‘My constituents are not happy’: Aldermen vote to eliminate city’s electrical aggregation program

QUINCY — The Quincy City Council voted Monday night to have an ordinance drafted to end the city’s electrical aggregation program.

Several aldermen noted during the Sept. 3 meeting that they were receiving complaints from customers who were automatically enrolled in the aggregation program, having their electric supply service switched to Constellation. City officials said they would contact SIMEC President Reg Ankrom to speak at Monday’s meeting.

Ankrom said the electric aggregation program referendum in Quincy was approved in November 2012 (the vote was 10,589 in favor and 5,586 against). The vote also determined that anyone who didn’t want to participate in the program had to opt out. 

The program aims to provide competitive rates by leveraging market competition. Ankrom said recent market volatility led to a one-year pause. A three-month contract was recommended to the city, allowed SIMEC to see what Ameren’s price is when it adjusts its rate on Oct. 1. Ameren’s price per kilowatt hour today is 8.136 cents. 

“Competition is designed to do a couple of things,” Ankrom said. “One, to produce a quality product at the lowest rate possible. We’ve seen competition working in this field over the past 10 or 11 years to reduce the spread we see between competitive pricing and the regulated pricing of Ameren.

“(The proposed three-month contract) would assure that we don’t run into a situation where we get what we believe is a reasonable price. Then within a month or two, we find out that price is actually higher than the adjustment that Ameren brings the market.”

Greg Fletcher (R-1) then relayed to Ankrom customer complaints he’s heard in his ward.

“I’ve been (an alderman) for 3½ years, and this program probably generates more phone calls than anything,” he said. “The will of the people you keep talking about 12 years ago, I personally don’t believe it’s the will of the people now. People are not liking this. They think it should be opt in, not opt out.

“Why is government sticking their nose in their personal business as far as utilities? They complain that dealing with Constellation is just a joke. There’s not much to hang on to here. All I hear is, ‘What are we going to do to get rid of this or make it opt in only?’ My constituents are not happy.”

Ankrom explained the reason the program was designed for customers to opt out is for the program to put together the maximum number of kilowatt hours. “That’s where the power is in the market,” he said.

“I understand that,” Fletcher said. “But maybe times have changed. What do we have to do to re-examine this thing?”

Corporation Counsel Bruce Alford explained to aldermen they could change the program.

“You don’t have to do a new referendum to change it. You can just change the order make it an opt in program,” he said. “There’s going to be more work on the city side than with an opt out, because we have to get accurate lists to the providers. The other option would be (to) just going to get rid of aggregation.”

“With municipal elections next spring, maybe it’s time for somebody to put that on the ballot. Let’s let the voters decide,” Fletcher said.

Eric Entrup (R-1) said he’s received many complaints from people who call Constellation to opt out but find it takes an average of 15 or 20 minutes to complete the process. (Ben Uzelac, D-7, later noted the online process typically only takes a few minutes.)

“I’ve never had calls like this in regard to this subject,” Mike Farha (R-4) said. “People are very upset. As far as I’m concerned, we didn’t have a referendum to approve the initial contract. I don’t know why we need one now. Just get rid it if you want to. That’s it.”

“Like I said, you don’t have to do a referendum to get rid of it,” Alford said. “If you just want to do an ordinance, you can do that.”

“Yeah, I think that would be the right way to go,” Farha said. “Maybe I’ll be the only one to say it, but I think we ought to do that.”

Ankrom explained that customers choose what electricity provider to utilize, but SIMEC tries to let people know their options. 

“The problem with the way it’s set up now is you’re forcing people to make a decision,” Fletcher said. “And I don’t like that. This ought to be, at the very least, an opt in only. Anybody who wants to play that, bless their hearts, but people (who) just want to be left alone, that’s the way it should be.

“Nobody tells me what grocery store I go to. Nobody tells me what gas station I go to, but I’m being told what electric company I’m going to use unless I physically create an act to opt out.”

“I just want to clarify one thing. Reg isn’t telling anybody what to do,” Uzelac said. “The City Council 12 years ago is telling people what to do.”

“Twelve years ago was 12 years ago, pal,” Fletcher said. “Now people’s not liking it.”

Jake Reed (R-6), who said electrical aggregation has “caused nothing but trouble” since he became an alderman, made a motion to create an ordinance to drop the program. Fletcher seconded it. The vote to drop it was 8-5, with Tony Sassen (R-4) abstaining.

Bergman clarified his vote, saying he believed aggregation has saved money for the taxpayers. However, preferred to create a referendum on the issue and let voters decide. 

“They chose 12 years ago, and I don’t want to take that opportunity away from the public,” he said. “I also know the mindset, and … I think it’s probably run its course. I think if it were put to the public, they would decide to do away with it and have the ability to choose (their electrical provider) on their own.”

Reis and Uzelac, who also voted no, agreed with Bergman’s comment.