Prop K WILL NOT Increase your taxes
The Climate Charter creates a net-positive revenue stream for the city–which can potentially reduce property taxes
The opposition of prop k: Big oil, trump donors
The most powerful corporations and lobbying firms that control our health and environment are funding a disinformation to lie to you about a ballot initiative that serves your interests directly. They include:
Chambers of Commerce: El Paso’s two worst corporate polluters are the JP Morgan-owned El Paso Electric Co. and Marathon Petroleum Corporation–have direct ties to both Chambers of Commerce. Pollution from these four major fossil fuel infrastructures largely contribute to El Paso being the 12th worst polluted city in the United States for ozone.
Consumer Energy Alliance: The CEA has been used as a front by the fossil fuel industry and far right groups to promote corporate interests over public interests. CEA worked to support Trump and increase fossil fuel production. CEA President David Holt has made comments to the American Public Gas Association (APGA) that they “need to support Donald Trump and his energy goals”. Nucor Corporation, which has a representative on the CEA board, is one of the largest contributors to Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign.
You cannot trust the claims of these entities that profit from your ignorance
Big Oil's fake numbers have been debunked. The debate is over.
The Chamber of Commerce paid for a false economic impact study of Prop K. Virtually all of the scary figures about Prop K link back to this false study. It’s a complete fabrication. Here's how they (probably intentionally) manucatured the false data.
They falsely assumed Prop K would force replacement of gas appliances. It simply would not.
hey falsely assumed that shutting down EPE’s gas plants would result in widespread power outages. This is a lie. In El Paso, energy generation can be achieved with 100% solar and wind renewable energy.
Don't take out word for it. Listen to three top energy experts and academics from the University of Texas and Columbia University. In Joshua D. Rhodes, PhD; Margaret A. Cook, PhD; Charles R. Upshaw, PhD read the Chamber of Commerce impact study and correctly identified it as a faulty analysis. Top energy experts
"The primary conclusions of the [Chamber study] are based on multiple fundamentally flawed assumptions and thus does not represent reality."
"[The Chamber's study] stark predictions of economic collapse stem from the assumption that El Paso would lose over 70% of their energy by 2045, which is egregious and displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how energy systems work, particularly in Texas.
“A recent study that warned of an economic collapse in El Paso if voters pass Proposition K was “flawed” and projected “irrational” job loss numbers”
“Municipalizing” benefits you directly
Power over our electric grid reduces electricity rates–studies prove that. Making the grid public and democratic reduces the financial incentive for the JP Morgan owned El Paso Electric Co to exploit our community. Every year they extract $144 million from us. Municipalization will result in the community taking control over these funds as additional sources of government revenue.
Increasing decision-making power results in pressuring El Paso Electric to increase renewables and use ratepayer funds more wisely. EPE is currently–as we speak–spending $163 million of ratepayer dollars to expand the Newman 6 fracked-gas plant, locking us into 228 megawatts of fossil fuel energy for over 20 years. Experts proved that EPE could have increased their energy generation using renewables–and this would have been cheaper and better for the environment
El Paso Electric cannot be trusted to be in control of our grid. If it were up to them, they would shut down their gas plants in the year 2061. By that time, it’s game over for the climate. Controlling our grid means controlling our fate, our future.
Municipalization does not mean purchasing El Paso Electric for $9 billion
Converting El Paso Electric into public ownership (municipalization) does not mean purchasing the company outright. The Climate Charter would only require the City to study feasibility, methods and legal possibility of municipalizing. It can entail eminent domain, renegotiations, and other options. The $9billion figure that the opposition is claiming is overestimated and inaccurate. In 2020 when JP Morgan purchased EPE, the company was valued at $4.3 billion. The utility did not double in price in three years. The process of municipalizing would require a neutral entity, a judge, to determine the value fairly—definitely not El Paso Electric.
“170,000 job losses” DEBUNKED
“$38,000 in cost per household” DEBUNKED
“9 billion to purchase El Paso Electric” DEBUNKED
Creating new positive revenue for the city—reducing property taxes.
Prop K will open doors for our City government to access State and Federal funding for climate initiatives–increasing local revenues. The Climate Department would be legally tasked with proactively accessing state/federal funds, especially to establish climate jobs. State and federal funds are available and ready for City governments to access. It’s not abstract or theoretical. The Environmental Protection Agency has allocated $7billion for residential and community solar projects as part of its upcoming Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grant program. There is local precedent for El Paso to access federal climate impacts for material benefits. February of this year, the City received $1.75 million in federal climate funding for a solar panel project at the El Paso Airport. The Climate Department increases the capacity and initiative for the City to continue receiving these funds.
Transitioning government property to renewable energy saves money, saves the taxpayer $500 million. In the status-quo scenario where the government changes nothing (Prop K is not passed), the taxpayer cost of powering government buildings is $11 million per year (~$270 million between now and 2045). Transitioning City Government to renewables (if Prop K was passed), the taxpayer would profit ~$231 million from the savings of renewable energy production. Passing Prop K would result in a net revenue generation of ~$500 million.
Prop K gets us closer to public ownership of the Electric grid. This prevents community wealth extraction and adds a new source of revenue for the City–potentially reducing taxes. Every year, El Paso Electric Co. currently collects a revenue of $860 million from ratepayers, and makes a profit of $144 million. By municipalizing, the taxpayer has power, authority and discretion about how to use these sources of revenue. Cities with public utilities can use electric grid revenues to pay for government services–reducing the need for high property taxes. According to the American Public Power Association, “residential customers of public power utilities pay monthly bills that are on average 4% less than customers of investor-owned utilities.”
Prop K can make rooftop solar more affordable and economically beneficial, reducing electricity rates (a form of taxing). The Climate Department would push El Paso Electric to increase the cent/watt they pay users of rooftop solar–making rooftop solar more economically effective and reducing total electricity rates. The Climate Department would also push EPE to reduce unnecessary fees for rooftop generation.