixed costs
of the grid that most of them use to ensure that they have electricity around the clock. This
means that customers without distributed generation systems must unfairly absorb these costs
through higher utility bills.
The intent of original net energy metering policies was to incentivize early adopters, not to widen
the energy divide between those who have the systems and those who do noteither because
they cant afford them, dont have the high credit score required to receive a zero-down lease, or
live in apartment or other type of housing that doesnt allow for rooftop solar systems to be
installed. And, since the cost of solar panels has dropped significantly (without any similar price
reduction to consumers), there is no need for this amendment.
We support solar power and equitable net energy metering policies that put the needs of our
communities before corporate profits. But, the cost shift created by current net energy metering
policies is an ongoing issue of concern for our communities, as evidenced by resolutions and policy
papers we have circulated.
We are pleased that Congress is giving this issue the attention it deserves, and we encourage you to
look at the real impacts net energy metering has on those living on the lower end of the economic
scale. Already, we spend a higher percentage of our incomes on energy than others, and adding any
more to our bills is just too much, regardless of our support for solar.

As you consider the Senate energy bill, we urge you to stand up for historically underrepresented
consumers by opposing the King-Reid amendment.
Sincerely,

______________________________________
Senator Catherine Pugh
President, National Black Caucus of State Legislators

_________________________________________
Honorable Johnny Ford
Director General, World Conference of Mayors

__________________________________________
Javier Palomarez
President and CEO, United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce

_________________________________________
Jose Perez
Chairman and CEO, Hispanics in Energy

_________________________________________
Allen Gutierrez
Executive Director, The Latino Coalition

_________________________________________
Joe Gibbons
Chairman, Energy Equity Alliance

_________________________________________
Waikinya Clanton
Executive Director, National Organization of Black Elected Legislative Women

________________________________________
Linda Haithcox Taylor
Executive Director, National Policy Alliance