Liberty First Network

Solar Choice Ballot Initiative Analysis

Many of our network partners have recently joined a coalition for a ballot
initiative on solar energy. There is some misinformation about the ballot
initiative and what it is and is not going to accomplish if passed.
The Liberty First Network has analyzed the ballot initiative language in
comparison to the information circulating and would like to bring you the
facts on the initiative.
Point 1: The initiative uses the Florida Constitution to promote solar energy over other forms
of energy. The ballot initiative will solidify in the Florida Constitution that It shall be the
policy of the state to encourage and promote solar electricity. The Constitution shouldnt be
used to promote any industry over another.
While it is true that the ballot initiative does have that phrase, it also goes on to state how this
would be accomplished. In the ballot wording the sentence after the one stated above states:
It shall be the policy of the state to encourage and promote local small-scale
solar-generated electricity production and to enhance the availability of solar
power to customers. This section is intended to accomplish this purpose by
limiting and preventing regulatory and economic barriers that discourage the
supply of electricity generated from solar energy sources to customers who
consume the electricity at the same or a contiguous property as the site of the
solar electricity production.
This would go on to mean that, while the state will have a policy to promote solar, it will be
promoting solar by ending regulatory and economic barriers for the industry. Removing
regulation is opening the market to small-scale solar generated electricity.

Point 2: The ballot initiative is not opening up a free market for energy in Florida.
What it does is give solar a competitive advantage over other types of energy by deregulating
only solar energy.
Currently electricity companies can produce and sell to the consumer an unlimited amount of
energy. This can be done at little to no upfront cost to the end consumer. The company makes a
profit off of the sale of the energy produced and consumed.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015

Small-scale solar energy is not able to provide the same service as the energy generated is
produced in small amounts on a single or multiple properties and can not be sold to a consumer
without being declared a utility. Small-scale solar energy production is not the same function as a
mass delivered energy company. The ballot initiative limits the sale of solar energy to 2
megawatts per year, which is the consumption of a single large store like Walmart or Target.
The ballot initiative would allow a consumer to have little to no upfront costs by leasing the solar
equipment on their own property and paying for the equipment by paying for the energy
consumed.
This ballot initiative would not allow for a large mass energy delivery system with no regulation.
That would be a competitive advantage. This would allow an end consumer to pay for energy in
the same way they currently pay for energy from a large company but choose solar for the way
their energy is delivered.

Point 3: You are already free to put solar on your roof, your business or on your land. Florida
has tons of solar currently, largely thanks to we the taxpayers subsidizing it. There arent
regulatory barriers in place blocking solar. The biggest barrier to solar is its cost and, rather
than improving technology to lower costs, the solar industry is spending its time and money
lobbying for more handouts.
While you are free to put solar on your roof right now, what this ballot initiative does is allow
you to resell any of the energy produce up to 2 megawatts. This is currently against the law for
anyone who is not a designated energy utility. So you can produce a product but can only
personally consume it. This initiative would open the market to competition in the energy
industry to small-scale energy producers of solar energy.
The ballot initiative itself does not in any way provide for subsidies. It is strictly for the
production and reselling of solar produce energy up to 2 megawatts.
Could subsidies be established in the future? Sure. Subsidies are being budgeted every year for
many MANY industries. Subsidies are not only seen in the solar industry. There are large
subsidies right now for the corn industry and other agricultural products. Small farmers are not
limited to growing corn for personal consumption nor is supporting a small farmer supporting
large scale subsidies for the industry.
Subsidies for industries is a separate issue. The initiative itself does not provide for them.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015

Point 4: If this is about free markets, why doesnt the initiative deregulate all energy? Solar
cant stand on its own, it isnt reliable enough to generate enough energy to provide 100% of
the power we need. Thats why the amendment requires the regulated utilities to still provide
power to anyone generating their own solar energy, basically treating the power grid as battery
back up.

The ballot initiative does single out solar. That is true. It's the sunshine state and solar power is
the most feasible alternative for this market.
The ballot initiative also does state that there is a requirement for utilities to provide access to
power. However, this is to keep in line with the Florida Building Code which includes the
International Property Maintenance Code.
Last year a Cape Coral woman, Robin Speronis, was incarcerated for providing her own power
using solar panels and collecting rain water for her own water consumption living without
connection to utility services. Magistrate Harold S. Eskin ruled that due to the Florida Building
Code inclusion of the International Property Maintenance Code she was in violation of the law.
When she still did not comply she was jailed.
In section 102.2 the International Property Maintenance Code specifically states that all
structures within the state can not disconnect access to local utilities to include electricity and
water.
No owner, operator or occupant shall cause any service, facility, equipment or
utility which is required under this section to be removed from or shut off from
or discontinued for any occupied dwelling, except for such temporary
interruption as necessary while repairs or alterations are in progress.
The provision included in the ballot initiative is only restating current florida statutes and codes.
The ballot initiative also does not prohibit an electricity utility from charging for that access. It
only states that access must be provided which is a restatement of current law.
Point 5: The ballot initiative will result in higher electric rates. The electric grid will still have
to be maintained, and because solar is not reliable enough to replace traditional electric
generation, new power plants will still have to be built. The cost for all of that maintenance
and electric generation will fall on the Floridians that dont have solar on their homes,
subsidizing the grid for the folks that can afford solar.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015

This statement is contradictory. One statement is that solar is not reliable or viable. In another
statement it is said to harm the electric companies as they lose customers to solar energy but still
have to maintain electrical power grids. If solar is unreliable, than the electric utilities will not be
losing business as consumers will not be using it. They will maintain near current levels of
customers for the utility companies as consumers will not want an energy source that is not
reliable in providing the energy they need. Nothing in the ballot initiative mandates a consumer
to use solar provided energy. It only allows consumers to choose solar energy on a small scale to
provide for their energy in a cost effective, no upfront cost manner.
If the statement of non-reliability is false and solar is a viable alternative, than utilities will lose
some customers. However, competition has always been the catalyst for innovation. Utility
companies will find ways to provide for better service in a more efficient manner. Government
can not make a companys business model stable and continuing the practice is the antithesis of
the free market.

**Points 6 thru 9 are all regarding the same issue and as such we will put them
together for analysis.
Point 6: Take a look at whos funding this to see the real story -- they dont support free
markets. Floridians for Solar Choice is just a front group for The Southern Alliance for Clean
Energy (SACE), the real backer of this initiative. They have provided nearly 100% of the
funding for FSC so far and their attorney is the campaigns Treasurer. SACE is funded by the
California-based Energy Foundation, with direct ties to Tom Steyer and other liberal activists.
Point 7: Government mandates and subsidies for renewable energy is the real goal. SACE
lobbies for government-mandated renewable energy and expanding federal and state subsidies
for renewables. They want a National Renewable Standard that would require 25 percent of
our energy to be generated by renewables. They want government to shut- out the traditional
fuels that make up the majority of our electric generation while propping up renewables like
solar that arent market competitive.
Point 8: Look no further than Gainesville for SACEs handiwork. SACE opposes traditional
energy no matter what the cost, and pushed for a new biomass plant in Gainesville. Now
Gainesville has the highest electric rates in the state.
Point 9: Are radical environmentalists, funded by Tom Steyer, trying to take-over the
conservative grassroots? It sure looks that way. They are trying to convince Floridas
conservative and limited-government grassroots that using the Constitution to support solar
energy is good free market policy. Tom Steyer, who makes money from solar energy
production and leasing, is laughing all the way to the bank.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015

From all the information seen and researched, Floridians for Solar Choice is a coalition of groups
from all parties and political ideologies. This is a single issue ballot initiative. Being a coalition
partner does not in any way condone or promote another organizations views on issues not
directly pertaining to the ballot initiative. Each coalition partner does disagree with each other on
many issues but have found a way to agree on this single issue.
Coalitions are often made of groups and organizations from different view points on issues. The
Liberty First Network also builds coalitions with groups across the state on single issues.
Working together on issues in a nonpartisan manner on issues with agreements has been the most
effective way to bring about positive changes for liberty issues. Divisiveness and refusal to work
together because of outside disagreements not pertaining to the issue at hand, will only further to
stagnate liberty. As an organization we completely support working with all ideologies on issue
of agreements while respectfully keeping our principles on issues of disagreement.
The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy is a coalition partner, however, that is only one part of a
large coalition. From the research done, it appears that the initial funding was provided by the
SACE. The organization, Floridians for Solar Choice, began in December of 2014, taking in
$210.00 in donations.
From January 2, 2015 to January 31, 2015, $2,625.00 was donated from individuals. SACE
donated $264,457.71 broken down as:

$100,000 in general donations

$148,262.50 for petition gathering
$3,467.50 in advertising
$6,834.51 in travel
$10.00 in notary fees
$2,683.20 in staff time
$3,200 in website design

Due to Florida campaign finance law, all work done by a coalition partner, that is paid for by that
partner, has to be recorded as a donation to the organization.
Being in the beginning stages of the coalition, the issue of funding seems off balance but again it
is hard to judge with it being in these early stages of the project. It appears, that the Southern
Alliance for Clean Energy worked on the ballot initiative. While working on the initiative they
paid staff members to work and that is what is largely being recorded as a donation. Other
coalition partners are using volunteers for the same function but volunteer work would not be
counted as a donation.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015

These groups do not seem to be working together on any other issues, except the solar choice
ballot initiative. So we should not allow competition in the market because liberals are taking
over the conservative grassroots? That seems a little conspiratorial and not a legitimate reason to
not support an initiative. Its a coalition. An issue should be judged by the merits of the actual
initiative not the coalition built to support it.

Analysis of Solar Initiative

March 6, 2015