Marin Clean Energy, the community electric power aggregation scheme, is gaining steam. The effort to fundamentally change Marin's energy supply is of such importance that voters deserve to make the final decision. The issue should be placed on the November 2009 ballot.

Led by Supervisors Charles McGlashan and Steve Kinsey, the plan puts a city-county agency into the business of supplying environmentally friendly electricity.

The new Marin Energy Authority would purchase power directly from suppliers of wind, solar, hydro and geothermal energy and use existing Pacific, Gas & Electric Co.-operated lines to deliver it to Marin consumers. Any Marinite may "op-out" of the Authority and continued with electricity supplied by PG&E.

Proponents contend that the process to cut our collective carbon footprint has to start somewhere to minimize global warming. Renewable purchases by Marin and other communities will stimulate the market for green sources, expanding overall supply. Experienced managers would run the Authority in Marin's traditional professional, non-political fashion.

Further, county projections indicate that under Marin Clean Energy, prices should decrease without the need to satisfy stockholders and fund PG&E's huge overhead.

Detractors point out that the amount of non fossil created energy in California is fixed. If one locale buys a batch of renewable electricity that doesn't necessarily increases the amount available for the entire state. They suggest that the new agency is inexperienced in the sophisticated energy industry potentially leading to unanticipated costs to both taxpayers and ratepayers down the pike.

To opponents, including PG&E, the scheme is a "feel good" exercise accompanied by financial risk. They suggest that the new agency is inexperienced in the sophisticated energy industry potentially leading to unanticipated costs down the pike.

The Marin authority is enabled by a new state law permitting localities to "aggregate" purchases of electricity after proceeding through a two-step process. The first phase creates the local energy authority. That's already been done with county taxpayers fronting $330,000 in startup costs. The second phase is the bigger deal.

After clean energy contracts are signed, each of Marin's cities and the county, representing consumers in the unincorporated areas, will be asked to sign binding agreements for long-term electricity purchases.

The business-oriented North Bay Council suggested that the matter be put to a countywide vote. It's a good idea, but given the broad supervisorial support behind the initiative, it's a non-starter.

It's in Marin's cities where the matter could and should be decided.

Marin learned during the Ross Valley flood control vote brouhaha that the approval process must be transparent and have broad credibility. The flood plan was first-rate, but the approval process was flawed.

Likewise, there's much merit behind Marin Clean Energy. It's an innovative concept accompanied by a defective approval process. Advocates make a fundamental mistake by moving forward without a better mechanism to confirm broad acceptance. Citing public opinion polls or attendance at community forums is not enough. Voters should make the final call.

This is not a suggestion that voters reject the measure. It's simply that local energy supply and its potential cost is such a fundamental issue that voters' concurrence is essential.

The energy authority should now proceed with the next phase. Solicit bids and negotiate power contracts subject to voter approval. Ideally, there would then be a countywide vote. If that's not to be, each city council should then exercise its authority submitting the question to their voters in next November's local elections.

If the town councils don't act, then voters should take matters into their own hands. It doesn't take much to gather the necessary signatures to put this or any other issue on the local ballot.