This is your SolarWakeup for September 9th, 2016

I didn’t really want to get into it but with so many of you asking my opinion, so apologies for the long thought. Two letters came out simultaneously about the direction SEIA is or should be going. One from the Chairman of the Board of SEIA which I thought gave an eloquent view of where the association is and where it has come from. Keep in mind that SEIA is deep in the search for a new President having retained a search firm to do so. The other letter came from two industry veterans and included a petition. In summarizing the petition, it calls for a change to the board structure, which is pay to play right now, giving the biggest contributors a seat and a vote on board issues. Only a few seats are voted by the membership. While this reduces the voice of smaller installers, I haven’t seen the smaller companies suffer from it. There have been cases when large scale focused members were not in favor of net metering or bigger issues, but each time outside influences and voice of the industry were able to ensure SEIA advocated for the right policy. Changing the board structure will drastically lower revenues and shifting to State level policies will drastically increase spending. Those two are mutually exclusive, they cannot be done in unison. I would go about it differently, I would focus on a code, a solar code, amongst the board. The focus would be the same as the solar pledge I started two years ago, ensure fair and competitive net metering that does not favor incumbent market participants and increase consumer choice. The media is making this about a divisive topic but it isn’t and shouldn’t be viewed as such. Focus more on getting involved and having your voice heard instead of thinking a 180-degree turn is necessary.

Opinion

Have a great day!

Yann