Public Utilities Advisory Board Special Meeting – March 6, 2025: CES Preliminary Report on Energy Options

The Public Utilities Advisory Board (PUAB) held a special meeting on March 6, 2025, at 5:02 PM in the Naperville City Council Chambers. The primary purpose was to receive and discuss the preliminary report from Customized Energy Solutions (CES) regarding Naperville's electric utility procurement options, with a focus on whether to extend the contract with the Illinois Municipal Electric Agency (IMEA) by the April 30, 2025 deadline. The meeting featured extensive public comment from residents and sustainability groups, a detailed presentation by CES, and a question-and-answer session with board members. No decisions or recommendations were made; the board will reconvene on April 8, 2025, for a special session to consider CES's final report.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Fernando Arriola (NEST Community Relations Chair): Stated NEST's goal is to respond to the CES report and the previous IMEA presentation. Expressed that NEST has been a trusted advisor to the city, recommending against signing the proposed IMEA contract. In his personal capacity, he noted the CES report did not deeply examine the dynamic energy industry, partner objectives, or modern techniques like demand response, virtual power plants, and battery storage. He observed that IMEA's priorities differ from Naperville's.
• Theresa Hus (Say No to Coal consortium, longtime Naperville resident): Argued that IMEA's presentation omitted ongoing maintenance costs for aging coal plants, rising transmission costs, and the risk of a 30-year contract from Kentucky. She claimed IMEA's wholesale rates have been higher than ComEd's for years and that residential rate competitiveness offsets higher commercial and industrial rates. She asserted that any cost claims for 2035–2055 are speculative because the contract is silent on costs. She criticized IMEA for inflating renewable energy claims by using nameplate capacity instead of capacity factor, and stated that 84% of IMEA's electricity comes from CO2-emitting sources (vs. 31% in Illinois), meaning Naperville would fail its sustainability goals. She urged PUAB to demand public forums and avoid an outdated contract.
• Ted Bourlard (NEST co-chair, Naperville resident): Questioned why CES did not discuss power contracts with major providers like Constellation Energy, why peak shaving as a capacity mitigation strategy was omitted, and why the option to sell the utility to ComEd was not covered. He noted that power providers have expressed eagerness to compete for Naperville's business and that issuing an RFP is a normal procurement process.
• Joe Hus (Naperville resident, >25 years): Emphasized that Naperville's electricity comes from one of the dirtiest coal plants in Illinois and the nation. He stated that hundreds of residents protested in January with "No to Coal" signs and that all eight city council candidates at a forum opposed the IMEA proposal. He called for public hearings, a scorecard, and an option selection based on citizen input. He linked climate change to recent extreme weather and health impacts.
• Greg Hubert (CleanEnergyNaperville.org): Asked CES to explain why they described IMEA's renewable energy integration plans as "aggressive" (page 36), given his observations from IMEA board meetings: aggressive use of Open Meetings Act exceptions, a full resource portfolio with little room for additional renewables, state law forcing Prairie State reductions by 2038 (not 2035 as IMEA shows), and an earlier-than-planned end to a Vistra coal contract. He noted IMEA does not provide meeting recordings.
• Bruce Jones (longtime Naperville resident): Questioned why CES did not provide options to remove coal and fossil fuels, did not include an RFP for competitive bidding, and did not incorporate utility-scale battery storage. He cited national trends: coal dropped from 51% to 16% while clean energy rose from 32% to 41% over 20 years, and in 2025 planned additions include 32.5 GW solar, 7.7 GW wind, and 18.2 GW battery storage.
• Debbie Mader (St. Charles resident, Tri-Cities Clean Energy): Expressed concern that the CES report did not discuss the risk of signing a 30-year contract with any entity. She described an energy forum in St. Charles where industry experts said the market is rapidly changing, with renewables and battery storage becoming cheaper than coal. She warned that signing now could lock Naperville out of newer, more affordable technologies.
• Tom Coleman (Co-chair, Climate Reality Project Chicago): Urged Naperville to develop an unbiased specification including lifecycle energy costs using unsubsidized levelized costs (citing Lazard: wind ~$50/MWh, solar ~$61, coal ~$118, nuclear ~$182). He stressed strong sustainability goals to survive political changes and noted that many states (e.g., Iowa, South Dakota, Vermont) have high renewable penetration.
• Cathy Clarkin (NEST leader, chemist, climate solutions professional): Advocated for establishing clear goals (clean energy, local control, decarbonization, contract length, local storage, energy efficiency, low-income protection) before seeking bids. She stated the community has already spoken against the proposed IMEA contract and wants to accelerate the clean energy transition.
• Nanette Wild (Naperville resident): Expressed dismay at Naperville's connection to a highly polluting coal plant and opposed extending that for 30 years, citing concern for her 14 grandchildren.
• Larry Kolach (Naperville resident, 30 years): Raised concern that companies like his former employer Nokia must report ESG impacts, and that energy source location could influence business relocation decisions, noting that Texas (ERCOT) has low-cost renewable energy.

Discussion Items

• CES Presentation: Ann Yu (Vice President, North American Consulting) and Madeline Frierson (Lead Consultant) presented a preliminary report outlining three main pathways outside a Joint Action Agency (JAA): purchasing from the PJM wholesale market, signing Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), and owning generation. Inside a JAA, options include staying with IMEA, joining another JAA (e.g., NIMPA or AMP), or starting a new one. The presentation emphasized that choices involve a trade-off between autonomy and risk. Key concepts explained: energy vs. capacity, capacity accreditation differences between dispatchable (gas) and intermittent (solar/wind) resources, and the impact of capacity price volatility. They showed that IMEA's revenue requirement is projected to increase 2.8× by 2050 under its current plan, while a PJM market approach with RECs could be 2.9–3.1× higher. They also compared current residential bills: Naperville ~$120, ComEd ~$127, and a hypothetical Naperville PJM purchase ~$127, with sensitivity ranges from -10% to +22% depending on energy and capacity price fluctuations.
• Board Q&A: Board members, particularly James Fillar and Philip Schrieber, probed the economics of staying vs. leaving IMEA. Fillar performed a back-of-the-envelope calculation: if Naperville's coal-derived power costs ~$37/MWh in 2035 vs. solar at ~$75/MWh, and Naperville consumes ~1 million MWh/year from coal, the annual savings from staying with IMEA could be ~$38 million, though this would not meet CEJA (Climate and Equitable Jobs Act) compliance. Schrieber questioned the long-term cost projections and the need for integrated resource planning, noting that the city has not defined its requirements. Chairman Halkias acknowledged the complexity and the need for a balanced approach among reliability, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability. The board discussed sub-account arrangements, the role of RECs, and the possibility of hybrid approaches (e.g., using IMEA for most load and procuring renewables for a portion via member-directed resources allowed under the proposed contract).

Key Outcomes

• No decisions or recommendations were made at this meeting.
• The PUAB invited Ted Bourlard (NEST co-chair) to make a presentation at a special session on April 8, 2025, to be prepared in coordination with the Electric Utility Director.
• CES will incorporate feedback from this meeting and public comment to produce a final report with a recommendation for the PUAB's consideration at the April 8, 2025 special session.
• The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:32 PM (motion by Phil Schrieber, second by James Fillar, passed unanimously).