AS I REPORTED back in March, it didn't take long for "renewable energy businessman" Sen. Tony Strickland to dodge a vote on a renewable energy bill. That bill, SB 14, would require investor-owned utilities to receive one-third of their power from renewable energy sources by 2020.

Well he's gone and done it again.

This time he failed to vote in committee on AB 920, a bill which would provide incentives for customers to use wind or solar energy systems. According to the proposed legislation by Assembly member Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael): 

The author believes this will encourage homeowners and businesses to conserve more electricity (and thus have more surplus power they can sell to the utility) and will allow property owners to install the maximum number of solar panels on their home.

Our Republican state senator justified his "renewable energy" ballot designation during his campaign against Democrat Hannah-Beth Jackson by his partnership in a wave energy company formed around the same time he decided to run in a green-leaning district. And here's a quote straight off his web page:

"I am working with Democrats and Republicans to transition California to a renewable, more energy efficient economy to jumpstart the economy, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, improve the environment, and lower energy prices."
-Senator Tony Strickland

So why then would Strickland take a walk on two important renewable energy bills? When questioning why politicians do what they do it is always wise to find out who supports or opposes a particular bill. 

AB 920 and SB 14 are opposed by Pacific Gas & Electric, which donated $1,250 to Tony Strickland's state senate campaign, $5,600 to Strickland's controller's race and $5,000 to his 2002 Assembly race, according to the very handy online site followthemoney.org.

Strickland's wife, Assembly member Audra Strickland, just plain voted against AB 920, so I will give her some credit for not being dodgy. I would ideally like to give Tony some credit, too, for his package of renewable energy legislation introduced a few months ago, which largely consisted of tax credits, continuing his no-revenue mantra.

But he is not consistent in backing renewable energy legislation, especially that opposed by his donors, and this highlights his credibility problem.

IN A BIT OF RELATED NEWS: According to the Mendocino Beacon it would seem Strickland's fledging wave energy company GreenWave, which is still in the preliminary permit phase and hasn't done much of anything yet, is one of the few left standing with proposed projects off the California coast.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company  and California Wave Energy Partners recently pulled projects, according to the Beacon. GreenWave's application has riled the locals up there with "more interveners and more people commenting than any other hydrokinetic project in the nation," the Beacon writes.

IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG. State Sen. Tony Strickland, (R-Moorpark) who listed himself as a "renewable energy businessman" on the ballot in the Senate District 19 race last fall, predictably failed to vote on renewable energy legislation on Tuesday.

The bill, SB 14, would require investor-owned utilities to receive one-third of their power from renewable energy sources by 2020. These utilities are now required to purchase 20 percent of the energy they sell from renewable sources by next year. The current legislation, authored by Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) would revise the requirement to match one ordered by the governor in November.

The 21-16 vote was mostly along party lines. While in the Assembly, Strickland did vote against SB 1078 in 2002, which set the current 20 percent renewable energy requirement for utilities. He also opposed most other environmentally friendly legislation.

The senator, who justified his ballot designation by his partnership in a wave energy company formed around the same time he decided to run in a green-leaning district, apparently received little or no income from GreenWave Energy Solutions last year, according to a Form 700 document filed with the state. The form listed his chief source of income as his wife Audra Strickland's Assembly salary. He also received income from the sale of real estate.

Now, to be fair, Strickland told Ventura County Star reporter Timm Herdt last year that he voted against the 2002 bill because he opposes government mandates. But this year he decided just not to vote at all. Dodging tricky votes and uncomfortable situations seems to run in the family.

Tuesday's walk only serves to underscore the very disingenuous campaign he ran last fall. Voters would expect someone who claims such green credentials to support public policy which promotes renewable energy practices, especially when it has been mandated by our Republican governor.

At least nobody can accuse him of helping out his own "business."