<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Marin Energy Authority &#8211; In or Out?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.cityofbelvedere.org/2009/12/23/marin-energy-authority-in-or-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.cityofbelvedere.org/2009/12/23/marin-energy-authority-in-or-out/</link>
	<description>A Blog on Belvedere Issues, Projects, Meetings, and Events</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:04:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://blog.cityofbelvedere.org/2009/12/23/marin-energy-authority-in-or-out/#comment-131</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 20:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.cityofbelvedere.org/?p=243#comment-131</guid>
		<description>open4energy - a publisher of unbiased technical information on energy saving for consumers and small businesses, has built a page framing this debate.

There is so much emotional material being thrown about, it is going to be hard for rate payers to understand the issues to be considered.

On the one hand is competition, and a move towards stability through  reducing dependence of oil for energy.

On the other is the risk of politicians being energy traders, and why partnering with PG&amp;E. is the better way to meet the requirements of AB32.

The answers are not obvious, but what is obvious, is that rate payers are being denied a vote, and the decision of politicians is being forced on them. This is not right at all.

We encourage all rate payers to understand the issues, and to either opt-out by contacting PG&amp;E - and know that doing nothing - means YES to a new pseudo government utility.

Google &quot;open4energy marin opt out&quot; and you will find a detailed discussion from both sides of the debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>open4energy &#8211; a publisher of unbiased technical information on energy saving for consumers and small businesses, has built a page framing this debate.</p>
<p>There is so much emotional material being thrown about, it is going to be hard for rate payers to understand the issues to be considered.</p>
<p>On the one hand is competition, and a move towards stability through  reducing dependence of oil for energy.</p>
<p>On the other is the risk of politicians being energy traders, and why partnering with PG&amp;E. is the better way to meet the requirements of AB32.</p>
<p>The answers are not obvious, but what is obvious, is that rate payers are being denied a vote, and the decision of politicians is being forced on them. This is not right at all.</p>
<p>We encourage all rate payers to understand the issues, and to either opt-out by contacting PG&amp;E &#8211; and know that doing nothing &#8211; means YES to a new pseudo government utility.</p>
<p>Google &#8220;open4energy marin opt out&#8221; and you will find a detailed discussion from both sides of the debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
