Sweetwater Responds to Floating Solar Opposition 

The Sweetwater Authority learned of and greenlighted the design of a floating solar array on its reservoir all in the same day. The swiftness of the approval after considering only a single company put some members of its governing board and the public ill at ease. 

But the leader of the water district says the rules are different for energy projects. And slapping solar on a reservoir is “taking a step in the right direction” on decarbonizing the energy-intensive process of treating water, said Sweetwater Authority General Manager Carlos Quintero.  

Here’s what happened: Quintero brought an agreement with a company called Noria Energy to design the solar array before the board during a June 28 meeting. The 3.75-megawatt array could save Sweetwater $500,000 in energy costs per year, money the agency could put toward lowering its expenses or water rates, he said.  

Quintero told the board it should move quickly to approve the agreement so the company could apply for limited, competitive bill credits from San Diego Gas and Electric available to local governments or colleges that generate their own energy. The board approved the terms with Noria in a 5 to 2 vote that day.  

The two opposing board members, Josie Calderon and National City Mayor Ron Morrison, both voiced concerns that they were just hearing about the project at that June meeting yet were expected to vote on it already. 

“You should have brought this to us earlier instead of at the 23rd hour,” Morrison said.  

After the agreement was approved, Sweetwater Authority held three public meetings about it with its Community Advisory Work Group. That felt like an afterthought to some on the Sweetwater Valley Civic Association, a formalized group of South County residents, which voted to oppose the project earlier this month. Calderon, a Sweetwater Authority board member, was in attendance and re-voiced concerns about transparency over the project.  

Quintero, the general manager, disagrees with the characterization that the development of this project has not been transparent.  

“We don’t go to the community and tell them what’s coming to the board. We put it on the agenda for the board to consider. That’s when it becomes public,” Quintero told me later. 

It’s currently undergoing an environmental study, and once all assessments are complete, Sweetwater’s governing board “will make a decision whether staff will continue to proceed with the project,” Quintero wrote in a letter to Voice of San Diego. 

I put the question to him again later. It seems a lot of the growing ire around the project stems from how quickly the agency entered into a design agreement without first putting it out for a competitive public bid. That’s generally required by law for public agencies like Sweetwater Authority.  

Quintero pointed to state government code 4217, law on energy contracts with public agencies, which he says permits the agency to sole source an energy project if it’s beneficial from a cost standpoint.  

“They are basically developing the project for free with a buyout clause if we don’t want to go with them,” Quintero told me.  

This is how the agreed upon terms work: Noria is designing the solar array for Sweetwater Authority. Sweetwater is paying for fees to apply for the SDG&E credits and environmental studies as well as obtaining permits. Then, the Sweetwater board has choices: Negotiate a power purchase agreement with Noria, or buy the design from Noria for $110,700 and move forward with a different developer or cancel the project.  

If Sweetwater chooses to cancel or work with another company, it can’t do so for 18 months under an exclusivity clause in the agreement terms. But that puts the time-sensitive energy credits from SDG&E at risk, Quintero said.