Solar Power Gets Red -Carpet Treatment

Aug 20 - Oakland Tribune

By Paul Rogers

Across the Bay Area, when it comes to solar power, red tape has largely been replaced by the red carpet.

In the nearly two years since environmentalists first started noting the wildly varying permit fees that cities charge homeowners seeking to harness the sun's power, the eye-opening push appears to be paying off: From Silicon Valley to the North Bay's bucolic wine country, dozens of cities are falling all over themselves to make it easier for residents to put up the panels.

Why? It might be from a genuine desire to reduce smog and global warming. Or maybe that local politicians are worried about looking out-of-step with Bay Area voters who blend a passion for green politics with a love for high-tech solutions.

Whatever the reason, consider:

-The average cost that cities charge for building and planning permits to install a typical solar system on a home has fallen 61percent -- from $652 to $252 -- since 2005 in Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Benito counties

-Although a few cities, including Palo Alto, have raised solar fees, at least 59 of the 131 city and county governments between Sacramento and Santa Cruz have reduced fees during the past two years, some from more than $1,000 down to a few hundred dollars.

-Fourteen jurisdictions now hand out building permits for solar powerto homeowners for free. Two years ago, none did. Berkeley cut fees to zero from $261 in October. In June, Foster City did the same, followed by Belmont, and then Monte Sereno on Aug.7.

-Meanwhile, cities including San Jose, Walnut Creek and Novato have streamlined their rules so much that their planning departments now issue most permits in a few minutes, a process that once took weeks.

"A lot of mayors and city leaders want to do their part. They are concerned about global warming," said Kurt Newick, chairman of the energy committee for the Sierra Club's Loma Prieta chapter, which encompasses Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Benito counties.

"They really want to have more solar power in their cities; that's what I think the reason is."

The findings are part of an exhaustive survey completed this week by Newick, a Campbell resident who works for Horizon Energy Systems, a San Jose solar company, and other Sierra Club volunteers.

Members of the Sierra Club's Loma Prieta chapter, based in Palo Alto, sent e-mails to planning departments asking how much it would cost for permits to install a typical home solar system. They chose a $27,000 system that would generate three kilowatts of electricity.

Their first survey of 40 cities, in fall 2005, found fees for the same permit ranging from

$1,620 in Millbrae to $95 in Saratoga. News coverage, coupled with pressure from local residents and follow-up surveys, has done the trick, Newick said.

"The costs are coming down," he said. "Most city leaders have looked at their fees and were shocked, and they made the change."

Still, wide variations remain.

The most recent survey, done in June and July, found that Winters, a small town in Yolo County near the University of California, Davis, charges the most of any of the 131 cities and county governments in Northern California -- $1,298 for a standard residential solar permit. By comparison, the average of all 131 jurisdictions was $282. San Jose was at $236, Oakland at $199, Santa Cruz at $136.

"Boy, we really look bad. It is kind of embarrassing," said John Donlevy Jr., Winters' city manager. "But we're going through a complete review of all of our fees, and we'll be lowering it."

Donlevy said his city of 6,875 people is hardly anti- environment. The city council recently required that half of the 600 homes approved to be built there during the next seven years be equipped with solar panels.

"We're a small town. We've got a small staff," he said. "We're getting there. The fees are definitely going to come down."

In Monte Sereno, with just 4,000 residents, City Manager Brian Loventhal recommended that his city council members drop the town's $411 solar fee entirely. They agreed last week.

"Essentially what we're doing is subsidizing it. But our council felt it was well worth it," Loventhal said, citing the need to reduce pollution and dependency on fossil fuels.

The survey found that among the 13 counties, city fees in Santa Clara County and San Mateo County each averaged $255, ranking them fifth, behind San Francisco ($85), Marin ($206), San Benito ($224) and Santa Cruz ($231). Just below them are Alameda County at $290 and Contra Costa County at $301. Last are Napa and Yolo counties, at $444 at $445, respectively.

Newick said reviewing plans and sending an inspector to check a typical solar installation takes a few hours at a cost of no more than $300 -- what he says a "reasonable" fee should approximate. In fact, state law bans cities and counties from charging more for any permits -- from solar panels to swimming pools -- than the permits cost to process.

Some cities have increased solar fees during the past two years, most of them by only a few dollars. Palo Alto's, however, jumped from $110 in 2005 to $327 today. The reason? The city wasn't recovering its costs, and now it is, said Larry Perlin, Palo Alto's chief building official.

"I feel comfortable with what our fee is. It's a zero-sum game," he said. "If the fee is taken to zero, then the fee for other permits or services would have to increase to make up for it."

Statewide, solar power installations have been steadily increasing. Among the reasons are that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Million Solar Roofs program pays one-third of the cost for homeowners and that millions of people have seen Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" and become more concerned about global warming. Although nobody knows for certain whether lower fees have contributed to the growth, anecdotal evidence says it might, sometimes.

Barry Cinnamon, president of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos, said the fees are rarely deal-breakers. Yet as his business has grown from 12 to 170 employees since 2003, he has met some homeowners for whom the fees really do matter.

"It's not going to mean the difference between doing it or not for most people," he said. "But I have had customers where the permits were

$1,000 or $2,000, and they said it was the nail in the coffin. They wouldn't do it."

Contact Paul Rogers at progers@mercurynews.com or 408-920-5045.

Originally published by Paul Rogers, MEDIANEWS STAFF.