OPALCO's public messaging (website, quick facts, budget reports) never quantifies or highlights this OPALCO share as "ratepayer-funded." Instead, they repeatedly say:

"Funded by member subscriptions and grants."

"Member survey results show preference for no rate funding; projects are not funded through rates."

"These projects are funded 100% by individual member investors" (for community solar array).

Battery: "Received a grant... that allocates funds to Washington consumers."

They separate the solar array (explicitly subscription-funded) from the full microgrid (battery + infrastructure), rarely discussing the complete cost split in member-facing materials.

In budget packets and quick facts, similar projects are described with "offsetting funds from grants" or "member contributions," implying no net rate impact (due to benefits like demand savings offsetting costs).

No line-item disclosure like "non-subscribers contributed $1.425M via rates"—it's treated as internal capital, not a direct pass-through.

This selective emphasis (highlighting subscriptions/grants, omitting the residual OPALCO share) can give the impression that non-subscribers pay nothing, even though the co-op's structure means they actually do. It's not outright deception—but it lacks full transparency on the indirect burden.

If this concerns you, public records like OPALCO's IRS Form 990s (via ProPublica) show overall financials (capital additions, equity changes), though not project-specific. Member letters in local papers (e.g., Orcasonian) have raised similar points about hidden costs.