 |
PUBLIC POWER AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
February 7, 2006
Members Present: Stephen Rich, Chairperson, Frank DeOrio, Timothy C. Lattimore, Robert M. Buschman, Robert Bergan, James Dacey, William Graney and Mike Luksa
Staff Present: Nancy Hussey and Michael Long
Members Absent: Vijay Mital (in India)
Special meeting of the Public Power Agency of February 7, 2006 called to order by Stephen Rich at 7:30 a.m. Steve stated that there have been conversations as we have gone through the grant application. As a group here at the City we have been working towards exploring the options of municipalization of the electrical system and as we look at this grant application it really is becoming a joint effort with the County and City and the County is moving forward very rapidly as well. We are coming to the thought process that maybe rather than look at two entities working together, as the City of Auburn is part of Cayuga County that we should look towards referring this matter completely to the County and as Frank and his committee has been exploring the RFQ process and it was done with the City in mind and now the
process needs to be revisited. We wanted to have a discussion this morning to see what other members of this committee thought about the City’s Municipal Power Authority recommending that the process of municipalizing the electric be assumed completely by the County of Cayuga. It was opened up for discussion by the committee.
Jim Dacey asked what Steve meant when he said let the County take over? Steve stated that Mike Long has done the work on the grant application and it is an intergovernmental application and we would continue with our commitment on funding the $10,000 on the assumption that the grant is received we would continue with our portion to make that happen. However rather than the City expending money as we proceed with this and the County expending money, it seems to be a point of logic that there be one power agency for the electricity rather than the City and County having two agencies, two committees and all we are talking here is just the electricity. If we go down that road it allows this group focus on projects for energy savings, alternative sources of energy, things that we have been doing in the past
year, that we have been doing very well, but conversely that we have been criticized for in that this seems to be our focus. Jim Dacey stated he thinks we should say joint when we refer to this in our discussion process as a joint committee. He doesn’t think it is fair to the people that have worked the Task Force, this Board to move forward and say the County is taking over and that would lead these people to believe that we are backing out of this totally and he didn’t think it was the case and doesn’t feel that anyone on our Board feels that way. In the future, it should be referred to as jointly.
Bob Bergan asked with the grant proposal that went in, when we are working with the County are we talking about the power system that goes beyond the City limits onto some of the donut towns? Steve stated yes and it would appear from the many conversations and statements that have been made that this group, and a speaker at Council meeting last week criticized us in that we met for an hour a month, we focus on an agenda which is reviewing our projects, talking about energy savings and then we are worried about the next agenda. Part of that may be a good point, also from that standpoint there are many of us in the private sector that don’t have hours upon hours to focus on this and if there is a group that has the time to truly devote to this then we should look toward that group for the direction to do
the work on it. Every one of us has a common goal that we would like to see, less expensive power. If there are people that have the ability to move forward with it, make it a co-effort, but to take the responsibility or that complete responsibility out of this committee.
Bob Bergan asked if the County Energy Board as a result of the referendum last November is that up and running? It was stated that it is. Frank DeOrio stated that the concern he has is that the original thrust from this group was to look for a consultant that would be able to investigate the feasibility for the City of Auburn, now it has become a Countywide project, need to resolve the idea that the consultants were asked to look at the City of Auburn. Are these same group of consultants willing to look at the County as whole and how do we move from this step to that step. Frank stated they had done a good job, the sub-committee, putting together the RFQ and whittling it down to 3 very competent consultants. His concern now is with the grant and the shared services and the idea of a
whole Countywide municipalization were do we go from here? Jim Dacey stated that we go back to the 3 that we have chosen and ask them if they will include the County and what the pricing. Frank stated we are not at the point of looking at pricing, but the process now would be to interview the final 3 and then select 1 and then work out a scope of services. The original request was for the City of Auburn, in that request we had some consultants who had to back out because of their relationship with NYSEG, namely, Black & Veatch and Acres International. Now that we are dealing with two additional utility companies, namely National Grid and Rochester Gas & Electric, I think basically we have to go back and ask these consultants if they are willing to take on Countywide so we have to get that information out to them and get a feeling that yes we can or no we can’t because we have a relationship with RG&E. That would complicate this
particular point of the process but we do need to move off a City study because it involves a Countywide project.
Bob Bergan asked because there are two energy power agencies the City would still be involved but that the County more or less would take the lead? Steve stated that was correct. One of the things we want to avoid here is duplication of effort and also duplication of expense. There are very valid concerns about the cost of this entire project from simply studying it to potentially implementing it. At our last meeting Rob Buschman brought up exploring the possibility of an Executive Director, again, here is another expense, and the City is not in a position to bear. Looking at the grant application, thinking about the duplication of effort, thinking about the expense, and it would allow this group to go back to something that we have done very well for the last year and we can continue to
focus on that. That becomes our primary focus instead of the very heavy responsibility of trying to do something about the electricity. Jim Dacey asked if there was any information on track record on this sort of agency where a County is lead on it? Bob Bergan stated that there was one done in Chemung County on a Countywide basis, they were very thorough, they retained consultants, they had a good community group, the had people come from the PSC come down and consult with them. This was done in the mid-90’s.
Frank stated none of the questions we have will be answered adequately until we have consultants review it with an professional eye. We should move forward with that at this point in time find a consultant that can be able to do the job to answer all the questions that have come up. Can we afford it, the time frame, the hurdles, and the obstacles and until we get to that point we are going to be second-guessing. Bill Graney suggested that our sub-committee confer with the County. Frank said if they want to get into the process how we selected the consultants or how we identify them that would be beneficial. It is important to get back to these consultants at the time frame that we had established and say that either: (A) we will continue with our process and the City moves forward on
its own and the County moves forward on its own or (B) ask these consultants if they want to participate in a Countywide project. If they do, then we need to get together and decide on who selects the consultant and who manages that operation from there on. That might be the easiest step is to get the sub-committee to meet with the committee from the County, and see how they want to process the original list of consultants and then when we come up with a way to handle it we can report back to the full committee. Jim Dacey asked if the County had formed a sub-committee to look at this and John Montone stated that the County has. They have two members and need to add two more. Jim Dacey made a motion that the City’s sub-committee and the County’s sub-committee meet and discuss the RFQ process and move forward on it. Rob Buschman seconded that motion. All in favor. Frank asked that the committees meet as soon as possible and
John Montone said probably by the first of next week. Tim Lattimore stated that in regards to the RFQ, he would like to make sure that when it is studied that the Auburn system be broken out. Frank stated that we want to make sure it is not looked at as a entire Countywide system, if a portion of the City or the City alone would survive the economic analysis and test, we would want that included. Tim stated he wanted to see if the City just wanted to buy the lighting system from NYSEG that the City might want to continue that portion of it. If the whole study is not doable by the County or the City but portions of the infrastructure are affordable, we would want to break those out. For assessment purposes we would want to see what the City’s system is. Steve asked if there was any more discussion on this portion of the meeting. Steve made a motion that we go into executive session. Seconded by Jim Dacey. All in favor.
Meeting resumed and Frank stated that this was a special meeting and that we are still meeting on Wednesday, February 15, 2006 at 7:30 a.m. Motion to adjourn made by James Dacey and seconded by Frank DeOrio. Meeting adjourned at 8:25 a.m.
| |
