Grand jury slams O.C. Power Authority’s inexperienced leadership, lack of transparency

Power lines at sunset.
A blistering new grand jury report finds the hiring of OCPA’s CEO questionable whereas criticizing the inexperienced energy company for missing monetary and governmental transparency.
(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Occasions)

The Orange County Energy Authority, a group alternative vitality program, has discovered itself firmly entrenched in controversy lower than two years after forming.

Brian Probolsky, the company’s chief government, filed a whistleblower grievance in Could after authority board member Dan Kalmick tried to name a particular assembly over the way forward for his management.

Member cities belonging to the inexperienced energy various have turned in opposition to the company since.

Irvine voted to conduct an audit of OCPA and its response to public info requests; Huntington Seashore supported the transfer whereas taking a vote of no confidence in Probolsky.

Amid the acrimony, the Orange County grand jury launched “Orange County Energy Authority: Come Clear,” a June 24 report ripping the company for the inexperienced management at its helm in addition to an general lack of transparency.

The grand jury first started its investigation in 2021 after public criticism about OCPA’s formation and actions sounded from those that advocated for sustainable vitality alternate options themselves.

“In recognition of the truth that OCPA manages a really giant funds and commits to long-term energy contracts price a whole bunch of thousands and thousands of dollars,” the report learn, “the [grand jury] is especially involved that OCPA is working with out in-house management with adequate experience to supervise the very complicated choices concerned in vitality planning and transactions.”

The company counts Irvine, Buena Park, Huntington Seashore and Fullerton as member cities. It began offering energy to industrial clients in April; residential clients are slated for service in October.

Irvine contributed $7.5 million to get the company off the bottom because the county’s first inexperienced energy various to SoCal Edison and San Diego Gasoline and Electrical. OCPA held its first board of administrators assembly in December 2020.

Based on the report, OCPA’s basic counsel offered the board with single candidates for the CEO and chief working officer positions quickly after.

“Inexplicably, the place descriptions for COO and CEO weren't made publicly out there previous to the hiring determination,” the report discovered. “The job descriptions additionally lacked any requirement for prior training, expertise, information of the electrical utility or vitality trade, or CCEs.”

The grand jury characterised recruiting efforts as “minimal at greatest” and deemed the hiring course of as outdoors the bounds of greatest practices.

On Jan. 12, 2021, the board voted to approve Probolsky as CEO regardless of his not having any associated trade expertise.

The hiring determination put OCPA in a novel place with regard to different CCE applications within the state.

The grand jury supplied a chart displaying the extent of trade expertise that chief executives held on the time of their hiring at 15 different CCE applications. All got here into the job with a minimum of 10 years of expertise; OCPA stood alone in its hiring of Probolsky, who had no prior expertise.

Against this, Antonia Castro-Graham, OCPA’s former chief working officer, got here in with “sturdy and intensive background within the clear vitality area” however resigned lower than a 12 months into her tenure. “Regardless of her job description, the COO was not given a job within the strategy of vetting, retaining, or working with outdoors contractors vital to OCPA’s operations.”

That left Probolsky in command of a $34-million funds with vital signing authority and with out significant oversight or OCPA governing bylaws, a scenario described by the report as him having fun with “practically unchecked authority.”

Alongside questions of OCPA’s government management, the grand jury additionally assessed the company’s dedication to monetary and governmental transparency.

It took till April for requests on the entire worth of OCPA’s long-term energy contracts to be disclosed. At a board assembly, the quantity was stated to be “in extra of a half a billion dollars.”

With such energy purchases and industrial clients already being serviced, the grand jury discovered no public report of a Danger Oversight Committee having been fashioned, a lot much less assembly quarterly, in accordance to coverage.

At first of Probolsky’s tenure, board conferences weren't recorded and archived, a call that prompted public outcry. Recorded conferences resumed months later in June.

In contrast to different CCE applications, OCPA didn’t publish budgets, monetary statements or fee comparisons on its web site till the grand jury investigation started.

The grand jury additionally accused the company of hiding fee will increase.

A public relations agency forwarded a media assertion launched on behalf of Probolsky.

It takes umbrage with what it deems as quite a few “factually inaccurate info” and “irrelevant comparisons” within the report. The assertion disputes the assertion that OCPA hid fee will increase, eliminated board assembly movies and did not publish monetary info on its web site earlier than the grand jury investigation.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post