Please see today’s Voter’s Guide for more information on this an other issues. This is the first official Camera endorsement of the season. More will follow, starting this week, with wrap-ups before election day.

The Camera editorial board supports two measures on the November ballot: 2B and 2C.

The city has made a very good case for more local control of its electrical energy. These measures, which do not create a municipal utility, will give the citizens of Boulder the tools they need for the next step in exploring that local control. Control that is more likely to include increased renewable energy, less reliance on fossil fuels, and a smaller, more nimble environment to make decisions on behalf of Boulder and not the vast Xcel Energy service area as a whole.

If this control comes as part of a “muni,” or with a renewed relationship with Xcel that includes localization, or something else, remains to be seen. Voting “yes” on 2B and 2C is the only way for voters to explore those options.

Xcel is a fine, profitable corporation, working toward increasing its renewables mix — while planning for new coal plants — and providing a responsible return to its shareholders. But it has its own responsibilities: That includes aggressively protecting its business interests, which is why it is spending so much money and time trying to get these measures defeated. There is nothing wrong with that.

But it also means the company has no impetus to negotiate a separation with the city. The two principal costs that are unknown at this time — acquisition costs and stranded costs — will only be genuinely known and explored if voters approve 2B and 2C, and any disputes are solved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. We disagree with most of the “pro” side that stranded costs will be zero. But we do believe putting off exploring our options is a terrible idea, as costs will increase in short order as Xcel improves old, and builds new, coal plants.

Issue 2B asks voters to increase the existing utility occupation tax by $1.9 million a year, money that will be used to cover the costs of studies and legal fees the city will need as it moves forward. Issue 2C asks voters for permission to form a municipal utility by selling bonds to cover the purchase from Xcel, but only if it can match or beat Xcel’s rates.

Boulder has already proved adept at handling essential services with its water utility. If we do move forward with a muni, the timing is excellent as interest rates on bonds are very low. Those interest rates, and the fact that a muni would be nonprofit instead of investor-owned, give the city an excellent opportunity at competitive energy rates now.

And regardless of the “blank check” accusations leveled by the opposition, we’ve been most impressed with how conservative Boulder has been regarding this issue. Its financial models for electrical rates assumed an 8 percent interest rate on a 30-year bond. No one actually thinks it will be that high. There are several off-ramps in the city’s plan that will end the process if certain goals are not met — if the city would not have at least rate parity with Xcel, it will not create a muni. The advisory board will have nine members, and up to four of them can be non-residents, business owners or other people who pay for energy in the city but aren’t citizens of Boulder.

This is a good next step for Boulder, and we support it.

— Erika Stutzman, for

the Camera editorial board