October 16, 2012
Mayor Harding’s lack of support is misplaced because Proposition 1 has nothing to do with his concerns about rates, cost estimates, or not having enough information.
A vote for Proposition 1 authorizes the Public Utility District (PUD) to provide electric service to Thurston County, yet does not obligate public officials to choose a PUD.
When Proposition 1 passes, a complete a feasibility study will then be conducted to determine where and if public power will benefit the people of Thurston County.
Of course Mr. Harding does not have enough information, because the voters have yet to authorize the full study that comes after approval of Prop. 1.
Based on information provided from that study, local government representatives (City Councils, County Commissioners) will then choose the best option to serve their constituents, negotiate with the chosen provider, and reach an agreement to provide electricity.
Mayor Harding said he is really “concerned that enough factual information is getting out to the public.”
I am really concerned that the boatload of money being thrown against Prop. 1 by a multinational corporation who owns our area’s 100-year-plus monopolistic electric supplier has affected our misread elected officials, muddying the waters of public opinion with their misinformation.
Proposition 1 is a referendum on public choice for electric power supply – the feasibility study, cost comparisons and public debate will come once the voters approve Prop. 1.
John D. Pearce, Chair of the Thurston Public Power Initiative (Prop. 1) said best:
“Voting “Yes” on Thurston County Proposition 1 is the only way you will ever have a choice of who supplies your electricity. It starts the process of self-determination and gives us the option to get out from under PSE’s monopoly.
Isn’t it better to have a choice?”