On the Agenda tonight
Comment Up
On the Agenda:
- Terminate the leasing agreement with Anderson & Carr for services at the Casino Building - SUMMARY: This agreement permits the termination, without cause, upon five days notice. The City wishes to exercise its right to terminate. (I wish that we had a city commission that terminated our outside counsel, Brian Joslyn, after the first year instead of dragging the Greater Bay case out for 3 years to end up recommending settlement for $1.6 million)
- Settlement agreement in the case of Reyes, Jordan & Drenski v. City of Lake Worth -SUMMARY: This agreement resolves the lawsuit by three former Utilities Department employees.BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION: After two mediations, the plaintiffs have agreed to a proposed settlement of all claims. Funding for the agreement to come from the Electric Utility Fund. (These guys need their jobs back)
- Discuss creating an ordinance to insure electric rate parity with the surrounding market within a five-year period- SUMMARY: This item is to discuss the creation of an ordinance that would formally create a five-year goal mandate to reduce the City’s electric rates to match the surrounding market rates as provided by FP&L. BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION: During the January 29, 2013, Selection Committee meeting, a request was made to create an ordinance setting a five-year goal to reduce the City’s electric rate to market rate. The ordinance would require a supermajority vote of the Commission to make any changes to the plan. The ordinance would also set the framework for the implementation of a five-year business plan for the Electric Utility to implement the necessary changes and set annual revenue limitations as the rates step down. (Not sure how you can compare our local utility with a huge conglomerate such as FPL. Not one company in the State can compare to FPL's rates which, incidentally, they did not offer to us when we were looking for an energy provider). This Ordinance, although sounding good, is probably politics over practicality.
7 comments:
Lake Worth needs a person with vision to make the pool profitable and a venue we can be as proud of as we are of our new Casino.
If you wished that you had a city commission that terminated Joslyn 3 years ago that would have been under the leadership of the best city manager and best commission ever. You were on a first name basis with those that were fired or voted out or decided not to run because they knew the beach lawsuit outcome would cost them any election.
Can't you ask them why they didn't terminate the contract?
I should not have posted the above because it really is laughable. Where do you guys dream up this stuff?
Joslyn was promising them a "slam dunk." Most commissions believe their attorneys.
If you recall, I spoke AGAINST the beach redevelopment and Against TAKING THE 5 MIL. I think it was you who wanted to re-design the beach and even said that taking away the 164 upper level parking spaces and walking up from the lower parking lot was just a dandy idea.
Lynn,
You said; “Not one company in the State can compare to FPL's rates which, incidentally, they did not offer to us when we were looking for an energy provider.”
The only way we could have rates comparable to FP&L’s rates would be for us, LW Electric Utilities, to be acquired by FP&L. That was not an option for us to consider with the way the current RFP was written. The way our extremely well paid consultant wrote the RFP, under the direction of the elected commission at that time was to assist us in getting out of the FMPA & All-Requirements Project and help us procure a wholesale power supplier for our future electric needs. We all knew it would be 5 years before we could legally get out of those agreements, but we also knew it would take time to procure and take all the necessary steps to make the switch. No where do I remember us asking for proposals on up-grading our antiquated generators as part of this RFP but somehow the Wartsila proposal was put in the mix.
If your statement that said “they did not offer to us when we were looking for an energy provider”, did you mean FP&L did not offer us the same retail rates their customer in FL pay? Our electric rates are set by our commission, unlike FP&L’s. Remember, after numerous requests by the commissioner and Juice Board to our utility director and staff to let them know what we pay FMPA for our power now. After months and months of them not getting that questioned answered we finally learned that the cost is only about 30% of the almost 60 million dollars the city collects in rates each year. The remaining 70% of that nearly 60 million dollars we spend on electricity each year goes toward running the utility, supplementing the general fund, paying consultants, lawyers, settling lawsuits, funding trips to out of state conferences for elected officials and financing The Casino.
Your statement “Not one company in the State can compare to FPL's rates” is right. Of the 33 different municipally owned power providers in the State only 2 are within 10% of FP&L’s rate. Until we can offer electric rate payers the same rates as FP&L and finally shed the BIG DISINCENTIVE that has handicapped us for decades, we will never be a financially sustainable city.
The only way we will see electric rates comparable to FP&L is to invite them to sit down with us, like Vero did and let them tell us what they would do for us to get us out of a business we’ll never be competitive in.
To state it again, Sue Hersey said that a separate and distinct RFP was needed to sell the utility. This was not done because it was not the mindset of the commission at that time to ever sell our Utility. actually, Why go through all of that $$$$ and time when you need a vote of the residents.
How can you vote to sell something before you know what someone is willing to pay for it. I know it's the chicken and the egg thing, but I would want to know what someone is willing to pay before I would vote on it. And getting a consultant to give you an oppion of what something might be worth is not the same thing as having an offer to buy from a qulified buyer. You know that from your RE days.
Possibly, Greg. However, what someone might be willing to pay for something NOW, versus several years down the road is another story. Also, if the owner is reluctant to sell or does not want to sell, why would a buyer give an offer unless, of course, the offer is more than the property is worth and he is just dying to buy it. In the case of our utility, neither one is true. FPL or some other utility will not buy it for more than it is worth--probably 25 cents on the dollar if we're lucky--and they are NOT dying to buy it.
I agree with your concept on a consultant, but at least the consultant will give you the best professional opinion, at the moment. If you go to a doctor for an opinion and it is bad news or whatever, it is always wise to get a 2nd or 3rd opinion. I happen to like consultants even if some of you don't.
To divert a little this did not happen in the Greater Bay law suit where Joslyn had 4 mock juries. MOCK is used for a reason and it is fantasy based on Joslyn's best arguments against us. Farcical.
Post a Comment