From:                                                       Libby Shaw <elshaw@mit.edu>

Sent:                                                         Friday, June 7, 2019 12:08 AM

To:                                                            Energy, DOER (ENE)

Cc:                                                             Jonathan Hecht; Will Brownsberger; Jocelyn R Tager

Subject:                                                   Re: Proposed regulatory changes to SREC1:  Negation of the public's trust in Mass government

 

 

Dear Commissioner Judson:

 

I concur completely with Dr. Tager in her email message below.  

 

It would be outrageous for the Baker government to negate the SREC I incentive program.   This would be a betrayal of scores of Massachusetts homeowners who have each invested many thousands of dollars in solar with the understanding that Massachusetts will back this program to term.

 

Sincerely,

Libby Shaw

73 Templeton Parkway

Watertown, MA 02472  

 

 

 

From: Jolly Tager <tagfred@comcast.net> 
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 10:34 PM
To: DOER.Energy@Mass.gov
Subject: Proposed regulatory changes to SREC1: Destruction of the public's trust in Mass government

 

Dear Commissioner Judson, 

 

It is horrifying to receive the news that the DOER plans to negate the SREC I incentive program after so many Massachusetts citizens installed solar believing  that they would receive SRECS for the promised time of the program.  This change flies in the face of 225 C.M.R. 14.00, which unambiguously demonstrates that solar projects retain their SREC I eligibility through the end of the program.   This interpretation of the regulations is long-standing and has been confirmed by DOER on multiple occasions. 

 

Changing this program in anyway makes clear that our current top elected and appointed officials of our Commonwealth are untrustworthy.  Trustworthiness, rather than greed and duplicity, is the hallmark of a civil, elected government.  If these proposed changes go into effect, Governor Baker and those he has appointed to “cabinet” positions make clear that reneging on promises, that citizens have relied on, is permissible.  Government acting in bad faith further erodes the public’s faith in elected leadership.   

 

When you breach an agreement as you are with these proposed changes, you lose all credibility with the public: those you are supposed to protect, not the fossil-fuel utilities. 

 

Jocelyn R. Tager, Ph.D.