Get Involved

There are lots of ways you can get involved. We need you to help keep Minneapolis' energy options open!

Help Build Community Power in Minneapolis:

We are seeking volunteers to be a main point of contact with their City Council Representative to advance the following priorities: inclusion of active community participation in the proposed city-utility partnership and a utility franchise agreement limited to a 2-year term. You can:

  1. Become a ward captain who will help identify and convene volunteers, help get information to them and encourage them to contact your Council Member at least once a month.
  2. Become a ward volunteer agreeing to call, email, or visit their Council Member once a month, using the information shared by ward captains.

If you're interested, please email Marcus Mills ([email protected]) with your name, address, and phone number or give him a call at 612-406-1252.

Thank you for helping secure the Minneapolis Clean Energy Partnership and a short-term franchise agreement that keeps Xcel and Centerpoint accountable to it. Together, we have real power in our energy future. 




We need YOU to make this happen. Sign up to work an event, make calls, volunteer your services or be a part of one of our field teams. Have a specialty skill you'd like to use to contribute to this cause?

Learn more about volunteering



Attend a meeting or event

Want more information? Come to one of our meetings, parties or volunteer to host your own house party for Minneapolis Energy Options!

See all events

  • Us Streams24
    commented 2016-11-15 07:11:24 -0600
    Thank you
  • Jack Abd Allah
    commented 2013-12-30 01:18:16 -0600
    Thank you
  • Matt Boys
    commented 2013-08-07 15:59:01 -0500
    If the goal is to provide local, clean (renewable), and affordable energy; let’s consider two viable options that meet these goals and consider the ROIC of each scenario.
    Scenario 1) Minneapolis seeks energy independence and establishes a municipal power entity. Assuming stakeholder approval, the city and its residents would have to buy-out Excel Energy in order to acquire all of the existing infrastructure. Analysts estimate this buyout would cost 1-2 billion dollars. So before any change happens to the way Minneapolis’s new municipality generates power, the entity is in the red 1-2 billion dollars. In order to accomplish the goals set above, new capital investment is required to purchase, install, connect to the grid, and own renewable energy generation. For price estimates, let’s use the most recent local wind farms being installed (ironically a partnership involving Excel Energy); the 3 proposed wind farms would generate 600 MW of energy, enough to power 180,000 homes (assuming 2 people per household, this is nearly enough energy to power Minneapolis with 100% wind energy). The cost of these wind farms is estimated at 350 million for each 200 MW wind farm, so $1.05 billion in total. Excel estimates that the power generated from these wind farms will save customers 180 million over a 20 year period compared to power generated by existing power plants. So, if Minneapolis sought a similar solution, the additional capital expenditure would be $1.05 billion. The total price tag of acquiring existing infrastructure and building new renewable energy options ranges from 2.05-3.05 billion dollars. This does not include the organizational capital to build, staff, manage, and service the newly formed municipality. Challenges here are: who has the expertise? How many jobs would this create (in the municipality)? (Note: I do not consider jobs created from building new renewables since in scenario 2 the same construction would occur) How many Excel jobs would be lost? Can the city manage, service, and provide reliable energy more efficiently and economically than Excel?
    To meet the goals outlined above, this scenario requires substantial financial capital ($2.05-3.05B) as well as human resource capital and energy expertise. There are many challenges for this route because the change is significant.
    Scenario 2) Keeping in mind the goals outlined above, a second option Minneapolis could consider is keeping Excel energy as the main energy service provider but partnering with Excel to achieve the city’s goals. Instead of acquiring existing infrastructure to buy out Excel, ($1-2 billion) the city could invest that money in it’s own renewable energy projects. Using the same assumptions above, the city could invest 1.05 billion dollars in 600MW of wind farms (enough to power MPLS) and sell the energy to Excel in a purchase power agreement (PPA). The city would own the wind farms (in the 3 proposed Excel wind farms, Excel is only agreeing to purchase energy from the wind farms, it is hiring out contractors to install & connect the wind farms to the grid and institutional investors own the actual wind turbines; the land is leased from local farmers). Because Minneapolis would own the renewable energy infrastructure, a favorable PPA could be met because there are less players in the deal (institutional investors are replaced by the city); and because of the competitive prices of wind compared to power generated by new & existing power plants (which will become even more favorable as the pending EPA regulations over new & existing power plants are passed) the city’s residents would reap similar savings to the 3 proposed wind farms— which is 180 million over a 20 year period. The total price tag for scenario #2 is $1.05 billion ($1-2 billion less than scenario #1) and the city could reach all of its goals: renewable energy, affordable, & locally owned. Another consideration for scenario #2 that could significantly reduce government spending is the ability to crowdsource the renewable energy infrastructure so that residents/investors could own the renewable energy projects themselves. Instead of the city owning the new wind farms, residents and investors could raise the necessary capital by crowdsourcing the wind farms and investors would be repaid through a pre-negotiated rate of return through a PPA. This model has proven extremely successful in some states that allow this type of investment, one example being Mosaic out of California.

    In each scenario, I believe net job creation is pretty close. Both involve the same amount of renewable energy development- so that’s a wash- and scenario 1 incurs job shifts, moving positions from Excel to the state, so there’s no real job gain there. There are other considerations that affect each scenario, but in the interest of length I’ve drawn out the critical theories that I believe are most relevant.

    About me: I’m an environmental sustainability consultant that graduated from St. John’s University with a focus in management and economics.
  • Rolf Westgard
    commented 2013-08-01 17:37:53 -0500
    As Minneapolis pushes ahead with its plan for a greener independent municipal power utility, we can imagine a warm muggy summer night when there isn’t a breath of air. All air conditioners are switched on. But the ACs are as still and quiet as all those sunless rooftop solar panels and calm wind turbine blades. The irony is that Xcel Energy already has the highest percent of wind energy in its fuel mix of all U.S. electric power companies. Some consider the idea of Minneapolis buying all of the infrastructure to operate its own power utility to be ill advised. I suggest the notion is madness.

Take Action! Donate Attend an Upcoming Event