|
4-00
<br />SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
<br />January 12, 1977
<br />A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Colton was held on the above given date in the Conference Room
<br />in the Civic Center, located at 650 North La Cadena Drive, Colton, California, at 7:45 p. m., Mayor Beltran presiding.
<br />Notice of Special Meeting was given on January 11, 1977, in compliance with Government Code Section 54956.
<br />ROLL CALL:
<br />Council members present were Hayes, Cisneros, Rehrer, Gonzales, and Mayor Beltran. Also present was City Manager
<br />Huffaker, City Attorney Edwards, and Deputy City Clerk Veralrud. Absent was City Clerk Ramos.
<br />Electric Rate Increases
<br />Southern California Edison Company
<br />Mayor Beltran stated the purpose for the Special Meeting this evening is to discuss the status of the rate increase
<br />cases against the Southern California Edison Company and participating Cities, which consist of Anaheim, Azusa,
<br />Banning, Colton and Riverside.
<br />Mayor Beltran then introduced Mr. George Spiegel, Attorney at Law, representing the participating Cities, from
<br />Washington, D. C.
<br />Mr. Spiegel related to the Council Members the proceedings that have taken place through both Court and Commission
<br />hearings with regard to the law suits filed against Southern California Edison Company, opposing their wholesale
<br />rate increase cases filed with the Federal Power Commission.
<br />Mr. Peter K. Matt, Attorney from the law firm of Spiegel & McDiarmid, gave a status report on Edison rate increase
<br />cases, filed May 8, 1973, and January 2, 1974, both of which were issued Court decisions granting Edison the full
<br />rate increase requested. Mr. Matt stated following the Court decision, a Brief on Exceptions for both cases were
<br />filed with the Commission, and these cases are now pending Commission decision, which may take anywhere from six
<br />months to two years.
<br />Mr. Matt reported that the rate increase case filed by Edison on October 31, 1975, is still under investigation and
<br />the current schedule is for Cities to file their testimony on January 25, 1977, with hearings to commence March 8, 1977.
<br />Mr. Spiegel advised it is difficult to avoid litigation with Southern California Edison because they will not negotiate
<br />a rate increase case before they file it with the Federal Power Commission; thus, the legal process can take anywhere
<br />from three to four years before a settlement can be reached.
<br />Mr. Spiegel then advised that possibly the City of Colton could consider entering into an agreement with a power
<br />plant to purchase surplus energy that can be transmitted to the City by the wholesale utility company.
<br />Mr. Spiegel then stated that the Cities of Anaheim and Riverside have entered into this type of agreement with the
<br />Nevada Power Company and Southern California Edison, whereby surplus energy is purchased from the Nevada Power
<br />plant and transmitted to their respective cities through Southern California Edison's transmission lines.
<br />Mr. Allen Watts, Attorney, Anaheim, California, advised the City of Anaheim has a five year agreement with the
<br />Nevada Power Company, and, through this agreement, it is estimated that Anaheim will realize a saving of approxi-
<br />mately $1,000,000. per year.
<br />Mr. Harold Preece, Electric Utility Superintendent, asked Mr. Watts the cost to the City of Anaheim for this agree-
<br />ment.
<br />Mr. Watts replied the cost was $12,500,000., and the cost to the City of Riverside was $3,500,000.
<br />Mr. Spiegel then advised another saving is the use of coal for fuel in lieu of oil, which is done by many of the mid-
<br />western states.
<br />Mayor Beltran then spoke about Edison's Fuel Adjustment Cost and asked if it is possible that Edison may be using
<br />coat as a source of fuel, however, still charging the Cities for the cost of oil.
<br />Mr. Matt replied that this is not the case, however, it has been determined that Edison is charging the Cities a
<br />higher rate for the oil as a fuel than they, themselves, are actually paying. Mr. Matt said that Edison has a very
<br />intricate method of financing for this Fuel Adjustment Clause, which is now under investigation.
<br />Discussion was then held with regard to the purchase of power from various generating plants as a more economical
<br />way of obtaining energy for cities.
<br />Mr. Watts spoke about the Inner Mountain Power Plant in Utah, which will be completed in 1985, and a joint powers
<br />agreement between Utah and the Cities of Anaheim, Burbank, Glendale, Los Angeles, Pasadena and Riverside. Mr.
<br />Watts advised this power plant will be a 3,000 megawatt plant, fueled by coal, with 85 percent of the power being
<br />distributed to the Member Cities in California.
<br />Mr. Preece asked the cost per kilowatt for this plant.
<br />Mr. Watts answered approximately $1,200 to $1,300 per kilowatt.
<br />Mr. Preece stated, in other words, the total cost for a 3,000 megawatt plant will be approximately 3 to 4 billion
<br />dollars.
<br />Mrs. Marlene Alexander, Member of the Colton Utilities Commission, asked Mr. Watts if the reason for the reduction
<br />in rates for the City of Anaheim, which occurred approximately December 29, 1976, was due to the agreement they had
<br />with the Nevada Power Company.
<br />Mr. Watts replied this may have had some effect, however, not necessarily so.
<br />Councilman Gonzales asked if Southern California Edison is receptive to these agreements between cities and power
<br />plants.
<br />Mr. Spiegel answered actually they are, because in the long run, Edison is going to benefit by this type of arrange-
<br />ment as anyone else.
<br />Mr. Preece said he would like to ask Mr. Edward Cecil, Engineer with R. W. Beck & Associates, where these rates are
<br />going and if these increases will continue.
<br />JAN 12 1977 .
<br />
|