Lacey to Pursue Multi-Town Energy Aggregation Plan

Energy savings, consumer protection touted as benefits

(Patch File Photo)
(Patch File Photo)
Lacey Township officials have signed off on a plan that would result in energy savings for township residents as part of a multi-town agreement.

Under such a program, the township would give a company permission to be the energy supplier for all of the township's households. Each electrical customer would still receive a bill from Jersey Central Power and Light, call JCP&L regarding outages or problems and, in most respects, never notice a change. But one line on the monthly bill – the supplier of energy – would change from JCP&L's "Basic Generation Service" to another company.

Residents would have retain the ability to opt out or choose their own energy supplier, however by law, the company chosen by the township would be legally obligated to charge below JCP&L's rate, thus guaranteeing a savings to residents.

Locally, Toms River began its energy aggregation program this month.

But Lacey's program will be slightly different in that a number of municipalities will partner together in order to obtain the best possible rate, said Mayor David Most.

"Hopefully we can get 150,000 customers together," said Most. "The more customers you have, the lower the price."

Stafford Township, Most said, will seek rates for the program. The other municipalities included in the plan are Berkeley Township, Manchester, Jackson and Egg Harbor.

"They're all in it as well, passing the same resolutions," said Most, who also touted the program as one that can protect residents against energy scams.

Senior citizens in the area have complained of ripoffs, with energy companies "low-balling" them with a reduced rate, then jacking it up over time.

Most said he signed up with an energy supplier who promised him an eight cent rate, only to have it jump to 14 cents.

Toms River's rate under the aggregation program is about nine cents.

The program will likely begin in all of the participating municipalities after Stafford receives bids and awards a contract.
mr henry September 24, 2013 at 06:49 AM
so let me see If I got this right . Your going to save money by leaving your local supplier for energy and buy it from a new supplier from out of the area who is going to charge you just below the local suppliers rates..I think when the Local supplier has to raise their rates to maintain the work force and lines in the area that need to be replaced you will find the Stafford Moran and Mayor have Screwed everyone in the area.
Xavier September 24, 2013 at 07:11 AM
Should be interesting to see if JCP&L raises their delivery charges in order to compensate for the loss in generating charges.
proud September 24, 2013 at 09:32 AM
The article states: "Most said he signed up with an energy supplier who promised him an eight cent rate, only to have it jump to 14 cents." Is this the same supplier being "aggregated"?
grace September 24, 2013 at 10:14 AM
sure hope not proud? when is his term up?
proud September 24, 2013 at 11:11 AM
Daniel Nee (Editor) September 24, 2013 at 11:35 AM
Proud - The township's rate would be contractually locked in. Also, under state law, the aggregated power rate would have to remain below JCP&L's rate. There are no fluctuations in these municipal aggregation agreements like there can be in standard residential agreements.
proud September 24, 2013 at 12:01 PM
Thanks Dan. Any idea how long the contractual obligation is?
mr henry September 24, 2013 at 07:37 PM
If JCPL loses its customers and some in-come don,t it make sense that the others will have to come up with more money IE a rate increase...Kind of like the Tax increase that Staffords Moran is saying will be needed due to a loss of tax base ...this seems like one of the most stupid idea and the only ones that make out is the people in the town that are looking for a paycheck..
Den Newks September 25, 2013 at 10:39 AM
If you have a problem with the supply charge you call the supplier. The problem is if you are on a budget plan with JCP&L . Because they will only budget their charges, not the suppliers. Some suppliers may also include a variable rate. As much as I can't stand JCP&L , I will opt out. A dollar or so isn't worth it to go off my budget . Keep in mind JCP&L does not make money off the supply, so it's no loss to them. Delivery charges cannot be raised unless the BPU approves it .
Martin September 25, 2013 at 10:53 AM
Compare rates of dozens of suppliers on the state BPU website. I'm in Toms River, and the supplier the town is foisting on residents (we must opt-out!) charges more than the one I've been with for years: Systrum Energy. You can also shop for natural gas rates and save over the local co. It adds up to hundreds of dollars in savings over time!
Chris Constantino November 15, 2013 at 11:21 PM
I was vocal with this in Point Boro and I am vocal with it now. And yes....I have a vested interest in this; it's unfair competition with what should really be considered 'legalized slamming'. I, as an associate for a 3rd party supplier, can NOT just reach out to everyone in town, let alone enroll them. In addition, we are all talking about energy independence from other nations and utilizing clean forms of energy, yet aggregation companies like do not ensure or even utilize renewable above the state's minimum requirement or cleaner sources of fossil fuels and sure as heck will not ensure that the source is domestic. So anyone who has used or took part in the energy independence or renewable debate and then supports a program like this that will NOT ensure more renewable and domestic sources, should be questioned.. Also...WHY should the towns be picking a provider for me? Isn’t that my right? Most towns are having issues just running themselves; why are they trying to run our lives now and why do we need to send money to a consultant for this, when we can have consultants look at other avenues to reduce costs/save money without infringing on our private property rights?. It’s funny how some local towns won't talk about or consider a 'useful or meaningful' tree ordinance, because it infringes on private property rights......how is it different? Yet they will consider things like energy agg or determining what plants people can or cannot plant in their yards?? Boggles my mind.. And this whole 'opt-out' thing is a joke. Most residents ignore/trash this type of mail or don't have the time to be bothered with looking into/responding to the mailer (or forget about it by the deadline); These agg company's bank on that fact because it gets more customers and $$$ in the pool for them. WHY not just do a co-op or agg with just the municipal properties and other towns municipally owned properties? Oh wait…that would be considered shared services, and sometimes people don’t like sharing… ;)


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »