Times recommends: Vote no on anti-solar Amendment 1 (October 14, 2016)
“Amendment 1 is a solar scam, and all of the millions being spent by the utility companies to protect their bottom line won’t change that. This campaign is bought and paid for by the biggest electric companies in Florida — Florida Power & Light, Duke Energy, Tampa Electric Co. and Gulf Power — that have contributed nearly all of the $21 million to confuse voters, protect their market share and prolong the delay of more affordable and cleaner energy options. On Amendment 1, the Tampa Bay Times recommends voting no.”
Editorial: No on solar-energy amendment (October 9, 2016)
“This is a utility-backed amendment that seeks to shut down consumers’ free-market choices. Here’s what’s at the root of this amendment: Allowing homeowners and businesses to sell excess solar energy they produce. That’s competition that the utilities want to thwart. We recommend NO on Amendment 1.”
‘No’ on solar: Endorsements 2016 (October 8, 2016)
“Labeled “Rights of Electricity Consumers Regarding Solar Energy Choice,” this amendment has been heavily bankrolled by Florida’s electric utilities. Regardless, cementing current policies into the Florida Constitution would be especially ill-advised in an area evolving as quickly as solar energy. The technology for generating it, storing it and distributing is changing. So are federal policies surrounding its use. This is an area better left to policy makers to address and revisit as often as necessary through laws and regulations. Vote no.”
Editorial: Vote No on solar-power amendment (October 11, 2016)
“Amendment 1 is a con. And you, the voter, are the intended mark. Titled, “Rights of Electricity Consumers Regarding Solar Energy,” it looks for all the world like a measure to help spread solar energy across Florida. But in reality, it’s a ploy by the large utility companies to protect their dominance of the energy market. If you want to speed the day when you can put an affordable solar panel on your roof, reject this cynical ballot measure. Vote no on Amendment 1.”
Vote “NO” on shady, not smart, solar amendment (September 30, 2016)
“Florida’s so-called Smart Solar amendment is “smart” only for the utility companies that have poured more than $20 million into this attempt to guarantee that they can keep their monopoly on consumer energy. The amendment is meant to confuse Floridians, and the state’s Supreme Court never should have let it get on the ballot. We strongly urge voters to say “No” to Amendment 1.”
Editorial: Solar amendment (October 7, 2016)
“The Florida Supreme Court only approved the ballot language by a 4-3 vote. One of the minority votes, Justice Barbara Pariente, said the language is misleading. For instance, the word “subsidize” is open to all kinds of interpretations. All of this controversy is a perfect reason to oppose the amendment. The Legislature is the place to sort out all of the arguments, not dueling Constitutional amendments..”
Editorial: Oppose Amendment 1 (October 3, 2016)
“Amendment 1 barely met the threshold for placement on Florida’s general election ballot. That alone should make voters highly skeptical of the initiative. The only “choice” for Floridians to make in this statewide referendum is between voting for or opposing an unnecessary, misleading initiative. We recommend voting NO, against Amendment 1.”
Editorial: With light shed on Amendment 1, vote ‘no’ (October 16, 2016)
“Eye-catching ads call for Floridians to support “one for the sun” to bring more solar to the Sunshine State where it’s sorely lacking. This is one that Floridians shouldn’t favor, however. If approval simply puts us where we are today, as both sides battling over this amendment seemed to acknowledge in separate meetings with our editorial board, we question why we’re even having a vote. We urge a “no” vote on Amendment 1.”
Editorial: Amendment 1 is a sham (October 15, 2016)
“But one of the biggest distortions voters will see on their ballots in November was homegrown right here in the Sunshine State. We’re talking about Amendment 1. Forget whatever you’ve heard. The amendment has nothing to do with solar energy in Florida. It is simply a confusing and deceptive chunk of legalistic language that has absolutely no place in the state constitution. It would accomplish nothing for the people of Florida. In fact, it’s ridiculous that the measure even made it on the ballot to begin with. We recommend that you vote “no” on this shady sham of a constitutional amendment.”
Our choices for Nov. 8 election: No on solar (October 9, 2016)
“If approved, with at least 60 percent of the vote, the amendment would allow consumers “the right to own or lease solar equipment installed on their property to generate electricity for their own use. Consumers can already do that. But this amendment seems to benefit the utilities more than the consumers. It creates even more of a monopoly, keeping entities other than large utilities from leasing solar panels to homes and businesses and selling the excess energy on the grid.”
OUR VIEW: Amendment 1 not a friend of solar users (October 18, 2016)
“Amendment 1 grants no additional rights to everyday Floridians. If voters want to support a true free market for energy consumption in this state and help consumers in the process, they should reject Amendment 1, which merely keeps people under the thumb of big utilities, and start advocating for allowing PPAs. It’s true that would require trusting the Legislature to craft such a plan or adopting another constitutional amendment to create that avenue. Those are long shots, but if Amendment 1 passes, we may as well write the obituary for the solar-power market in the Sunshine State.”
Editorial: The amendments on the Nov. 8 ballot (October 13, 2016)
“This initiative is funded by the utility industry. The Florida Supreme Court ruled, 4-3, that Amendment 1 met the basic tests for placement on the ballot. Yet Justice Barbara Pariente and two other dissenters wrote: “Let the pro-solar energy consumers beware.” The proposal, she added, is “masquerading as a pro-solar energy initiative.” We recommend voting NO, against Amendment 1.”
Editorial: A path toward renewable energy (September 18, 2016)
“Unfortunately, Florida’s utilities are taking advantage of public support for solar by pushing a deceptive amendment to protect their energy monopolies. The state’s biggest utilities have spent millions of dollars funding the misleadingly named group Consumers for Smart Solar to try to pass Amendment 1. The measure would put existing rules on solar power into the state Constitution and open the door to punitive rates for solar users. If we want a future filled with clean beaches and water rather than relying more heavily on polluting fossil fuels, we need to chart a different direction for Florida.”
Editorial: The power, as in solar, lies with the voters (October 13, 2016)
“Amendment 1 grants no additional rights to everyday Floridians. If voters want to support a true free market for energy consumption in this state and help consumers in the process, they should reject Amendment 1, which merely keeps people under the thumb of big utilities, and start advocating for allowing PPAs. If Amendment 1 passes, we may as well write the obituary for the solar-power market in the Sunshine State.”
Herald recommends no vote on Florida’s Amendment 1, a solar energy initiative pushed by utilities (September 29, 2016)
“Witness the misleading epithet that the powerful utility industry conceived to peddle Amendment 1: ‘Consumers for Smart Solar.’ Should there be truth in advertising on this, an accurate campaign title would be: ‘Utilities for a Stronger Monopoly on Power.’ The deceptive title convinced thousands of Floridians to sign petitions circulated in a campaign underwritten by the energy and utility companies, thus earning a place on the November ballot .The electric utilities want to enshrine the status quo into the Constitution. The Bradenton Herald Editorial Board recommends a no vote on Amendment 1.”
No to FPL: Vote No on 1 (September 15, 2016)
“Of course, they’ve branded their deceptive campaign with an appealing name and catchy slogans and say the measure – Amendment 1 – will promote solar, but their initiative does nothing more than to protect their monopoly which keeps you a captive customer. It’s time for the Sunshine State to see the light. Florida should reject the manipulation of big power companies. Send them a message loud and clear, “Vote No on 1” in November. Amendment 1 Blocks the Sun.”
Back the Eff Away from AMENDMENT 1 (October 5, 2016)
“Armed with more than $21 million of Big Energy cashola and a crib sheet of buzzwords designed to appeal to voters to the left, right and center, Consumers for Smart Solar (deceptive name much?) is pushing Amendment 1 hard in a campaign it calls ‘Yes for 1 for the Sun’ and denying that it will cripple the solar energy industry in the state or give local governments powers they are not equipped to wield. Don’t be fooled. Vote ‘no’ on Amendment 1.”
Constitutional Amendment recommendations (October 14, 2016)
“No. 1, an alleged “solar energy” initiative, is greatly misleading. My, oh my, if there ever was a descriptive misnomer, the so-called “Rights of electricity consumers regarding solar energy choice” amendment title and ballot summary wins the prize. Do not be fooled by this ballot initiative: it is NOT pro-solar. Vote NO on Amendment No. 1.”
Constitutional Amendment recommendations (October 14, 2016)
“No. 1, an alleged “solar energy” initiative, is greatly misleading. My, oh my, if there ever was a descriptive misnomer, the so-called “Rights of electricity consumers regarding solar energy choice” amendment title and ballot summary wins the prize. Do not be fooled by this ballot initiative: it is NOT pro-solar. Vote NO on Amendment No. 1.”
