Appalachian Power and Dominion Energy are seeking to end Virginia’s net metering program, which credits customers for excess electricity from rooftop solar at the retail rate. Both utilities propose compensating solar customers at a significantly lower rate, based on the “avoided cost” (the price they pay for purchased electricity). This has sparked fierce opposition from solar advocates, who argue it would make residential solar installations economically unfeasible. The debate centers around whether these changes are necessary to prevent cost shifts to non-solar customers or whether they undermine Virginia’s growing solar market. The State Corporation Commission will review the proposals.
Virginia’s investor-owned utilities thought 2025 would be the year they put an end to net metering – and with it, rooftop solar installers’ modest competition with their monopoly.. The 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) removed many barriers that residents and businesses installing solar panels under the state’s net metering law had faced, but it also called for the State Corporation Commission to reevaluate the program, beginning right about now.
Not surprisingly, Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power are seizing this opportunity to push for changes that would undermine the economic calculus supporting customer-owned solar.
Since at least 2007, Virginia law has required that customers of Dominion and APCo who have solar panels on their property be credited for surplus electricity they supply to the grid at the same retail rate they pay for electricity. The credit is applied against the cost of the electricity the customer draws from the grid at times when the panels aren’t generating, reducing what they owe on their electric bill.
But now that they have the chance, both utilities have filed proposals to end net metering. Both essentially propose to charge new solar customers the full retail rate for the electricity they draw from the grid (with Dominion using a more complicated half-hour “netting”), but compensate them for electricity fed to the grid only at the utility’s “avoided cost,” or what it pays to buy electricity from other generators. By law, existing customers and new low-income customers with solar would be unaffected.
APCo calculates avoided cost as the wholesale cost of energy and capacity, plus transmission and ancillary services, for a total of less than 5 cents per kilowatt-hour. Thus, a homeowner with solar panels would now pay the full retail rate of about 17 cents/kWh for electricity drawn from the grid, while being credited at less than one-third that amount for electricity put back on the grid.
Dominion’s approach instead pegs avoided cost to what it pays for solar generation and associated renewable energy certificates (RECs) bought from certain small producers under power purchase agreements, an average of about 9.5 cents/kWh. Dominion’s residential rate currently averages about 14 cents/kWh, but would go up to more than 16 cents if its latest rate increase request is granted.
The VCEA gave APCo the first swing at the piñata. APCo filed its proposal in September, and the SCC will hold an evidentiary hearing on May 20. Dominion only filed its petition last week, and no hearing date has been set yet.
Not surprisingly, APCo’s proposal generated fierce opposition from advocates and solar installers. They point out that it’s hard enough to make the economics of home solar work with net metering at the retail rate; slashing the compensation for electricity returned to the grid by more than one-third, as Dominion proposes, or two-thirds, as APCo wants, would make solar a losing proposition for most homeowners. Maybe economies of scale and other factors would allow the market for commercial solar to survive under Dominion’s program, though Dominion’s insistence on confiscating customers’ RECs won’t make anyone happy.
If solar owners definitely lose under APCo’s plan, advocates say other ratepayers don’t necessarily win. A homeowner’s surplus generation travels only the short distance to the nearest neighbor, lessening the need for the utility to generate and transmit power to meet the neighbor’s demand. Since the utility charges that neighbor the regular retail rate for the electricity, without having to bring it from somewhere else, the utility saves on transmission costs. On top of that, the surplus solar comes in during the day, when demand is typically higher than at night and electricity is more costly, making solar more valuable to the utility. Plus, it is clean and renewable, and the customer bears all the cost and risk of the investment.
Utilities do not share this rosy view. By their way of thinking, solar customers use the grid as free energy storage and backup power, without paying their fair share of grid costs. Not only does this deprive the utility of revenue, but those grid costs now have to be spread out among the remaining customers. This, they say, creates a cost shift from solar owners to everyone else.
More than a decade ago, Virginia took tentative steps towards resolving the dispute, with the Department of Environmental Quality setting up a stakeholder group to work towards a “value of solar” analysis. The process was never completed — the utilities walked away from the table when it appeared the results weren’t going to be what they wanted, and the group’s work product did not include numeric values or policy recommendations.
Virginia is hardly alone in navigating these clashing narratives.
Other states and regulators have arrived at very different conclusions as to the “correct” value of distributed solar to utilities, ratepayers, and society as a whole. States like Maryland kept net metering after a value of solar analysis concluded the benefits outweighed the costs. On the other hand, California famously ended its net metering program in 2022 when solar comprised almost 20% of electricity generated in the state and created a mid-day surplus without enough storage to absorb it; at the time, 45% of that solar was distributed. That same year, however, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed an unpopular bill that would have phased out net metering in the state.
The experience of other states, combined with an abundance of research and analysis conducted over the years, gives the SCC a lot to work with as it considers the fate of net metering for APCo’s customers this year, and later for Dominion’s.
Countering the arguments of the utility’s hired witnesses, solar industry and environmental organizations have weighed in on the APCo docket with testimony from experts with nationwide experience. The experts pointed out a range of errors and omissions in the utility’s work product. They also presented their own benefit-cost analyses demonstrating a value for distributed solar in excess of the retail price of electricity, using tests often applied to energy efficiency and demand-response programs.
Perhaps even more significantly, SCC staff also filed an analysis that found many of the same problems with APCo’s proposal, including failures to comply with statutory requirements. The staff report did not include a quantitative analysis, but it urged the importance of considering benefits that APCo had ignored. Like the intervenors, staff recommended the commission reject APCo’s plan and retain its net metering program as it is, at least for now.
Although the staff report would seem likely to carry weight with the commissioners, it’s never easy to predict what the SCC will do in any case before it. But in Virginia, unlike California, distributed solar makes up vanishingly little of total electric generation. Even taking the utilities’ arguments at face value, it seems foolish to upend this small but important market to remedy a perceived harm that is, at least for now, more theoretical than real.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
SUPPORT
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Left
The article reports on Virginia’s ongoing debate over net metering for solar energy, with a focus on the utility companies’ push to end the practice. The tone leans toward supporting the solar industry and its economic benefits for consumers, highlighting opposition from environmental groups and solar installers. The emphasis on the potential harm to homeowners, the financial impact on solar owners, and the favorability of net metering for consumers suggests an inclination toward advocating for renewable energy. The article maintains factual reporting, but the language and framing subtly align with a pro-solar, environmentally conscious stance, positioning it as Center-Left.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Esther Wickham | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-08-25 18:15:00
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) found George Mason University (GMU) violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by implementing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies favoring race in hiring and promotions. OCR’s probe, prompted by faculty complaints, concluded GMU’s leadership under President Gregory Washington promoted discriminatory practices. OCR proposed a Resolution Agreement requiring GMU to commit publicly to nondiscrimination and a personal apology from Washington. The GMU Board of Visitors is reviewing the findings, but Washington’s attorney rejected OCR’s conclusions, citing flawed investigation methods and denying discrimination. GMU must comply by September 1.
(The Center Square) — The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights announced George Mason University violated federal law by hiring and promoting staff based on race and other characteristics.
In July, OCR launched an investigation into GMU due to multiple complaints filed by professors alleging that university leadership had adopted unlawful diversity, equity and inclusion policies from 2020 that give preferential treatment to prospective and current faculty, the department said in a press release.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in education programs and activities receiving federal funding. Institutions that are found in violation of Title VI can lose federal funds.”
OCR notified GMU President Gregory Washington that under his leadership, the Fairfax, Virginia-based university violated Title VI by supporting DEI practices and policies.
“In 2020, University President Gregory Washington called for expunging the so-called ‘racist vestiges’ from GMU’s campus. Without a hint of self-awareness, President Washington then waged a university-wide campaign to implement unlawful DEI policies that intentionally discriminate on the basis of race,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor. “Despite this unfortunate chapter in Mason’s history, the University now has the opportunity to come into compliance with federal civil rights laws by entering into a Resolution Agreement with the Office for Civil Rights.”
OCR has issued a proposed Resolution Agreement to GMU to resolve the civil rights laws violations.
The department’s agreement requires GMU to publicly commit to nondiscrimination in hiring and promotion, including a personal apology from the president for promoting unlawful discriminatory practices.
The school’s Board of Visitors said Friday it was reviewing the steps outlined in the resolution and will “continue to respond fully and cooperatively to all inquiries from the Department of Education, the Department of Justice and the U.S. House of Representatives and evaluate the evidence that comes to light,” the board said in a statement on Friday. “Our sole focus is our fiduciary duty to serve the best interests of the University and the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia.”
But on Monday, Washington rejected the Department of Education’s demands.
In a 10-page letter to GMU’s board on Monday, Washington’s attorney, Douglas Gansler, alleged that OCR cut corners and only interviewed two university deans, Inside Higher Ed reports.
“To be clear, per OCR’s own findings, no job applicant has been discriminated against by GMU, nor has OCR attempted to name someone who has been discriminated against by GMU in any context. Therefore, it is a legal fiction for OCR to even assert or claim that there has been a Title VI or Title IX violation here,” Gansler wrote.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
The article primarily reports on the findings and actions of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights regarding George Mason University’s alleged violations of federal law related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. While it includes statements from both the OCR and the university’s leadership, the language used—such as quoting the OCR’s strong criticism of GMU’s DEI efforts and highlighting the university president’s rejection of the findings—frames DEI policies in a negative light. This framing, along with the focus on alleged unlawful discrimination against non-minority groups, aligns with a center-right perspective that is often critical of DEI initiatives. The article does not merely neutrally report the facts but subtly emphasizes the controversy around DEI, suggesting a center-right ideological stance rather than a purely neutral or balanced report.
www.youtube.com – NBC4 Washington – 2025-08-25 09:28:12
SUMMARY: As summer ends, students and teachers at Raymond Elementary in D.C. prepare excitedly for the new school year. The school boasts a brand-new playground and courtyard, with dedicated staff like Miss Tracee Robinson, a second-grade teacher known for her “Not Like Us” rap parody. Teacher Alexandria Henderson has a DonorsChoose wishlist totaling over $1,100, including carpets, headphones, and snacks. Thanks to Pepco’s $1,100 donation, her wishlist is fully funded. Principal Miss Hubbard and the community express gratitude as the school gears up for Monday’s first day, celebrating support from NBC4, Telemundo 44, and corporate partners.
News4’s Molette Green helps get Raymond Elementary hyped for school with a longtime teacher’s rap and a big donation for supplies.
_______
NBC4 Washington / WRC-TV is the No. 1 broadcast television station and the home of the most-watched local news in Washington, D.C. The station leads the market in providing timely and breaking news and information in text, video and graphics across more than 15 platforms including NBCWashington.com, the NBC4 app, NBC4 streaming news channel, newsletters, and social media.
virginiamercury.com – Charlotte Rene Woods, Nathaniel Cline – 2025-08-25 04:29:00
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin has ordered a state police investigation into allegations from a conservative blog that Fairfax County Public Schools helped underage girls obtain abortions in 2021 without parental consent, potentially violating state law. The claims have become a key Republican talking point ahead of elections, with GOP gubernatorial candidate Winsome Earle-Sears emphasizing parental rights. The investigation’s outcome remains uncertain and may not conclude before Election Day. Fairfax schools and officials have pledged cooperation but cannot comment further. The controversy echoes past political battles over parental rights in education and intersects with ongoing efforts to enshrine reproductive rights in Virginia’s constitution.
by Charlotte Rene Woods and Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury August 25, 2025
Gov. Glenn Youngkin has ordered state police to investigate explosive allegations from a conservative blog that Fairfax County Public Schools officials helped multiple underage girls obtain abortions in 2021 — a probe whose findings may not surface before Election Day but could still sway voters in the court of public opinion.
Virginia law requires minors to obtain either parental consent or a successful court petition to undergo the procedure. Such records are also exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
The Mercury asked the Fairfax County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court whether any petitions were filed at all in 2021 and how many have been filed in subsequent years, which they did not provide.
Still, the possibility that a public school broke state law and bypassed parents’ consent rights is quickly becoming a political talking point for Republican candidates this year.
‘Gift that keeps on giving’
Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, who is running for governor, speaks to a crowd at an American Legion office in Chesterfield County on Aug. 14, 2025. (Photo by Charlotte Rene Woods/Virginia Mercury)
Against the backdrop of an ongoing effort to enshrine reproductive rights into Virginia’s constitution, Republican gubernatorial nominee Winsome Earle-Sears has seized on the allegations.
At a recent campaign event in Chesterfield County, she welcomed the story’s circulation in the news cycle.
“I don’t know if you also saw what’s happening in Northern Virginia — it’s just a gift that keeps on giving,” Earle-Sears said as the crowd laughed.
It cheered after she added: “Parents. Still. Matter.”
Political analyst Bob Holsworth said the controversy echoes of Youngkin’s successful 2021 campaign, when allegations of a sexual assault in a Loudoun County school bathroom sparked national furor over transgender students’ use of restrooms.
Investigations and legal proceedings extended well beyond the campaign, but by then “Parents for Youngkin” signs and “parents matter” chants had become staples of his rallies. Youngkin went on to win the governorship, and Republicans flipped the House of Delegates for a term.
“Interestingly, the target audience is not voters in Fairfax and Loudoun,” Holsworth said of the Democratic strongholds, “but Republicans elsewhere in the commonwealth.”
The allegations first surfaced in WC Dispatch, an Ohio-based conservative blog run by independent investigative journalist Walter Curt Jr. His father, Walter Curt Sr., is a Youngkin appointee to the Virginia State Council of Higher Education and has donated thousands of dollars to both Youngkin and Earle-Sears. Curt Jr. told Virginia Scope that his familiar ties don’t affect his reporting.
Holsworth suggested that GOP campaigns are aiming to “get these issues aired on Fox News so they can deliver a message across Virginia in a way that Democrats can’t.”
That’s because the claim itself — whether ultimately proven or false — is already enough to stoke concerns among some voters about public schools encroaching on parental rights. Defending parental oversight in K-12 education been a consistent Republican theme in Virginia politics.
If the allegation proves true, Earle-Sears has vowed accountability.
“Your underage daughter can’t get an aspirin without your permission,” she wrote on X on Aug. 19. “Yet a Virginia school may have taken a young girl for an abortion, in secret, using your tax dollars. If true, it’s monstrous, and there will be consequences.”
The legal wait-and-see
Gov. Glenn Youngkin and Sen. Siobhan Dunnavant, R-Henrico, hold a “Parents Matter” discussion at a Henrico County elementary school. (Graham Moomaw/Virginia Mercury)
Pending the outcome of the state police investigation, any responsibility to prosecute would fall to Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano, who has declined to comment.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, noted that the timeline for an investigation is uncertain. While the number of people involved doesn’t appear large he said, the allegation dates back four years —a factor that could complicate evidence gathering and examination.
Tobias added that Republicans could “make a lot of political hay of it” heading into the elections, especially since Fairfax’s commonwealth’s attorney has been a frequent target of Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares.
Miyares, who is up for reelection this year, has long pushed for changes in state law that would allow the state to intervene in local prosecutions and has repeatedly attacked Descano as being too lenient.
A potential prosecution arising from the Fairfax abortion allegation could even spill into the next gubernatorial term.
Democratic gubernatorial nominee Abigail Spanberger is also watching closely. Her campaign said in an email to The Mercury that she “will be monitoring the status of the Virginia State Police’s investigation and will support appropriate action to uphold Virginia law.”
The campaign also highlighted Spanberger’s perspective as a mother of three young girls who attend public school, adding: “She believes that decisions about a child’s health and safety should always be made between them and their parents.”
Fairfax vs. everyone else
Beyond the locality’s prosecutor, Fairfax County Public Schools has become a lightning rod for criticism from parents as well as state and federal leaders.
Among the most polarizing decisions: overhauling admissions at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology to promote greater diversity, and resisting statewide transgender policies that would have required schools to out transgender students or restrict pronoun use.
The division is also arranging a security detail for Superintendent Michelle Reid.
After the abortion allegations surfaced, Reid wrote to the school community that the conduct described “would be unacceptable” in the district.
“I want to stress that at no time would the situation as described in these allegations be acceptable in Fairfax County Public Schools,” Reid said.
The school district has also stated that it will “fully cooperate” with the investigation but cannot comment further while it is ongoing.
Reproductive laws in campaigns
Reproductive-rights supporters watch as lawmakers debate a proposed constitutional amendment to protect abortion access on Jan. 21, 2025. (Photo by Charlotte Rene Woods/Virginia Mercury)
Beyond Earle-Sears’ bid for governor and the lieutenant governor and attorney general races, all 100 House of Delegates seats are up for election this year.
Looming over those contests is an ongoing effort to enshrine reproductive rights — including abortion — into the state’s constitution. The measure must pass the legislature again next year before appearing on a statewide ballot for voter approval or rejection.
While every Republican in the General Assembly voted against the proposal this year, they first attempted to add language reflecting existing state law on minors’ access to abortion. Democrats rejected that effort, pointing out that a U.S. Supreme Court case also affirms parental consent under the 14th Amendment.
Even so, the possibility that someone may have broken the law in Fairfax is “alarming,” said Sen. Jennifer Boysko, D-Fairfax, who is carrying the Senate version of the reproductive rights amendment.
“We should all be deeply concerned anytime anyone says they have been forced, misled or coerced into life-changing decisions about their reproductive health,” she said.
While Boysko did not specifically address the amendment in her comments, she added that she is confident the investigation will “shed light on the facts of the case.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
SUBSCRIBE
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
The content presents a detailed account of a politically charged issue involving abortion rights and parental consent in Virginia, highlighting perspectives primarily from Republican figures and conservative sources while also including responses from Democrats. The focus on Republican strategies, conservative media, and parental rights themes, alongside balanced reporting on Democratic reactions and legal context, suggests a center-right leaning. The article does not overtly endorse one side but emphasizes Republican political messaging and concerns, reflecting a moderate conservative viewpoint.
