CC Minutes 05/12/2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Commission Meeting May 12, 2003 Page 12 3. Mr. David Henson, 233 Bridle Path, Casselberry, Florida, stated that Progress Energy was a company that did not honor their agreement with the City and they does not deserve the City's trust and have not earned a thirty year franchise contract. He also addressed the stranded cost issue, Section G, stating that this was a decision that should be made by FERC since the arbitrator has ruled there were no stranded costs. Commission Input: Vice Mayor/Commissioner Al Clark stated that he appreciated the efforts put roi'ward by Progress Energy in the agreement would prefer to continue discussion to a later meeting in order to give staff time to look at the ramifications as to the economic impact of accepting an agreement at this point. He favored negotiating for a shorter franchise period than thirty years. Commissioner Linda Hart said the proposals from Progress Energy were lacking and she would prefer to table the decision on this item to allow for other entities to give proposals. This would allow for comparisons with the Progress Energy agreements. She also asked that staff look into a shorter franchise period. Commissioner Susan Doemer expressed concerns regarding the $1.5 up front settlement from Progress Energy when the City has spent in excess of $2 million. Priorities should be gauged on what is best for City residents in determining this issue. She indicated that she would hold judgment on the proposed agreements until proposals are received from the other entities. Commissioner Kathy Cook stated that the agreement with Progress Energy was more than fair. The $1.5 million offered over three years by Progress Energy was ample compensation. She stated that a decision should be made regarding the proposal from Progress Energy and the issue not be postponed. Mayor Pronovost stated that the proposal from Progress Energy did not address the issues in the franchise, i.e. outages, performance standards, guaranteed rates; Progress Energy should earu the right to receive a thirty year contract by the competitive bid method. He opined that the City should reject the proposal from Progress Energy not because of negativity but because it is not responsive to the City is requesting. He also stated that there was a high level interest in cities getting together and pooling their resources to secure a better deal with an electric service provider. The City Manager said as directed by the Commission, staff`had met with OUC, KUA and ENCO. He indicated that he would draft financial projections for the purchase and acquisition of the system. The projections will be based on the current rates that would match Progress Energy.