Despite pleas from environmental advocates, Naperville’s Public Utilities Advisory Board has recommended that the city stay on with its coal-heavy electricity provider for the next three decades.
Following a four-and-a-half hour special meeting Tuesday night, the advisory board narrowly endorsed the 20-year contract renewal with the Illinois Municipal Electric Agency (IMEA) that Naperville has been grappling with for more than a year.
The board’s recommendation, which moved forward with a split 4-3 vote, is not binding.
Ultimately, how the city will procure its energy in 10 years’ time — when its current contract with IMEA is due to expire — is up to the Naperville City Council. The earliest the recommendation could go to council is May 6, according to city staff.
However, IMEA has given Naperville until April 30 to decide if it wants to extend its contract out to 2055. Asked whether the delay will impactn the city’s ability to consider a contract renewal, Naperville Electric Utility Director Brian Groth said he did not know.
All four candidates elected to council in the city’s election this month — two incumbents and two newcomers — have publicly stated they would not support signing an early contract renewal with IMEA.
Still, that didn’t keep tensions from rising Tuesday, with climate-minded community members going back and forth with the advisory board over the priorities a contract decision should be predicated on: merely how much it will cost ratepayers to keep their lights on or the environmental implications of where that energy comes from.
On the agenda were two presentations pertinent to the city’s contract renewal, one concerning the legal and market constraints Naperville’s electric utility operates under and another from the Naperville Environment and Sustainability Task Force (NEST).
The meeting was a continuation of what’s been an ongoing information-gathering process by the PUAB in anticipation of IMEA’s deadline.
Naperville, unlike most other municipalities in Illinois, provides electricity to taxpayers as a local service, rather than residents relying on an investor-owned utility such as Ameren or ComEd. To do so, the city purchases energy from IMEA, a joint action agency that offers an already assembled power supply to members at a wholesale price.
So far, of IMEA’s 32 members, 27 have signed a contract renewal. That does not include its two largest members: Naperville and St. Charles.
To kick off PUAB’s fact-finding, the board in late February received a presentation from IMEA staff. A week later, the board heard from Philadelphia-based consultant Customized Energy Solutions, which presented an overview of the different ways — as well as their associated risks and benefits — that Naperville could power its electric grid in years to come.
Discussion Tuesday added two more perspectives to the mix.
The first presentation came from energy law attorney Chris Townsend and energy planning consultant Mark Pruitt, who gave an outlook of the kind of energy market Naperville could be navigating down the line. At the core of their presentation was the forecast of a changing and uncertain market amid evolving policy and a broader statewide transition towards renewables.
Townsend and Pruitt did not provide any recommendations as far as procurement. They did, however, advise readiness.
“You need to really dig into what are all your options,” Pruitt said, “and then to have a plan to say if this, then that happens because it’s going to change. …I think that the advice is to try to diversify to the extent possible, but you have to be realistic in terms of what options are available within the market.”
NEST’s presentation was more pointed. The organization, which has been an official Naperville advisory body since 2019, lobbied against IMEA’s extension offer and instead advised that the city take its time devising a procurement strategy.
“We have rushed this process because we’re following IMEA’s timeline, not ours,” said Theresa Hus, one of NEST’s presenters. The six NEST speakers asserted that there’s been a “lack of process” for ensuring the city selects the right mix of energy solutions to meet its needs.
NEST also argued that Naperville has an obligation to consider the environment in procurement planning. With IMEA, for instance, the bulk of the agency’s current energy portfolio comes from non-renewable sources, though the agency has stated it intends to reach a net-zero carbon emissions energy portfolio by 2050.
“The use of fossil fuels, and especially coal, comes with immense costs associated with pollution (and) climate change,” said Paul Bloom, a North Central College physics professor who spoke for NEST.
“I guess the question is what price do you want to assign to human suffering and to death?” Bloom said.
Some board members, however, weren’t convinced. Following NEST’s presentation, members posed follow-up questions to the group and the discussion quickly devolved into a debate over the cost of renewables versus staying on with IMEA and, at times, the accuracy of NEST’s information.
“You’re misleading people is what I see. … The point comes down to this is not about the environment,” board Chair Louis Halkias said to NEST. “This is about what’s best for the city of Naperville financially.”
Halkias emphasized that cost and reliability were the priorities and that sustainability wasn’t.
“Naperville is not going to save the world. … There’s always going to be a difference of opinion about the environment and the climate,” he said. “I can find as many people to say the opposite of what you’re saying.”
“Do you wish to challenge the physical science basis of climate change?” Bloom asked Halkias.
“No, no I don’t,” Halkias said, “because that’s not what we’re here for.”
Board member James Fillar said, “There’s going to be zero-net change to environmental emissions whether Naperville buys its power from IMEA or not. … Now, people may feel bad about that. They may feel uncomfortable about Naperville buying coal-fired power. But at the end of the day, the environment is going to see no net change.”
A follow-up report from Customized Energy Solutions’ presentation last month was also discussed at the end of the meeting. Included in the report was a recommendation for the city to continue procuring energy through IMEA.
CES also recommended that Naperville leverage a clause within the agency’s proposed contract extension that would, to a limited extent, give the city some leeway to explore renewable resources outside of IMEA.
As they weighed their own recommendation on the matter, a few members floated the idea of asking IMEA for more time for the city to decide whether it wants to renew.
“We are being put under the gun,” member Brandon Hoeft said, “and I personally feel that way. … I think at this point we’ve talked enough about it. We need more information.”
Nonetheless, a slim majority of the board advanced CES’ recommendation to council. Hoeft as well as members Michelle Ackmann and Philip Schrieber cast dissenting votes.
In the wake of the board’s vote, NEST co-leader Cathy Clarkin in a call Wednesday said she believed the board’s decision was predetermined.
“We were skeptical to begin with that they were going to take our presentation in good faith,” she said. “And at the end of the day, we didn’t feel like we were treated in good faith.”
Meanwhile, Halkias was asked after Tuesday’s meeting had adjourned why the board engaged with NEST if sustainability, as he said, wasn’t within the scope of PUAB discussions. He replied, “I wanted to give them an opportunity to have a voice in this because they said they didn’t.”
