Lance Shearer

Daily News Correspondent

Amendment 1, a measure on the Nov. 8 ballot that if approved would amend the state constitution, on its face promotes solar energy, and Florida residents' right to take advantage of it.

Yet more than 100 people earlier this month listened at the Conservancy of Southwest Florida’s Eaton Conservation Hall as solar energy advocates urged voters to reject it. Despite being pushed by a group calling themselves “Consumers for Smart Solar,” panelist and PlugSmart CEO Rich Housh told the group, the amendment is funded by over $20 million from Florida’s major utility companies, including $5.5 million from Florida Power & Light and even more from Duke Energy.

“This is the most deceptive, devious, disgusting move by a company I’ve ever seen,” said panelist Neville Williams, solar entrepreneur and author of “Sun Power.” “They don’t want to see a free market in solar energy. We need to do a lot more solar, and the utilities are trying to shut it down.”

Panelist Susan Glickman, Florida director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Action Fund, called Amendment 1 “a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” using the tremendous and justified popularity of solar energy to trick the public into voting for a measure that would allow utility companies, their lobbyists and allies in state government to control and minimize the use of solar power by residents and small solar power competition.



“Nothing’s better than solar. It’s free, and there’s no emissions,” said Housh, a Naples resident who said he had installed “the first grid-tied (solar electricity) system in Naples” at his house 10 or 12 years ago.

“We’ve avoided 2.7 million pounds of carbon just at our little house.”

Opponents of Amendment 1 say the utilities intend to charge prohibitive rates for consumers to sell back their excess solar power to the grid, under the guise of fairness to customers who don’t have solar collectors.

“The worst part of Amendment 1 is it says nonsolar customers subsidize solar users,” said Glickman, paving the way for barriers that would penalize solar customers. It was a message that resonated with the audience at the conservancy, on hand for one of the organization's “Evenings at the Conservancy” sessions.

“That’s the whole thing. They want to stop us selling power back to the grid,” said Naples resident Dolph von Arx, sitting in the front row with his wife, Sharon, a board member and major financial backer of the conservancy. “I’ve been an early supporter of sun power.”

Reached by phone, Consumers for Smart Solar board member and Tallahassee lobbyist Screven Watson said opponents’ comments on Amendment 1 are misleading.

“There’s a lot of talk about what it does and what it doesn’t do. Amendment 1 does three things. It places a right for individuals and businesses to generate solar energy in the constitution. You can do it now, but only because it’s not prohibited. It leaves government in the process, retaining their ability to be involved to protect against fraud and abuse. And government can monitor the process, so people who don’t choose solar don’t become unfairly burdened with maintaining the power grid,” Watson said.

Both sides in the debate have lined up a variety of organizations supporting them. The anti-Amendment 1 forces have the backing of environmental groups including the Sierra Club, the Audubon Society of the Everglades and the Western Everglades, Greenpeace and Collier Citizens for Sustainability, in addition to the Conservancy.

The “yes on 1” forces list Florida TaxWatch, the Faith and Freedom Coalition, the NAACP, and Floridians for Government Accountability among their backers.

But it could be argued that the most important backers for Consumers for Smart Solar are the utility companies, backed by roughly $22 million in contributions. These have funded a wave of mailers and television spots, along with a petition drive that put the measure on the ballot while squeezing out a competing ballot amendment put forward by Floridians for Solar Choice, a solar industry-backed group.

“We luckily have their support,” Watson said of the utility companies. “But where is the bouquet of roses for the utilities? What do they get out of it?” No industry, he said, “should be getting tax breaks or a special sort of exemption.”



Also at this month's presentation at the conservancy, “No on 1” organizers promised to get yard signs to those who would give them $2 apiece to cover the cost.

“Everybody in this room already knew what we needed to do for real conservation,” Naples resident Roger Dolezal said. “It’s one meeting versus companies spending millions — tonight’s presentation isn’t going to change the vote.”

Naples resident and Freedom Cigar Bar owner Randall Denman said he absolutely believed the “No on 1” case, but in his case, he learned about it too late.

“Now I know about it, I would have voted no. But I’ve already voted. I took the bait — I voted yes.”