Amendment one -should I vote yes or no. I have tried to read it and don't quite

[patricia92243]

understand what I am reading. Any help will be appreciated. I want to vote tomorrow if I can get this straightened out.

[anoNY42]

1. It's generally viewed as a bad deal

for solar by folks on the left. It uses nice language like making solar a constitutional right (as if someone is trying to ban solar, which is not the case), but it also could lead to power companies not paying as much for power sent back to the grid by the solar system.

Power companies want a law stating they can charge a solar panel owner a fee for a grid connection based on the theory that that person is not paying his "fair share" of the maintenance costs for the grid (since the maintenance costs are rolled into the price of electricity, and that person is not using as much electricity from the grid due to his panels). Some folks think this is logical, some do not. This amendment makes laws allowing power companies to do this more likely.

[patricia92243]

5. Thanks, you make it easy for me to understand. I'll be voting no.

[anoNY42]

6. I'm a "no" too

[HAB911]

2. Please vote NO

It's intended to keep control of solar in the hands of the power companies to maintain their monopoly

[HAB911]

3. ADDITIONALLY

Please vote NO for Judicial Retention for the three Supreme Court Justices that allowed this extremely confusing wording on the ballot.

Labarga, Canady, and Polston.

Not up for retention but voting not to allow was Justice Pariente. She said in her dissent, "The ballot title is affirmatively misleading"

[Callmecrazy]

7. Yeah, I voted No on that...

The Utilities want to charge people with Photovoltaic (PV) systems a maintenance fee and they don't want to pay for the power that PV systems deliver to the grid.

[patricia92243]

8. THANKS EVERYONE! As usual, I can always depend on DU :)

[mitch96]

9. Follow the money

FPL and Duke energy are behind it..... Why? so they can control the profits...
Vote NO!!