Renewable energy proponents complain about opposition tactics

Renewable energy proponents complain about opposition tactics

DENVER - Oct 14 (The Associated Press)

Proponents of a renewable energy initiative claim Xcel Energy, Colorado's largest electric utility, is violating the campaign finance law by sending pamphlets opposing the measure in customers' bills.

Manolo Gonzalez-Estay, spokesman for Coloradans for Clean Energy, said Wednesday that the group plans to file a complaint with the secretary of state's office.

A hearing is pending on a complaint the group filed in September that alleged the utility-dominated Citizens for Sensible Energy Choices illegally left out an in-kind contribution of office space from Xcel in a campaign finance report.

The campaigns for and against the Amendment 37, which would require utilities to get more electricity from renewable energy, have intensified as each has accused the other of misleading voters. A recent poll said 54 percent of likely voters support the measure, 26 oppose it and 20 percent are undecided.

If the measure's approved Nov. 2, Colorado voters would become the first in the nation to impose a renewable-energy requirement. The 16 states with similar requirements set the standards through legislation or regulations.

The initiative would require Colorado's largest utilities to get 10 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, by 2015. Supporters have raised $865,607 to promote the plan.

Opponents, who have raised about $1.1 million, contend the proposal could increase costs by as much as $1.5 billion and shift a big part of the burden to businesses.

Steve Welchert, spokesman for Coloradans for Clean Energy, said those arguments and opponents' claim that a Grand Junction newspaper opposes the measure show how far they're willing to go.

"I think the trend you see here is a campaign of deception to try to mislead the voters," Welchert said.

Spokeswoman Jeani Frickey acknowledged that the Citizens for Sensible Energy Choices Web site mistakenly listed the Grand Junction Sentinel as opposing the initiative. The paper endorsed Amendment 37 Tuesday.

"There was nothing intentional about it. As soon as (the paper) brought it to our attention, we took it down," Frickey said.

She added that she doesn't believe Xcel did anything wrong when it included a newsletter opposing the amendment in customers' bills.

Proponents noted that mailings by rural electric associations to their customers were listed as in-kind contributions to Citizens for Sensible Energy. Xcel's newsletters sent in September and October weren't included on the latest financial report filed with the secretary of state's office.

The utility has 1.3 million customers in Colorado.

"Tens of thousands of customers' dollars paid for these mailings and Xcel can't prove otherwise," Welchert said. "All they're hoping for is that their lawyers can delay their day in court until after this election."

Frickey countered that the mailings by the rural electric associations were campaign literature, while Xcel's information was part of its monthly newsletter to customers.

"We reserve the right to communicate with our customers in the time-honored way we've communicated with them," Xcel spokesman Mark Stutz said.

Customers call every day with questions about Amendment 37, he added.

He said that customers' money isn't financing the campaign against the proposal because the law doesn't allow it. However the utility can use profits to support causes, Stutz said.

The two sides have clashed over how much requiring more electricity from renewable energy sources would cost. A recent study financed by The Energy Foundation of San Francisco and released by supporters said the requirements wouldn't significantly affect energy bills.

Xcel, however, estimates that customers' bills could increase by hundreds of millions of dollars over the next several years if the measure passes and federal renewable energy tax credits aren't revived.

The utility also warns that business will bear the burden because residential increases are capped at 50 cents a household.

Proponents say the law prevents discriminating against classes of rate payers, and any increase should be shared.

For far more extensive news on the energy/power visit: http://www.energycentral.com .