Naperville’s City Council has told staff to stop weighing whether to sell its electric utility and instead zero in on two paths forward: joining or building a new joint action agency, or buying power directly off the wholesale market without owning any generation infrastructure. The direction narrows what had been a four-option review of how the city will keep the lights on once its current power-supply arrangement runs its course.
Naperville has long gotten its electricity through the Illinois Municipal Electric Agency, the 32-member joint action agency that, according to the Chicago Tribune, supplies the city with coal-generated power. The council voted 6-3 in February to pause contract negotiations with IMEA, a decision that came after the city had authorized staff back in August 2025 to negotiate a new agreement, and after IMEA had requested a contract extension running through 2055. Council members at the time cited a lack of clarity on IMEA’s future power sources and costs, and noted the current contract does not allow Naperville to procure energy from other sources, per the same account.
The city’s existing IMEA contract has been described in differing terms — the Tribune has reported it runs until 2035, while NCTV17 has cited an end date of September 30, 2034. Either way, staff and council are treating the window as an opportunity to rethink how Naperville buys power for the following decades.
Four Options Narrowed to Two
Earlier this year, staff laid out four structural paths: joining a joint action agency, market participation with asset ownership, market participation without asset ownership, and selling the utility outright, according to NCTV17. City staff has since discouraged both selling the utility and pursuing market participation with asset ownership, and the council formally rejected the sale option. Losing the utility would mean losing local control over future rates and the city’s energy mix, per the dossier’s account of that discouragement.
Market participation with asset ownership, which typically involves 15- to 20-year deals, was also steered away from by staff. That leaves the two options council has now directed staff to research further: joining or creating a new joint action agency, or participating directly in the wholesale market without owning generation assets.
What a New Joint Agency Would Require
A joint action agency is a group of member utilities that pool their resources to secure electricity, offering shared staffing and economies of scale, the Tribune reported. About 80% of public power utilities within PJM territory already belong to one. But joining or forming a new one is not simple — it requires significant negotiations and agreement from other utilities on both the agency’s requirements and Naperville’s goals.
The timeline is tight. If Naperville goes this route, the city would need to either identify an existing group to join or begin building a new agency from scratch no later than June 2027, the Tribune reported, and any new agency would need a board of directors established by June 2028.
Buying Power on the Open Market
The alternative — market participation without asset ownership — would have Naperville securing both electricity and capacity straight from the PJM Wholesale Market rather than through city-owned generation, according to The Cool Down. It would let the city avoid locking into one long-term energy mix and pursue newer technologies such as battery energy storage, while similar benefits could also be reached through power purchase agreements or energy contracts with suppliers.
The tradeoffs are real. Staff has warned the approach exposes Naperville to wholesale-market price volatility and would require standing up a new energy management office, or outsourcing that work, per NCTV17. Citizen Portal has reported that staff estimated PJM collateral requirements could run roughly $12 million to $24 million depending on how many months of deposits are required. Under this model, utility rates would probably need to be revisited every three months, The Cool Down reported, and staff has suggested a 2027 rate study as the next step in evaluating it, according to Citizen Portal. South Sioux City, Nebraska, has been cited by NCTV17 as a community that has closely adopted this market-participation model.
A Vision Statement, and Some Dissent
Alongside the procurement debate, the council settled on a vision statement for the electric utility, one that prioritizes reliability, sustainability, affordability, flexibility and local control. Council member Supna Jain suggested the statement, and Mary Gibson backed it for containing five interrelated pillars she said apply directly to the utility and energy-procurement decision ahead.
Not everyone signed on. Council members Josh McBroom and Nate Wilson did not support the vision statement and expressed hesitancy specifically about including sustainability in it. Benny White pushed back, arguing sustainability belongs in the statement because a Naperville community survey showed residents prioritize it. City Manager Doug Krieger, who has recommended joining a new joint action agency, said he will review the broader mission statement in light of the newly adopted vision.
What Comes Next
Reopening negotiations with IMEA remains an option on the table even as staff pursues the two preferred paths, though no final procurement decision has been made. Naperville city staff will research the feasibility of both joining a new joint action agency and participating in the wholesale energy market, with findings and next-rate-study recommendations expected to come back to the council in the summer of 2027.
