This is the jist of the situation, though some of the facts may be approximate.

Any beginning will start in one direciton but if it does not recieve periodic adjustment and energy it will begin to drift and become something else. 

This is the case with public power movement, what began as a demand for the elimination of National Grid's monopoly but the municipalization of the lines; may become just another middle mand scheme.  

 We must again show our power to direct the movement towards our initial goal.

Having recieved the first 1/4 of Source One's feasibility study we can afirm that the creation of a department of energy to: own and maintian transmission facilities, buy energy from producers on the wholesale market, and construct or partner to build and operate power plant; has the best possibility of acheiving the intended goals.  

In order for Source One to complete the study the mayor must decide which course to study further: aggregation, Co-op, or municipalizaiton. 

Co-op is untested in NY and would require approval of state agencies. 

Aggregation allows NG to keep it's monopoly and serves only to eliminate middle-man schemes. 

Municipilization through the creation of a department will achieve the goal of reducing costs, gaining control, and is easily implemented by a Common Council vote.  National Grid's "contract" with the city has been handed down since 1890 and allowes the city to purchase transmissioninfastructure at a regulated price.  National Grid will probably take the city to court, and this possibility must be explored further.  

We must not be led astray by the legal ease of aggregation.  Let the mayor  know that you want Source One to continue studying the municipilization option.