Quote:It prevents non-solar families from subsidizing the cost of solar. Electric companies can charge solar users for their negative impact on the grid. Anyone with solar who is off the grid would have no problem.


 

Let me add that very few of the solar households would be among the poor and lower middle class, so asking them to subsidize the well-to-do people who buy solar panels is a regressive policy.

 

Kind of vague, though.   What exactly constitutes a "subsidy?"   And how can a solar user have a negative impact on the grid? 

 

A constitutional amendment prevents the legislature from passing laws that contradict it.  So someone wants to handcuff the legislature.  What kind of law could the legislature pass that the supporters of this amendment are worried about?    Would this amendment prevent the state or local government from passing a tax credit for solar panels?   Why is the power industry worried about such a thing?  

 

I just don't get why the power industry wants this amendment.  Solar power is such a miniscule thing compared to the power generated by power plants. 

 

I voted no because I just don't understand what the heck this amendment is all about. 

---