.

La Grange Park Accepts Bid for Electricity from First Energy

Trustees accepted a bid from First Energy, the lowest bidder, for their electrical supply for the next two years on Tuesday night. Residents who participate should see big savings.

If all goes well, La Grange Park residents will be saving a pretty penny on their electric bills over the next two years. On Tuesday night, trustees accepted a bid from First Energy, an Ohio-based electrical supplier, to supply the village with electricity for two years. First Energy was the lowest bidder.

La Grange Park residents who participate in the program will be billed 4.93 cents per kilowatt-hour for their electricity. The average household is expected to save about $347 a year off their bill, a savings of 42 percent.

Sharon Durling, a consultant from NIMEC who has helped the board through the aggregation process, said she believed the bids the board received from First Energy and six other aggregators to be "very favorable."

Trustees also voted to receive 50 percent of the village's electricity from sustainable sources and to add a civic contribution tax to the new rates. The tax is expected to add about $10 a year to resident's electrical bills. Trustee Marshall Seeder was the only trustee to come out against the civic contribution, calling it a back-door attempt to tax La Grange Park residents. Other trustees, disagreed and said the village should also benefit from electrical aggregation in a time when the village is looking for new ways to generate revenue.

Trustees were divided on how much, if any, of the village's electrical supply should come from green sources. Trustee Seeder voiced his support for 100 percent of the electricity to come from renewable sources because of La Grange Park's commitment to being a green community. Other trustees felt that voting to get 100 percent of the village's energy from green sources might not sit well with all residents in the village. In the end, trustees voted to approve getting 50 percent of the village's energy from sustainable sources.

Tuesday night's votes were divided between three areas of approval: accepting the bid from First Energy for a 24-month period and without an early termination fee, approving 50 percent of the supply to come from sustainable sources and to add a civic contribution, and to accept the bid with the previous provisions and a rate not to exceed 4.93 cents per kilowatt-hour. Trustees Patricia Rocco, Scott Mesick, LaVelle Topps and Board President Jim Discipio voted in favor of all three. Trustee Seeder voted against adding a 50 percent requirement and a civic contribution tax to the rate, but voted in favor of accepting the bid on both votes. Trustee Susan Storcel was absent at the meeting and Kozica has voted "present" on each vote before the board on electrical aggregation.

Kozica said following the meeting that he routinely voted present on the issue, instead of yes or no, because he didn't feel the board had enough time to consider the options around electrical aggregation. A vote of present, essentially a no vote, is considered to convey a voter not having preference for either approving or voting against a measure.

The board has been . In March, a referendum to allow the village to purchase energy on their behalf.

Residents of La Grange Park will automatically be enrolled in the program. Those who wish to stay with ComEd will be able to opt-out before the program begins, and will also be able to opt-out at any time without an early termination fee.

Little will change with the switch, except lower rates, Durling told trustees. Residents will continue to receive their bills from ComEd and they will continue to maintain the electrical supply to residents. In a worse case scenario, if First Energy was no longer able to provide power, the village would be let out of its contract and would pay the regular ComEd rate, Durling said. She added that should that happen residents would not see any change in their flow of electricity. 

"Not even a flicker," Durling said.

Correction: This story has been updated to correctly reflect the votes of Trustee Marshall Seeder. A previous version of this story stated he voted against accepting the bid in the third vote of the evening. This was incorrect and the story has been updated to reflect Trustee Seeder's vote in favor of accepting the final bid package.

Tim F June 14, 2012 at 02:41 PM
That's a good electric company. They will be able to deliver. Some of the surrounding municipalities are leaning toward smaller companies that might not deliver in extreme demand situations. If that happens, those municipalities will have to pay "spot prices" which will cost them much more.
John Panek June 14, 2012 at 04:15 PM
Civic contribution? Call it what it is - a tax - and a backdoor one at that. Are we to pay this with a smile in gratitude to the board? Appreciation to the board for pulling this together but fluffy language around a tax in an insult.
Matthew Hendrickson (Editor) June 14, 2012 at 04:51 PM
Thanks for your comments guys.
Mister Heche June 26, 2012 at 03:42 PM
"...Trustees were divided on how much, if any, of the village's electrical supply should come from green sources. Trustee Seeder voiced his support for 100 percent of the electricity to come from renewable sources because of La Grange Park's commitment to being a green community. Other trustees felt that voting to get 100 percent of the village's energy from green sources might not sit well with all residents in the village. In the end, trustees voted to approve getting 50 percent of the village's energy from sustainable sources..." What is left unsaid here is that energy from renewable sources is more expensive. From what I understand about the market, the village would have garnered even more savings for residents if the trustees had opted for non-renewable energy. In other words, village residents will be paying extra to support "green" energy sources that are more expensive and less efficient than traditional sources of energy. That sound like an ideological decision, as opposed to a business decision, to me. I have now problem with "green" decisions that save the village money, but I strongly object to "green" decisions that take additional money out of resident's pockets without their consent to satisfy a "green" agenda,
Mister Heche June 26, 2012 at 03:48 PM
"...Other trustees, disagreed and said the village should also benefit from electrical aggregation in a time when the village is looking for new ways to generate revenue..." Would the village not benefit from the savings on its own electricity use at its facilities? If so, why does the village also have to reach into the pocketbooks of its residents? The "civic contribution" seems more like a disguised tax increase that will not be noticed by many residents because, it will be hidden in the savings achieved by the switch of providers.
Matthew Hendrickson (Editor) June 26, 2012 at 04:14 PM
Thanks for your comment Mister Heche. I've heard a couple of residents say that they're fine with the tax... as long as it funds pothole repairs!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something