Guest Editorial: Croton's CCA ratepayers are being kept in the dark.
Is Sustainable Westchester’s Community Choice Aggregation program the best deal for residents? And is Croton’s Board of Trustees doing its best to keep villagers informed about their choices?
by Joel Gingold
Among the principal obligations of any governing body are to represent, and fight for, the best interests of its constituents, and to protect them from harm, financial and otherwise. Unfortunately, the Croton Board of Trustees has chosen not to follow these tenets and, rather, pursues its own agenda and, often, perhaps, acts principally to burnish its “progressive” credentials.
On March 20 of this year, the Journal-News published an article reporting that electric ratepayers in the 23 communities (including Croton) who were members of Sustainable Westchester’s Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) program, over the preceding 16 months, had paid about $48 million more in electric Supply Charges than they would have if they had paid Con Edison’s normal monthly rates. While there are many positive things that can be said about the CCA program, each individual should be apprised of the option to participate or not. Despite being informed of this discrepancy over a year ago, the Croton Board of Trustees has chosen not to inform its constituents of the additional costs they were incurring and their ability to opt out of the program to save money if they so chose.
Early in 2024, as a subscriber to the CCA, I first realized that my electric rates under the program were well above those charged by Con Edison to customers not so enrolled. At that time, the Sustainable Westchester/Westchester Power web site noted, in small print, that the average Con Edison rate over the previous year had been 9.378 cents/KwH, while the “Green” (all renewable) CCA rate had been 15.449 cents/KwH and the “Brown” (partially renewable) rate had been 13.685 cents/ KwH, a differential of 4.3 and 6.1 cents/Kwh, 45-65%, respectively.
For a typical residential usage of 450 KwH/month, this amounts to a CCA premium of about $20-$30 per month. Most residents understood that they were paying a premium of about 1.8 cents/KwH for “Green” vs. “Brown” power, but not the more than 6 cents/KwH premium that was actually assessed. I subsequently opted out of the CCA.
I then sent a note to each of the members of the Board of Trustees, based on that data published on the Sustainable Westchester/Westchester Power web site, bringing their attention to this discrepancy and stating that I thought that, as the principal local sponsor of the CCA program, the Board had an obligation to inform the ratepayers of Croton of the premium they were paying for CCA electricity and allowing them to opt out if they so choose. Those who were willing to pay the premium to support the CCA system could, of course, remain in the program. But at a minimum, I felt Croton ratepayers should be apprised of the facts so they could make an informed decision regarding what to do. Apparently, there were others who did the same.
Yet, despite being informed of this situation, the Board chose to remain silent and take no action. They even entered into a subsequent CCA agreement with Sustainable Westchester (which also resuilted in higher costs than would have been paid under Con Edison’s normal rates.) Thus numerous Croton ratepayers, most of whom were unaware of the extra costs they were incurring—or even that they had been opted into the CCA without their knowledge—continued to pay a premium.
The Journal-News article also reported that Town of Greenburgh Supervisor, Paul Feiner, posts both the CCA rates and the Con Edison rate regularly in his monthly town newsletter, so that his constituents can see the differential in real time. Unfortunately, this is not done in Croton.
While the future costs of electric power cannot be predicted with great accuracy, there were resources available to the village that the Board could have consulted to get at least an estimate of future power costs. Yet they chose not to do so and simply made an early agreement, in advance of Westchester Power’s signing a contract, to blindly accept whatever Sustainable Westchester/Westchester Power subsequently agreed to.
Under the contract ultimately executed by Westchester Power last year, and which, according to its web site, extends through the end of 2025, 100% renewable power is priced at 13.207 cents/KwH and 50% renewable power is priced at 12.087 cents/KwH, a differential of 1.12 cents/KwH or about 9%. However, by action of the Village Board, Croton ratepayers who are enrolled in the CCA (whether they chose to do so or not) automatically pay the higher rate. My latest Con Edison bill, covering mid-May through mid-June 2025, charged me 9.88 cents/KwH, 3.327 cents/KwH below Croton’s CCA rate, a 34% premium. For consumption of 450 KwH per month, this amounts to a premium of about $15 per month—less than under the previous contract, but a significant amount just the same.
Westchester Power received only a single bid when it sought to renew the CCA program last year. And one has to wonder if they simply grabbed whatever rate was offered at the time, rather than decline the bid offered and wait for a while to see how energy markets developed, because a good fraction of Sustainable Westchester’s income results from a royalty on every KwH of power sold under the CCA. It appears that they were afraid of losing that revenue source, even for a brief period.
There are undoubtedly many in Croton (and who have been unknowingly opted into the CCA) who would willingly pay a premium to receive 100% renewable energy, and they deserve our respect and commendation. However, it is imperative that they know exactly what premium they are paying. The Village Board’s inaction on this issue has kept all of them in the dark, so to speak, unless they took the time to examine the Westchester Power website.
Many believe that the premium they are paying for all-renewable energy is the differential between the two CCA rates. They are not aware of how far both of the CCA rates are above those of Con Edison and the actual size of the premium they are paying. Why? Because the Village Board has knowingly chosen not to inform them of the differentials and the amount of those premiums.
At a time when the prices of essentially everything have soared, we should all have the ability to make such decisions based on the best information available. The Board has done nothing to assist its constituents in this effort. This is a failure, in my opinion, of one of its basic responsibilities to its constituents.
To those CCA members who feel that they cannot afford this premium and who wish to lower their electricity costs, it is (relatively) easy to opt out of the CCA program by visiting the Sustainable Westchester/Westchester Power web site and following the instructions contained therein.
We are also all aware of a rather significant rate increase that Con Edison has applied for, and strong arguments can be made for rejecting or modifying it. But we should also be aware that such an increase applies only to the Con Edison Distribution Charges (including transmission, local distribution, etc.) and have nothing whatever to do with the Supply Charges (the costs of power generation) which are impacted by the CCA. So whatever happens in the Con Edison rate case, your electricity Supply Charges will not change.
Joel Gingold, a retired nuclear engineer, has been a resident of Croton for more than 80 years. He wrote two books about his life in Croton and elsewhere, “Now Hear This” and “On the Street Where I Live.”
Editor’s Note: The Chronicle strives to give voice to the diverse viewpoints in the village by frequently publishing Guest Editorials. To discuss a submission, please get in touch at TheCrotonChronicle@gmail.com
*******************************************************************************************************
To share this post, or to share The Croton Chronicle, please click on these links.
Comments policy: No personal attacks, please be polite and respectful at all times.
Thank you Joel, well written and informative. I'm disappointed that our Board did not share this information with us and make it absolutely clear that the Board has chosen higher electrical supply rate for its residents. I wonder if the Village is also paying those higher rates with out tax dollars?
And thank you Joel as well.