Clay Fitch, WREC CEO
For more than 30 years, I’ve had the great pleasure of working and leading Wells Rural Electric Co. (WREC), a not-for-profit, member-owned electric utility in Northeastern Nevada. Our interest, and in fact our mission, is to improve the quality of life for our members, who also happen to be our neighbors, friends and family. We were built by the very communities we serve and I take the job of protecting the interests of our communities very seriously. I’m troubled by the recent trend of attempting to regulate the energy industry via constitutional amendment. Such practice ignores the legislative process where all viewpoints can be considered, limits our ability to be responsive to sudden changes and, as a result, ultimately harms the consumers we’re meant to serve. For those reasons, I would urge you to VOTE NO on QUESTION 6.
First and foremost, energy legislation doesn’t belong in the constitution. We have a saying in the cooperative world, “if you’ve been to one co-op, you’ve been to one co-op.” Admittedly, it might not be the catchiest phrase but it speaks to the truth that we were all built by distinctly different communities to provide essential services in areas that have distinctly different challenges and needs. The same is true even for larger utilities. After all, what works best in Las Vegas does not work best in Reno and Carson City. When it comes to providing energy, one-size-fits-all is not an effective solution.
Nuance and adaptability are rarely characteristics of constitutional amendments. If there is a need to pivot or change course, working around a constitutional amendment is simply not feasible. Changes would have to go back on the ballot and be approved twice, a process that takes years to achieve. That’s not the kind of fluidity that dictates success.
Perhaps more importantly, the primary intent of Question 6 has already been achieved.
Not only does Senate Bill 358 make Question 6 unnecessary because it already requires that 50 percent of the state’s energy come from renewable generation by 2030, it also serves as a prime example of the legislative process working effectively. After seeing the results of Question 6 on the 2018 ballot, state representatives recognized the desire of Nevadans to embrace renewable energy generation and proactively worked toward that goal. The result was legislation that both achieves reducing carbon emissions while maintaining the flexibility to fit more of the utilities around the state.
In WREC’s case, participating in the discussion resulted in large-scale hydroelectricity being included as a renewable energy source under SB 358, which allowed our utility to support the bill while also protecting our members. From an environmental standpoint, the appeal of renewable energy involves reducing carbon emissions. Because WREC receives its power from the Bonneville Power Administration in the Pacific Northwest, roughly 90 percent of our generation portfolio is carbon free. Unfortunately, hydroelectricity has rarely been considered “renewable” in the past for reasons that have far more to do with politics than practicality. Question 6 references “waterpower” but does not define what that includes. While hydroelectricity would seemingly fit, the constitution doesn’t allow for the discussion and confirmation of such ambiguity that is naturally provided by the legislative process.
Hydro is highly efficient, and thus highly affordable, while also being carbon free. Without the ability for dialogue and nuance, Question 6 could have forced us to abandon hydroelectricity, which would have significantly raised the cost of electricity for our members without providing any change to our carbon footprint.
The Constitution should guarantee the rights of the citizens and provide the basic framework of the government. Policy matters, such as the source of electricity, should be enacted through legislation where all points of view and real-world impacts can be considered. Supporting Question 6 and supporting carbon-free energy are not mutually exclusive. Please vote no on Question 6.
– Clay Fitch, WREC CEO
(Written by Jason Goods)
