Random thoughts

Here is a post by GeeGuy and the Official Minutes of an Electric City Power Board Meeting, from back in March.

ECW. Mr. Liebert asked Coleen Balzarini whether we had an actual written contract with SME for the purchase of power, setting of rates, etc. Silence ensued, he asked again. Balzarini said yes, there is a Power Purchase Contract. He said that’s it? Nothing else? And she just smiled and nodded.

He pressed her again.

“Well, I hope we have one,” she quipped. Her tone, according to Mr. Liebert, was somewhat flippant, suggesting (to him, anyway) that of course we would not proceed this far without a contract.

“Hope springs eternal,” he replied.

ECPI. He then asked if there was a contract between SME and the City. Executive Director Balzarini responded that there is an all requirements contract between the City and SME through 2011.

(Note from ECW: excerpt from the City Clerk, Peggy Bourne’s, letter to me of January 29, 2007: “You will note that ECPI has not passed any resolutions or entered into any contracts.”)

Now, I find this interesting. I happened to be at that meeting, and I cannot say I ever heard “there is an all requirements contract between the City and SME through 2011.” I did hear “Power Purchase Contract.”

At this same meeting, there were a couple other things.

“Mr. Lewin was also concerned about the City’s sales of electricity below cost and how the City’s water credits would be repaid if Highwood Station is not built.” The way I remember it, Mr. Lewin was not just “concerned” he asked questions. I find the official minutes to be rather misleading here, because he asked questions that were not answered.

I’ll bring this next one up for only one reason. Cheryl Reichert also asked if J.T. Boyd would be available to discuss studies of coal supplies in the Great Falls area. This question was not answered. I happen to know, at the beginning of this whole sordid mess, SME did, in fact, discuss opening coal mines in the Stocket area. However, the coal out there is lower quality, and not exceptable for the plant, which is actually addressed in the EIS, that PRB or comparable quality coal will be burned.

Carol Fisher asked the Board from where ECPI gets its money. Bill Ryan responded the ECPI’s revenues come from its power sales. Coleen Balzarini added that the City Commission approved the issuance of up to $2 million of general obligation bonds for its share of development costs for Highwood Station. (I just put that in there because it makes me chuckle.)

Ole Stimac thanked the Board for its work and said that he is excited for plant construction to begin and for the jobs it will bring. (Ole Stimac is the Union rep for the local Plumbers and Pipefitters. I wonder if he knew in March that the Unions would get the jobs.)

Lets skip ahead to the May 7th meeting of ECPI.Of note in the Directors Report: The team will also begin developing potential “green” products for ECPI customers who are interested. Um, would this include wind power? Wonder why this “Advisory Board” never mentioned it to Commissioner Beecher. And that was May. They just said the same thing again?
At this time the Development Agreement was also put on hold. Then Phase 2 tasks for R.W. Beck were outlined. Check this out. “The cost of Beck’s work will be covered by the $2 million authorized by the City Commission and will be repaid at the time of financing or from the City’s economic revolving fund.”

In Communications:

Executive Director Coleen Balzarini discussed the following articles with the Board:

1. Wind article from Arizona Daily Star
2. CO2 capture article from Lee Newspapers
3. Great Falls Tribune article on Great Falls’ air quality

Huh, more wind. Does this Advisory Board really tell the Commission anything?

Now, these next couple make me go ?

He also asked about the basis for setting ECPI rates. Ms. Balzarini responded that ECPI provides cost-based electricity, so the cost of providing the power is what is charged to the customer. Bill Ryan added that ECPI uses a non-profit business model.

Neil Taylor said that he would like to see the Board pass a resolution saying that taxpayers would not be affected in the event Highwood Station was not built.
Mary Jolley asked if the rates are self-sufficient. Ms. Balzarini responded that the rates are sufficient to cover the City’s cost of procuring the electricity.

So, exactly how are we going to pay back that water credit? Oh, wait, she answers that question in the next meeting.

The City Commission passed Resolution 9534 in Dec. 2005. Resolution 9534 is a General Obligation of the City, meaning the City’s general fund is a co-signer on the non-voted general obligation debt authorized by the City Commission. She added that that portion of debt issued for development costs will are planned to be repaid by revenues from power sales.

So, let me get this right. ECPI provides cost-based electricity, so the cost of providing the power is what is charged to the customer. Ms. Balzarini responded that the rates are sufficient to cover the City’s cost of procuring the electricity. But the can repay debt from revenues from power sales.

How?

How can we still be asking the same questions?

How can we still be getting different answers to the same questions?

15 August 2007 | Life | Comments