Comment Up
Orlando Utility Commission was chosen as our new energy provider.
The Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC: "The Reliable One") was chartered in 1923. It's about as old as Lake Worth Utilities. The difference in this facility and ours is that Orlando has the population to generate the resources allowing it to be one of the best electric facilities in the State. It takes money to run an electric utility plant, something of which our small city is in short supply.
OUC is the second largest locally owned electric
utility in Florida and the 16th largest in the nation. The company is
governed by a five-member commission (including the Mayor of Orlando), and is responsible for all operating policies.
OUC owns and operates the Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center and
portions of other power plants in Florida. Notable ownership includes
the Indian River Plant north of Cocoa, a former OUC plant now owned by RRI Energy; as well as a 6.08% stake in the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant near Fort Pierce. OUC also owns eight water plants.
Lake Worth's Select Committee, consisting of 7 members (city commissioners, Finance Director and Chair of the Utility Board), all voted for Orlando Utility Commission as this company was the lowest bidder across the board based on the city's requirements in the RFP.
As price and terms plus reliability were our top considerations, this was a good, sound vote by our city and void of politics except when former candidate for District 4, Lisa Maxwell, Chair of the Electric Utility Board, condemned a former commission for not getting a bid on the sale of our utility in the RFP and not requiring that all bidders have their costs made public. At the time it was originally discussed, Sue Hersey said that it should be a separate RFP to sell our Utility. Last night attorney Schef said that if bids were public then we would have had totally different results. Under Florida law, bidders have the right to protect trade secrets and price is a part of that.
8 comments:
Guess that bus ride put on by FPL didn't do the trick!!!
OUC was really the only choice. As you said at the meeting Lynn, they should pick the one with the lowest cost and shortest term.
They took your advice. They must be visionary.
Now, since we see what is entailed in making such a choice and the cost associated with it, we need to immediately start looking at what comes next.
It was stated last night that installing new generators at our own plant is the lowest cost long range plan.
Sounds intriguing.
Selling our utility to a buyer like FPL also sounds intriguing.
Both plans have drawbacks. The only one we know the cost and perceived benefit is the plan to build generation.
We need to put out an RFP or an RFI (request for interest) in the purchase of the asset to provide long range cost savings and reliability.
This time, let's scrutinize the RFP a little better. Shouldn't be trade secrets involved in the offer to buy our utility.
I would have liked to see FPL as the low bidder, but they had the same chance as did OUC. Like Maxwell said, she was less comfortable with OUC, an MOU than with FPL, an IOU just because of their make up.
Just remember, we get to go through all this angst again in another 2 to 3 years.
No, they weren't visionary. What they were, however, was smart. Any other choice would have been wrong. I hope that they can work out the penalty clause--way too much money.
The penalty clause only pertains to someone breaking a contract. But we would never do that, would we?
Apparently FPL's penalty clause was quite a bit heftier than OUC's and one of the deciding factors.
Doesnt FPL own those large transmission towers along I-75?
Does OUC pay a fee to FPL to transmit power through those power lines?
This outcome is what happens when you cannot see the forest for the trees.
LW will no longer have to worry about the new 138kV tie line that is in the budget as you will either be rebuked outright, or the price will become so high that you will not be able to afford it. Also, do not become overly concerned about the lack of power when the next storm knocks out the 138kV, as FPL may decide that their service territory takes precedence over LW and OUC.
You can also forget about selling the utility in the short term as FPL will have no reason to purchase a bedroom community that has no manufacturing base, and pay generation payments to OUC at the same time.
Apparently FPL's price and terms were much, much higher. Even the penalty clause was higher according to Sue Hersey. We now will go out and work on what we will do 3 years down the road. Times are changing. Technology is changing. I don't like a company who seemed to believe that they had an "in" with us to allow OUC to give us a better deal or holding us up to hostage on our future. Don't like dealing with people like that. Don't like dealing with people coming in at the last minute and giving us better price and terms such as FMPA did. We took our best bet based on the criteria of the RFP and now we will deal with the long term future.
I believe the second tieline has been in the works for a while even though FMPA has been our supplier.
This is a 3 year contract so after that we could sell to FPL if there is any reason to do so.
This sounds like a self important blowhard who is trying to sound knowledgeable and intelligent.
Post a Comment