25-9665:00 P.M. Joint Workshop of County of Lake and Cities of Clearlake and Lakeport on the Option of Public Power Generation in Lake County with Sonoma Clean Power
Dear Lake County Board of Supervisors and City Councils of Clearlake and Lakeport,
I write regarding Sonoma Clean Power’s (SCP) proposed Offer of Service to Lake County, and in particular its requirement that our County and cities commit to participation in the Geothermal Opportunity Zone (“Geozone”). As currently written, the agreement raises serious concerns about transparency, fairness, community impacts, and long-term financial liability.
1. Erosion of Trust: A “Bait and Switch”
When SCP first presented its feasibility study to the Board of Supervisors earlier this year, staff assured the Board that Geozones were not part of the analysis. Yet only weeks later, SCP’s own Board made Geozone participation a condition of service. This direct reversal undermines trust.
Further, when the Board became aware that Geozones were now a pre-condition, the BoS directed SCP to bring its Offer of Service to the public. SCP’s community presentations largely omitted any meaningful discussion of the Geozones. Only when residents specifically asked were the Geozones acknowledged — despite being one of the most controversial elements of the proposal. This approach fell short of the Board’s intent for transparent public engagement.
2. Undefined Geothermal Development in Lake County
While I support renewable energy in principle, SCP has provided little clarity on the scale, technology, or impacts of its geothermal development. Contradictions in SCP’s own materials raise more questions than answers:
• SCP says projects “won’t look like Calpine” but cannot describe what they will look like.
• SCP points to “promising technologies” abroad but admits they are too early to evaluate.
• SCP’s website depicts house-sized facilities, while slides shown to the Board illustrated multi-acre industrial plants resembling refineries dotting the landscape— slides never shared with the public.
• SCP cannot specify whether facilities would involve deep vs. shallow wells, high vs. medium temperature, open vs. closed loop, or the use of fracturing. Each of these choices has implications for seismicity, groundwater, air quality, and aesthetics in a county dependent on agriculture and tourism.
Equally troubling is the Geozone map itself. Created by SCP without local input, it places nearly half of Lake County’s population inside the zone, compared with less than 5% of Sonoma’s population and less than 0.1% of Mendocino’s. Yet this map was not presented at public meetings. It was acknowledged during Board discussion that the map “looks scary.” To ask residents to trust that it is “just a placeholder” or that our Planning Department will protect us is not sufficient grounds for a 20-year binding agreement.
3. Long-Term Financial Liability
The agreement would commit Lake County and its cities to a 20-year financial obligation estimated in the tens of millions, potentially exceeding $100 million, with steep penalties for withdrawal. This level of liability could affect our credit rating and constrain future budgets — all for a project whose technologies and impacts remain undefined.
Meanwhile, savings to consumers, as SCP points out, is not guaranteed and is considered nominal. Representation, on SCP Board is disproportionate to the impact the Offer of Service presents to the community.
4. Questionable Justification
SCP argues that expanded geothermal is essential to displace natural gas. Yet state planning documents do not support that claim. According to the CPUC, natural gas currently provides about 35% of California’s electricity. By 2035 its share will fall to near 0%, retained only as backup capacity. By 2045, gas will no longer provide net generation. Over that same period, geothermal’s statewide contribution is projected to remain flat at around 5%. It is therefore misleading to present this Geozone requirement as a critical solution to natural gas dependence.
Conclusion
Lake County deserves clean energy, but also transparency, accountability, and fair treatment. SCP’s Offer of Service, as currently drafted, imposes disproportionate risks and obligations on our County while providing insufficient information and community engagement.
I urge the Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of Clearlake and Lakeport to reject SCP’s Offer of Service in its current form, or at minimum to require removal of the Geozone condition and to demand clear, verifiable details before entering into any long-term commitments.
Dear Lake County Board of Supervisors and City Councils of Clearlake and Lakeport,
I write regarding Sonoma Clean Power’s (SCP) proposed Offer of Service to Lake County, and in particular its requirement that our County and cities commit to participation in the Geothermal Opportunity Zone (“Geozone”). As currently written, the agreement raises serious concerns about transparency, fairness, community impacts, and long-term financial liability.
1. Erosion of Trust: A “Bait and Switch”
When SCP first presented its feasibility study to the Board of Supervisors earlier this year, staff assured the Board that Geozones were not part of the analysis. Yet only weeks later, SCP’s own Board made Geozone participation a condition of service. This direct reversal undermines trust.
Further, when the Board became aware that Geozones were now a pre-condition, the BoS directed SCP to bring its Offer of Service to the public. SCP’s community presentations largely omitted any meaningful discussion of the Geozones. Only when residents specifically asked were the Geozones acknowledged — despite being one of the most controversial elements of the proposal. This approach fell short of the Board’s intent for transparent public engagement.
2. Undefined Geothermal Development in Lake County
While I support renewable energy in principle, SCP has provided little clarity on the scale, technology, or impacts of its geothermal development. Contradictions in SCP’s own materials raise more questions than answers:
• SCP says projects “won’t look like Calpine” but cannot describe what they will look like.
• SCP points to “promising technologies” abroad but admits they are too early to evaluate.
• SCP’s website depicts house-sized facilities, while slides shown to the Board illustrated multi-acre industrial plants resembling refineries dotting the landscape— slides never shared with the public.
• SCP cannot specify whether facilities would involve deep vs. shallow wells, high vs. medium temperature, open vs. closed loop, or the use of fracturing. Each of these choices has implications for seismicity, groundwater, air quality, and aesthetics in a county dependent on agriculture and tourism.
Equally troubling is the Geozone map itself. Created by SCP without local input, it places nearly half of Lake County’s population inside the zone, compared with less than 5% of Sonoma’s population and less than 0.1% of Mendocino’s. Yet this map was not presented at public meetings. It was acknowledged during Board discussion that the map “looks scary.” To ask residents to trust that it is “just a placeholder” or that our Planning Department will protect us is not sufficient grounds for a 20-year binding agreement.
3. Long-Term Financial Liability
The agreement would commit Lake County and its cities to a 20-year financial obligation estimated in the tens of millions, potentially exceeding $100 million, with steep penalties for withdrawal. This level of liability could affect our credit rating and constrain future budgets — all for a project whose technologies and impacts remain undefined.
Meanwhile, savings to consumers, as SCP points out, is not guaranteed and is considered nominal. Representation, on SCP Board is disproportionate to the impact the Offer of Service presents to the community.
4. Questionable Justification
SCP argues that expanded geothermal is essential to displace natural gas. Yet state planning documents do not support that claim. According to the CPUC, natural gas currently provides about 35% of California’s electricity. By 2035 its share will fall to near 0%, retained only as backup capacity. By 2045, gas will no longer provide net generation. Over that same period, geothermal’s statewide contribution is projected to remain flat at around 5%. It is therefore misleading to present this Geozone requirement as a critical solution to natural gas dependence.
Conclusion
Lake County deserves clean energy, but also transparency, accountability, and fair treatment. SCP’s Offer of Service, as currently drafted, imposes disproportionate risks and obligations on our County while providing insufficient information and community engagement.
I urge the Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of Clearlake and Lakeport to reject SCP’s Offer of Service in its current form, or at minimum to require removal of the Geozone condition and to demand clear, verifiable details before entering into any long-term commitments.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lajcik