Parker Pioneer Orchids & Onions Grocery Smarts Obits Calendar Weather Public Notices Archives
Weather Magnet

Cost of going solar: School board still in dark on details

By JACKIE LEATHERMAN
Today's News-Herald
Published Tuesday, December 29, 2009 7:07 AM MST

Editor’s note: The Lake Havasu Unified School District governing board took a first step this fall toward the possible installation of a solar system at the district’s only high school. They are currently waiting to review a contract, still in negotiations, that could jumpstart one of the largest single solar projects at a K-12 district in the state. This third story of a three-part series examines the funding of the potential project.


Entering the solar race to become one of the state’s largest single solar projects doesn’t come without a price tag — to the tune of the estimated $24 million for Lake Havasu High School.

The Lake Havasu Unified School District governing board has neither seen the contract currently under negotiation for the project, nor has officially approved the project.

But school officials have repeatedly said they don’t expect to pay any out-of-pocket expenses to install the anticipated 2.7-megawatt system because of the abundance of tax credits and rebates offered by the state and federal governments, as well as the utility company.

School districts are unable to receive the tax credits and rebates because they do not pay taxes, according to several officials. A new law signed this year allows private companies to enter into agreements with school districts for solar installation, and, in turn, the private companies receive the tax credits and rebates and apply them to the projects’ costs.

But until the governing board sees the contract, its members don’t know for sure what the project size, cost, savings or out-of-pocket expenses will be.

In September, the board chose APS Energy Services to move forward with contract negotiations. The contract could be in front of the board by the end of February, according to APS ES spokesman Steve Frost.

Sarah Helmer, APS ES manager of marketing and communications, wrote in an October e-mail that there were more than $32.5 million identified in possible tax credits and rebates to help cover the project’s costs if it were installed.

The majority of the identified funding comes from the school’s utility company equaling more than $18.1 million.

Helmer stated in the e-mail the incentives would be received throughout a 20-year time period.

However, the exact incentives, amounts of incentives or terms of the incentives for LHHS won’t be revealed until the contract is finished, according to several officials.

She further stated, “Because these credits and incentives are provided over time, the district will finance a portion of the project up front. As with any financing, such as a home mortgage, there will be annual finance charges that will occur over the 20-year term.”

But school board officials have said previously they have no money up front to get the project under way.

Two of the larger systems at K-12 districts in the state — Deer Valley Unified School District and Sedona Oak Creek Unified School District — both used voter-approved bond money for their systems. One of Deer Valley’s systems is 1 megawatt; one of Sedona’s systems is 100 kW.

But since giving APS ES the green flag to move forward with the negotiations in September, local voters have since turned down the extension of two property taxes in November that stripped millions from district’s budget starting next fall.

The district’s governing board is in the process of possibly closing down one of its two middle schools next fall to meet an expected $1.7 million less in funding next year, largely due to the voters’ collective decision.

The district is still uncertain about how much money it will receive from the state department of education, which primarily funds districts’ budgets based on student attendance.

Missy Wood, school district director of business services, previously said this fall that “if the credits weren’t available … there would be no way we could take on that type of debt even if we were to finance it.”

Wood said Monday it is her understanding their regular utility bill payments would go toward the financing.

“But I can’t really confirm that until I see a bottom line or a contract,” Wood said. “The board has not accepted anything at this point. I’m not sure exactly what the package will look like when it’s completed. Until I see their bottom line or their negotiations or the terms they come up with, I really can’t give you an answer.”

But Wood also echoed a similar sentiment from several other sources around the state regarding the solar project.

“I do think the road that we are going down is the right (one),” she said. “Basically, (it’s) where the future is heading.”

Almost every single one of the nine entities contacted by Today’s News-Herald said they were working on bringing either more or larger solar projects to their arena.

“It’s wonderful to see school districts like Lake Havasu being able to move forward with solar,” said Arizona Corporation Commission Chairwoman Kris Mayes. ACC regulates utility and renewable energies in the state. “When you put all (of the tax rebates and incentives) together, solar becomes more affordable for schools. Schools are going to be able to lower electricity bills and at the same time teach students about renewable energy and science and solar.”

You may contact the reporter at jleatherman@havasunews.com

Article Rating

    Current Rating: 0 of 0 votes!Rate File:

Comments (18 comment(s))

    riverruner wrote on Jan 8, 2010 8:18 AM:

    " This is like making the decision to buy high efficiency light bulbs over incandescent. The initial cost is greater but the long term saving are significant. This issue is a great example of the no-win situation public institutions face. ANYTIME they spend any money on ANYTHING they get second guessed and vilified. You even see it in the emphasis on test scores. The federal government and the state require schools to meet a certain level of performance as measured by test scores and when the district meets those requirements and dares to point out that it costs money to achieve them they get criticized for over-emphasizing test scores.
    The Thunderbolt track is another example. Had the district decided not to repair it then the AIA (Arizona Interscholastic Association) would have pulled its sanction and LHUSD would have had no sanctioned track which would mean no home track meets. No home meets would mean all track meets would require expensive travel or the end of the LHUSD track program. While some people couldn’t care less can you imagine the reaction of parents whose kids were on the track team? Not to mention the fact that it would have cost many times more to bring it into AIA compliance in the future.
    No one and no institution is perfect, but I do find it remarkable that a school district as successful as LHUSD takes so much heat. "

    WATCHING HAVASU DIE wrote on Jan 5, 2010 6:09 PM:

    " Not with out a vote they had better not,,,I think by the results of the school overide it pretty much says what the people want "

    Havasures wrote on Jan 5, 2010 2:29 PM:

    " So let me get this straight...the district has to close a school because it can no longer financially afford to keep it open. This will include the lay offs of many people. Yet, the district was still able to find the money to do the Thunderbolt track refurbishment project and now they are going to find the money to put up solar panels at one site...where is all of this money coming from? I have a child at the high school who last semester received photo copies of his math book chapters to study because there were not enough books for each student to have one! Where the heck are the priorities? "

    riverruner wrote on Jan 5, 2010 11:27 AM:

    " I stand corrected on the district people who are on those 3rd party contract. There are 2 at the DO. "

    havasu_liberal wrote on Jan 4, 2010 9:44 PM:

    " To riverruner: When I said in a previous post that my "history with this district goes back much, much farther than a four year old override," I meant it. When I got here David Barbosa, PhD, was the superintendent; the original Smoketree school building- the one that was built mostly by volunteer labor- was still in use; the current high school library was the lunch room, and neither Smoketree nor Jamacia schools were built.

    In that time there have been several finiancial crisises that never made it into either of the papers - yes, once we had two papers, The Lake Havasu City Herald and Today's News. These crisises had direct impact on the academic services and they also impacted teachers in the district.

    And please do not make the mistake of believing that this district's top administrators are on any kind of a "pay freeze". Those top administrators who "retired in place" all realized an approximate 40% pay hike by double dipping. They are not taking their raises annually, they are simply front loading them. "

    riverruner wrote on Jan 4, 2010 7:43 AM:

    " Havasu_Liberal last time I looked all district administration has been on a salary freeze for the last 3 years. So when you say things like: “I have watched administration impose Draconian spending freezes on all but themselves.” It appears you are either misinformed or have an agenda of your own. "

    tomgarven wrote on Jan 3, 2010 11:29 AM:

    " to bobo:
    There is a very good write up in Scientific American entitles "A Solar Grand Plan". Doing a Google search will get you the article. It describes how solar can become competitive and at today's rates. It is somewhat dated since it was written WAY BACK in 2007 and since that time solar panel efficiencies have increased past the point needed to make the plan feasible.

    Enjoy the article and some of the 714 reader comments.

    tomgarven@hotmail.com "

    tomgarven wrote on Jan 2, 2010 7:19 PM:

    " bobo wrote on Dec 31, 2009 [in part]

    Solar has changed considerably over the last 5 years. Today it is quite possible for a residential system to be installed which can provide anywhere from 25-100% of someone's electric charges.

    Also we don't have the same transmission charges or time of day metering like California does. I just checked my Unisource Energy bill and the delivery charge was $13.48 for 820 KW/h or on my level pay bill of $123.00. So for residential customers in Havasu it looks like about 10.9%. Don't know what the commercial rate is without calling Unisource. I know my son who lives in California pays much more than this. "

    bobo wrote on Jan 2, 2010 12:39 PM:

    " I wish Solar Voltaic were the answer to our energy needs , but I see a lot of people getting disappointed in this area. It can’t be argued that NASA has been one of the largest research organizations in solar voltaic in the world. They study and purchase the best, most efficient solar voltaic panels that exist for the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station and hundreds of other spacecraft. They are currently looking into new methods of power generation for a proposed moon base. These would include solar voltaic, but also, nuclear and Hydrogen fuel cell generators using the water ice available on the moon. Yet Cape Canaveral sits on a 219 sq mile site in Florida (the sunshine state). They rely almost exclusively on oil/natural gas fired generators from conventional power plants to power their facilities.
    Could it be because they don’t qualify for a Tax Credit or Government Grant? "

    r2sweet99 wrote on Jan 2, 2010 3:23 AM:

    " London bridge is falling down falling down falling down.... "

    bobo wrote on Dec 31, 2009 2:56 PM:

    " The most you could hope for in a small solar plant like this, is to supplement certain power needs like a few air conditioners or office lighting. Too many people think you hook this stuff up and you watch your meter run backwards. Not true! First of all, to tie into the electrical grid requires expensive switchgear and voltage conditioners to compliment the utilities electrical generators. Second, All this stuff requires a lot of maintenance. And third, the majority of your electric bill is the cost of transmission and maintenance, so they certainly would'nt pay you the same rate as they charge you. Sounds to me like the School District has not done it's homework (no pun intended). I see this district going broke and becoming a ward of the State in the next couple of years, unless they change their management style and go back to the basics. "

    havasu_liberal wrote on Dec 30, 2009 10:19 PM:

    " Tekkie and Reason- There are certainly many points of agreement, but please do not assume that I am running off at the keyboard here. My history with this district goes back much, much farther than a four year old override.
    I certainly do not want to see staff furloughs or schools closed. And I would love to see class sizes reduced and more individual attention given.

    But over the years I have listened to repeated threats of staff layoffs and school closings if the voters turned an override down. I have listened to the threats of programs being terminated. I have heard the threat of increased class sizes until the district used it so much that it proved ineffective. I have watched school building staff involved in the teaching process get rif'ed while district office staff was added. I have watched administration impose Draconian spending freezes on all but themselves.

    I have also watched boards suddenly "find" money. I watched voters pony up when the threat was to end the football program. Yes, other sports were included, but the concentration was on football. And yes, when the board announced that several new computer labs were being added (this was well prior to '05), they used the word "found" relative to the money. They never used the word "grant".

    There has been a recent history in this district of wanting to be "first" or "biggest" or "the leader" in areas that are designed more for public consumption than anything else.

    So I am not sure that, based on both the recent and past history, this board or this administration will take the time and diligence needed to fully evaluate the project. If this project goes up in smoke, the district may very well be left with a substantial obligation that will have to be passed on to the tax payers. I think at the minimum, the board needs to assure the public that there is some insurance against the costs falling back on tax payers. And they need to be clear and specific on what that insurance is.

    BUT the REAL ISSUE here is not the failure of an override as you seem to believe. Arizona is not at the bottom of the per-pupil-expenditures list because of the voters who voted no on an individual district "bond election". Arizona is where it is because of the morons elected to the state legislature. The perfect example is Ron "Senator No" Gould. Gould has questioned the need for what he evidently sees as excessive state funding for the schools. No wonder- he and his ilk have cut funding to the minimum they can get away with. He has also questioned the need for the Department of Economic Security.

    We will not make any real progress until we elect State Senators and Representatives who are willing to step up and do what really needs to be done. "

    resident wrote on Dec 30, 2009 10:52 AM:

    " tekkie, my point exactly, the project should be canned if taxpayers are requested to pony-up.

    tomgarven, I hope you are not negotiating the roi for this project. Anything over ten years is not acceptable. "

    VoiceOfReason wrote on Dec 30, 2009 8:53 AM:

    " havasu_liberal, those were not threats. They were the reality that would have occurred if the original override in '05 had not been approved. It WAS approved, so the furloughs did not occur. Now that the voters chose NOT to renew that override, you may see the furloughs that you seem to wish for, along with other cuts.

    The funds for computer labs came from technology grants for which the district had applied. Grant funds awarded can not be used for anything outside the scope of the grant. Would you have the district not go after grant money for various programs just because there may be a shortage somewhere else?

    I would echo tekkie's comments. People need to educate themselves on these issues before running off at the mouth (or keyboard) and making accusations. "

    tekkie wrote on Dec 29, 2009 9:20 PM:

    " resident you make no sense...why won't the solar panels work in 20 years? You know this? Site your source please.

    AND...the schools overrides that they were asking to CONTINUE not begin, CONTINUE do not pay the utilities.

    I wish residents would go to board meetings and find out what money from the state pays for what - grants pay for some things and as this article clearly states - the money would come from credits the solar company would receive and if that doesn't happen the whole project might be canned.

    We can just continue to have Arizona be one of the lowest dollars spent per pupil in the United States. And then we can wonder why articles like there are few college graduates in this town are written?

    Stop blaming the school administration and get involved. It is a public school, ask to see the finances, ask to have them explained to you, if you don't then you remain uninformed and ignorant. The district wouldn't have to ask if the state thought more of education - if residents told the state to fund education more, fight for the future of tomorrow or reap what you sow. "

    tomgarven wrote on Dec 29, 2009 2:26 PM:

    " The solar cells developed by Bell Labs back in the 1950's are still working today.

    Almost all silicon solar panels come with a 20 year warranty and are expected to work well past 40 years. After 40 years a good name brand panel will still be pumping out 80-90% of it's initial rated power.

    The life expectancy of some of the newer types of solar panels like thin-film materials is unknown but they are also expected to last at least 20 years.

    The weakest link in any solar electric system however is the inverter; the device that converts the DC electricity from the solar panel into the AC used in your home. Most inverters carry a 10 free replacement warranty and their expected lifetimes are from about 12-25 years depending on brand, model, installed location, capacity, etc.

    I assume [I love that word] that in the end we will find out that the cost will be about the same as it is for a homeowner to go solar. For example, solar becomes cost competitive and a good option when viewed as a 20 year cost after rebates. "

    havasu_liberal wrote on Dec 29, 2009 1:49 PM:

    " Let me get this straight... we have a school administration that can't find the $1.8 million needed to keep all schools open and all programs running but can somehow find unidentified grants and incentives of $6 million to cover the cost of a solar installation? (That is assuming the $18.1 million from the "utility company" really materializes.) And this is just to satisfy the needs of the high school...

    Don't get me wrong, I am all for alternative energy but I really don't want to see the school funding go up in real smoke if this thing falls through. Other districts that have done this had cash-in-hand and voter-approved bonds. This somewhat amorphous agreement represents about 75 percent of the district's annual budget.

    This is just a thought, but a few years ago, this district threatened to furlough all of the art, music and PE teachers at the elementary schools and the middle schools. While they were making that threat, they found enough money to put in a couple of more computer labs... "

    resident wrote on Dec 29, 2009 9:49 AM:

    " ...to the tune of the estimated $24 million. These solar panels will be outdated in 10 years, but let's pay for 20.

    hey board, don't come asking me for (bond) money just because you think it is the 'right' thing to do. "

WRITE A COMMENT

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone and we reserve the right to withhold or remove any comment from publication.

Do not post:
    * Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
    * Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
    * Personal attacks, insults or threats.
    * The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
    * Comments unrelated to the story.


Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in havasunews.com's story comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of Today's News Herald. Today's News Herald provides an interactive computer service and does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Today's News Herald spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!

You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.

Registered users sign in here:

Become a Registered User

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
 

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

*First Name:
*Last Name:
*Zip Code:
 
Havasu Home Search

e-Edition


Shop Local

American Profile

Special Sections








View All Special Sections

Readers' Poll