Letters: How reforming California rooftop solar policies will benefit all the state's residents

San Francisco Chronicle​

16-05-2025

Regarding 'California wants to kill rooftop solar — all because officials were duped by this flawed theory' (Open Forum, SFChronicle.com, May 11): The op-ed downplaying the rooftop solar cost shift is misleading and ignores overwhelming evidence.
The California Public Advocates Office found that nonsolar customers paid $8.5 billion in 2024 alone to subsidize rooftop solar users — making up as much as 27% of their electricity bills. That's not theory; it's math.
The author leans on a study by his firm, M.Cubed, that's been debunked. UC Berkeley energy economist Severin Borenstein called it out for 'fundamental conceptual errors' and 'misunderstanding how customers contribute to fixed grid costs.'
Even California Public Utilities Commission-approved modeling shows that net-energy-metering customers cover as little as 9% to 18% of the actual cost to serve them.
Fixing the cost shift doesn't mean abandoning solar — it means creating a system that is fair to everyone, not just the 1.6 million households with panels. Working-class Californians shouldn't pay billions so wealthier homeowners can enjoy near-zero electric bills.
Environment can't be rebuilt
Regarding 'California blocking new housing in this posh Silicon Valley town over wildflowers' (Bay Area, SFChronicle.com, May 10): The Peninsula's rare serpentine meadows and wildflower-rich grasslands are more than just scenic — they're essential lifelines in a time of climate change and biodiversity collapse.
The story frames the issue as wildflowers versus housing, but this is a dangerous oversimplification. These ecosystems support a rich tapestry of endemic and endangered species that exist nowhere else. Destroying them for short-term development is not just shortsighted — it's irreversible.
We urgently need affordable housing, but not at the expense of irreplaceable biodiversity. Nature-based climate solutions rely on protecting intact ecosystems like these meadows, which store carbon, support pollinators and build resilience against climate shocks.
Let's prioritize smart development rather than paving over the last fragments of ecological heritage. Preserving biodiversity isn't a luxury — it's a necessity for a livable future.
Bob Hall, San Francisco
Limit coyote killing
As the saying goes, crazy is doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.
By this measure, coyote management in California and nationwide has been crazy for decades, with constant, indiscriminate killing and taxpayer-funded extermination programs — all while coyotes survive and move into new areas.
Fortunately, California is poised for change. The California Fish and Game Commission's Wildlife Resources Committee will consider new rules to limit coyote killing.
Science demonstrates that intense persecution of coyotes increases conflicts by encouraging more reproduction and opening territories to inexperienced, juvenile dispersers prone to seek food like garbage and small pets.
Nonlethal methods: hazing, livestock fencing, keeping pets on leash and garbage secured have proven more effective in reducing human-coyote conflicts.
Wildlife Resources Committee's recommendation must be adopted so that the state can advance new approaches to coyote management and coexistence, which in these changing times are both very necessary and very sane.
Camilla Fox, executive director, Project Coyote, Larkspur
Doesn't seem right
Is anyone else worried about this extravagant gift to President Donald Trump from Qatar? Isn't Air Force One considered the Oval Office when the president travels? To quote Han Solo: 'I have a bad feeling about this.'
Arlene DeLeon, Castro Valley