Pending Legislative Proposal To Exit PJM Grid Provides An Opportunity To Enact A Public Power Option
New York State Has A Public Power Plan
(Caption: Source: Public Power San Diego)
NJ Should Follow NY's Lead
As a result of skyrocketing energy prices, artificial barriers to renewable energy, and allegations of corruption, NJ Legislators are currently considering legislation to leave the PJM grid and either join New York State's grid or form an independent New Jersey grid.
The bill has passed the full Assembly and is pending in the Senate. It directs the NJ Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to analyze options and submit a public Report to the legislature by the end of the year, see:
The bill provides that the BPU shall:
"Explore the feasibility of withdrawing from PJM’s high-voltage electric transmission grid entirely either by joining a different regional system or establishing a New Jersey-led grid."
Implicit in leaving the PJM grid and forming an independent NJ grid is the concept of publicly owned power - both the grid (transmission and distribution) and sources of supply. Existing NJ State laws provide adequate legal authority to enact a publicly owned public utility energy system. This could be done based on and as part of a new PJM grid exit law.
The New York State legislature enacted a public power law in 2023, which is described as "the biggest climate law in the US": (Public Power NY)
The Build Public Renewables Act (A00279/S04134) is a New York State law passed in 2023 that will unleash the power of public funding to build publicly owned, 100% renewable energy, create a new era of green union jobs, help slash energy bills for those who need it most, and make New York a national leader in the fight to win a future we’d be proud to pass on to those to come.
I've long called for both a PJM exit and a public power option in NJ. But those appeals have not gained any traction.
For some curious reason, NJ climate and energy activists have not launched a NJ campaign based on the huge victory in neighboring NY (could it be PSE&G funding?).
The same failure is true with respect to climate law, where NY's climate law has enforceable regulatory emissions reduction goals and timetables applied to all major emission sources, while NJ's Global Warming Response Act law is aspirational, toothless, and effectively limited to a small portion of the power sector (via implementation in RGGI and DEP air pollution regulations).
And the same flaw is repeated in enforcement of Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification, where NY State DEC has used that provision to kill major gas pipelines, while NJ DEP has not.
However, the PJM Exit bill now provides a golden opportunity to build the public power option into the PJM Exit issue.
Legislators may have inadvertently put the public power option on the table and teed up an opportunity for climate activists to launch a statewide campaign, which is likely to garner broad public support given public outrage over rising energy bills.
So, I suggested to Senate Environment Committee Chairman (sponsor) Senator Smith that the Senate bill be amended to explicitly address the implicit issue of public power. I copied NJ climate activists, so let's hope that they wake up.
This is far too significant an issue to vaguely defer to the BPU. Legislation must be specific with clear objectives in support of public power.
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Bill WOLFE <>
To: senbsmith <SenBSmith@njleg.org>, sengreenstein <sengreenstein@njleg.org>, "senmckeon@njleg.org" <senmckeon@njleg.org>, "senzwicker@njleg.org" <senzwicker@njleg.org>, "senscutari@njleg.org" <senscutari@njleg.org>, "Hansen, Eric" <EHansen@njleg.org>
Cc: "shawn.latourette@dep.nj.gov" <shawn.latourette@dep.nj.gov>, domalley <domalley@environmentnewjersey.org>, Ken Dolsky <kdolsky@optonline.net>, Matthew Smith <msmith@fwwatch.org>, "emile@njconservation.org" <emile@njconservation.org>, Anjuli Ramos <anjuli.ramos@sierraclub.org>, "Taylor McFarland, NJ Sierra Club" <taylor.mcfarland@sierraclub.org>, "dpringle1988@gmail.com" <dpringle1988@gmail.com>, "agoldsmith@cleanwater.org" <agoldsmith@cleanwater.org>, "ed.potosnak@njlcv.org" <ed.potosnak@njlcv.org>, "srodas@njadvancemedia.com" <srodas@njadvancemedia.com>, "fkummer@inquirer.com" <fkummer@inquirer.com>, "jonhurdle@gmail.com" <jonhurdle@gmail.com>, "ferencem@njspotlightnews.org" <ferencem@njspotlightnews.org>, "McAlpin, John" <McAlpinJ@njspotlight.com>, "O'Neill, James" <ONeillJ@northjersey.com>, Jeff Pillets <jeffpillets@icloud.com>, Robert Hennelly <rhennelly55@gmail.com>
Date: 07/17/2025 8:52 AM EDT
Subject: BPU Scope of Work - S4693
Dear Chairman Smith - A critical element of your bill, S4693 is to:
"Explore the feasibility of withdrawing from PJM’s high-voltage electric transmission grid entirely either by joining a different regional system or establishing a New Jersey-led grid."
Implicit in "establishing a New Jersey-led grid" is public ownership of the grid and generation sources.
The BPU would need clear legislative policy direction to evaluate this implicit public ownership option.
Accordingly, I suggest that your bill be amended to make the implicit public power option explicit.
Additionally, the bill should include the following generic type of amendments, to direct BPU to study the feasibility, cost - benefit, and financing of a transition to a publicly owned power utility model in NJ.
These tasks are for illustrative purposes only to inform OLS amendments. They were excerpted from a consultant's Report to the City of San Diego, as part of the City's analysis of the public power option:
Electric and Gas Franchise Agreements Consultant Report
"(1) perform a preliminary valuation of the existing electric and gas distribution infrastructure owned by [...X....];
(2) estimate the cost to physically separate (i.e., sever) that portion of the [...x...] infrastructure within the [State] from the remainder of the [...X...] electric and gas systems located outside the [State] boundaries to allow for non-[...X...] ownership and operation of the utility infrastructure serving the [State];
(3) evaluate the economic feasibility of [State/Local] acquisition and operation of the electric and gas distribution infrastructure in the [State]; and
(4) perform a survey to assess franchise best practices used by other [].
I look forward to your favorable consideration and reply.
Bill Wolfe