OCR Text |
Show CA L" ( . Letters Yrfti&L ToThe I lml Editor Editor: I have been requested to present some of the feelings of Parowan City regarding our experiences in owning and operating a municipal power system. Generally, we are extremely happy with our system and with the financial advantages it offers in terms of relatively low charges to our citizens and in terms of its increasing funds available to the citizens through the formal city government structure. Through our affiliation with the ICPA (Intermountain Consumer Power Associa tion ) we have received all the technical expertise and data to operate efficiently. Additionally, affiliation with the ICPA provides the "economy of scale" advantages which we would not otherwise enjoy. We look at our system as being owned in part by each person who purchases electricity through the system. In reality, that is exactly who owns our system, and we feel that each citizen ought to-and in actuality does-receive the return on his "investment". "in-vestment". That "return" comes in the form of lower power costs and in the form of services provided to the citizenry through funds generated by the operation of the municipally owned power system. Parowan has been fortunate over the years to benefit from some far sighted decisions made years ago and from the selfless service of a number of citizens who have worked with the system. I think few of our citizens are unhappy that we took advantage of the set of circumstances that led to our assuming our municipal system. Sincerely, James C. Robinson Mayor of Parowan Editor: I am somewhat concerned with some statements made in a circular recently passed around by "Cedar Citizens for Locally Owned Power." There are some misrepresentations that need to be brought to public view. My first concern is the question: "Can UP&L guarantee Cedar City customers no power outages?" The subsequent answer was "No." They didn't bother to mention, however, that a Municipal Operation could make no such guarantee either. No power company can honestly make that guarantee. In another place, it was stated that if UP&L were to buy the CPN system, they would have a monopoly, therefore eliminating competitive pricing; yet, in the preceding paragraph it stated that UP&L doesn't set their own rates; they are set by the Public Service Commission. Com-mission. That contradiction could be very misleading. rwrrT$:wx""r" Another contradiction is that some -of the people who are campaigning for " i municipal power opposed the recent water bond issue because it would I erode the City's bonding power to buy out the CPN system. Now they claim that the City's bonding power would not be diminished by purchasing the CPN utility. Their story changes to fit their desires. I also question the deceptive statement that taxes would not be raised to purchase the CPN system. Our taxes would surely be raised to compensate for lost tax revenue.. .to support our schools and our city and county government. Another thing to consider is future development in energy. UP&L is contributing greatly to the development of new energy sources, which the City is quite unlikely to do. Another point which is very critical is that a municipal power system is government owned. Regardless of whether it be city, state or federal, it is still government owned which is one step closer to Communism. Not only that, we have learned from hard . experience that government owned operations are inefficient and bureaucratic. May I relate some personal experience. ex-perience. I spent two years in a country where the airline service, water, telephone, gas, electricity, and train service were all govenrment owned and that country has serious problems caused by this government ownership. The biggest problem it causes is an annua inflation rate of 175 - 200 percent. Do we want this? Inefficient government ownership could cause the same problem for us. Like the majority of Cedar City residents, I am not an authority on the power . issues, but my observation is that UP&L has been straight forward with us from the beginning. They have told it like- it really is even though it wasn't totally favorable. On the other hand, the "Southwestern Utah Power Federation" and the "Cedar Citizens for Locally Owned Power" have tried to make their program look like a bed of roses. I think many of those roses will wilt and die to the disappointment and financial hardship of Cedar City residents. Jeffrey K. Johnson Editor: In response to an item in last week's record from the Iron County Commissioners requesting public opinion on the outcome of Judge Margaret Miller's trial, if the commission com-mission should pursue the matter further. Pursue what matter? Pursue a matter that has been beat to death? A matter that should have never been brought to trial in the first place. Judge Miller won the election fair and square, she was in fact, one of the highest vote getters. Could this be a thorn in the county's side, a high vote getter and a woman besides ! Judge Miller has, throughout this ordeal, conducted herself in a highly professional manner. It seems a shame that anyone" man or woman, elected or hired to do a job, should have to fight so hard, for what was rightfully theirs in the first place. It seems to me, Gentlemen, that articles such as the one last week are beginning to look a little like harrassment. Judge Miller won the election, she won her case in court, now I think that you should Pay Up and Shut Up!! Sharon Webb Editor: All of the recent talk about the terrific savings available to the consumer through a municipal system for power has me very excited because it occurs to me that the concept of a city-owned power system could be just the beginning as far as the struggle against ever-rising prices is concerned. As the proponents of municipal power have carefully explained, the city is able to raise funds at interest rates which are considerably lower than prevailing commercial rates through municipal bonding, preferrably revenue bonds. Since revenue bonds do not affect the bonding capacity of the city, but rather enhance its financial position through increased revenues, the city could easily expand the municipal concept to other areas of economy. Its evident that many other basic necessities in our lives have shown dramatic price increases during recent years, and for many, incomes are stretched to the breaking point. With the amazing possibilities available to us through revenue bonds, the city could provide relief to its citizens in many areas of daily expenses. Let us consider for example, the deplorable condition of current housing costs. This is, of course, due to the inherent nature of private enterprise to maximize profits, to the detriment of the general populace. The solution apparently has been so obvious that it has been overlooked .. until , recent , revelations .. about ... our . ,,, existing power situation brought it to " light. By eliminating the private contractor con-tractor and replacing him with a municipal building corporation, the exhorbitant prices necessitated by the builder's profit margins will be immediately im-mediately reduced to reasonable levels. This could be accomplished much more easily than with an existing power system because there is nothing to purchase or condemn. The city could simply refuse to renew the contractors license. By doing all the building in the city, savings would increase through volume . buying. The corollary to this, of course, would be to close down all the lumber yards, the builders supply houses and have one municipal supply house which would be open to the public for further consumer savings on do-it-yourself projects. Another of the necessities which the city should get involved in is the most basic of all, food. Everyone knows that rising food prices have an impact on us all. Again, through efficient . management, volume buying, and revenue bonds, the city could go a long way towards aiding the foundering foun-dering consumer by reducing food costs. As with municipal power, any surpluses generated through these activities could be used for city purposes such as recreational facilities, city offices, etc. I've just scratched the surface so far. With the unlimited capacity of revenue bonding at our finger tips we could have a whole flock of new city departments, eliminating unnecessary un-necessary expenses in every aspect of daily living. Gasoline stations, clothing stores, pharmacies, restaurants, the list is endless and exciting. Any innovation as new and different as this needs someone with vision, dirve and staying power to effect the necessary changes. Since Carl Palmer has ably demonstrated his abilities thus far, perhaps he should be the one to undertake the challenge. Perhaps his existing organization could be expanded to include these additional projects with a minor name change, such as the South West Utah Powerful Federation. Although the above plan seems to be without flaw, I still have been bothered by one nagging doubt. The whole idea reminds me of the antics of one of the more aggressive citizens of the world, currently involved in its own expansion program in Afghanistan. Sincerely, Stephen Brown Editor Hopefully, on February 12, the power issue wil be put to rest. I've attended many meetings on this matter. Sponsored by CPN, the Chamber, Federation, Utah Power and Light, and The Cedar Group. My observation is that a small local group and outsiders want Municipal power at any cost. This is based on the following: For the last three elections, we've had outsiders host a pre-election radio program, paid by whom? The pro municipal forces now state that our power bills probably won't go down, and that Utah Power and Lights' price of twenty million for the CPN system could be a more accurate appraisal than the federations twelve million. Was their first figure of the depreciated book value of five million false or misleading? The unsuccessful independent candidate for the council made a statement on Feb. 2, where he presented some figures about Utah Power & Light but stated he couldn't substantiate them. He also implied that someone other than Arlo Larsen paid for the citizens for Utah Power & Lights aid, but he couldn't prove that either. Talk about misleading! On the same day another speaker stated resentment of Utah Power & Light mentioning the LDS Church, they were only stating a fact of who the largest single stockholder of Utah Power & Light is. These people stated that Utah Power & Light stockholders were paying for all the recent advertising ad-vertising by Utah Power and Light, well who's paying the pro municipal bill? No names are ever forthcoming. The pro municipal group states we have a firm source of power until 1985 from Utah Power & , Light. That could be for the courts to decide. After 1985 we can get power from Moon Lake; at what price? And it's not built yet. But probably higher than Utah Power & Light. If we go municipal we would be eligible for BOR power, but quote the mayor of Beaver, "We may get some, all, or none of our present allotment." This is a firm power source! i The pro municipal group further i states that buying this system won't effect the bonding capacity of thexrt well I think it could because, youtan only sell W-enns, J)o,4a.lhe, capability of patytrig (h''bflf tferstJ-cb'i-- revenue, Mfhis point you increase the revenue (power bills) or you sell general obligation bonds (which increases in-creases your taxes) or you do nothing to improve capacity and update the system. This is no different than a family's or business's finances on unsecured and secured loans. You do reach that maximum borrowing capability. Management, who will it be? And at what cost? Will the experienced CPN, employee's stay with a municipal management in southern Utah is so great, why have some of these municipalities had to call on an investor owned utility to help them out? Taxes, I've noticed that four out of live cities in southern Utah that have municipal system's have higher taxes than Cedar City. I also notice that some of these municipal system's made huge profits, (nasty words) and were kind enough to donate them back to the city. They would have helped the citizens better by reducing the power rate and increasing taxes. You can deduct your taxes, but not your power bill from your federal and state taxes. Benefits, I believe that only the present municipal systems will benefit, if Cedar City goes municipal. What I'm hoping for is management, service and competitive rates, in todays market not yesterdays. And I'm convinced that at this time only Utah Power and Light can supply these. There is no way, under the present conditions,1 that these present municipal systems are receiving their power that Cedar City's rates will ever be as low as theirs. By the way I've never owned any stock in any corporaton nor am I LDS. I . do not work for CPN or Utah Power & Light. These are my own observations after attending four and a half years of meetings. I'm just a family man trying to make ends meet, like a lot of other people. Robert Heather P.S. Toquerville has elected to go with Utah Power & Light because of firm power source! Editor: On January 11, 1980, we experienced ex-perienced a small fire at the Old Mill Lodge in Parowan. The Parowan Volunteer Fire Department responded in ten minutes. Rod Adams was driving the fire truck, but I didn't know the names of the other volunteers. We wish to express our appreciation for the fine job these men did. Due to their rapid response and minimal water damage, we were able to continue business as usual. Once again, thanks for a great job, guys. Ed Pitcbford, Judy Pitchford, Frank Plamonden Editor: Like so many people in Iron County, I have been so confused about the power issue that I finally determined to study it for myself. I have heard the arguments on both sides. I have gone to key individuals representing both groups with a set of my own questions, and I am completely convinced that Cedar City must not let municipal power slip through our fingers. My questions asked to those people on each side were: Q. What will municipal power do to my power rate? A. Municipal will cost almost the same for the first couple of years, but after that-while it will be stable and almost constant-Utah Power and Light will continue to increase. Q. What will it do to Cedar City's potential to bond for school buildings, a new city building, etc.? A. The bonds to purchase California-Pacific would be revenue bonds paid off by the profits from our own municipal power company and would not affect our bonding potential nor increase our. taxes in order to pay for that revenue bond. The profits that California Pacific . now enjoys would be paying the bonds as well as replacing in the city coffers the taxes now being paid by California-Pacific. Q. Will a municipal system be managed and maintained by a group of amateurs? A. No. The enormous amount of profit realized from such a system would afford Cedar City the highest possible skilled personnel to maintain and manage the system. Q. Would Cedar City be buying an outmoded, almost derelict system that would immediately need enormous enor-mous amounts of replacement and upkeep? up-keep? A. No. If that were the case, why would Utah Power and Light be so eager to purchase it. Truth actually it is a huge money potential in this area. Why else would Utah Power and Light be pumping the promotion money into this sale and be so eager to own it? . I have always believed in competition com-petition and free enterprise, but I am convinced after studying the cities around our state that have municipal m j)ower and much lower rates as a i3jwu.lt; that; .they, are, .run, more ef- liciently; they are run with integrity, fewer power failures, and a more sympathic attitude toward the homeowners than these giant r monopolies maintained and managed ' hundreds of miles away from us. Fred C. Adams r i . Editor: To the people for Municipal Power: . For three years, all I have heard from the people supporting a municipal power system are quotes from other municipal systems throughout the state; on how much they are paying for power. All of these systems were purchased 20-30 years ago or more. As of yet, no one representing municipal power has ever projected a price which we would be paying in five years or ten. (This is how long it would be before we would be able to obtain Bureau Power.) They don't know. They don't even know for sure how much power we will be able to receive from Bureau Power. Sure, Moon Lake in 1985 and Glen Canyon in 1989, but how much?? If we have to buy power from three or four different sources, then we are probably going to be paying three or four different prices. Let's say that all of the power in 1985 - 89 was available for Cedar City, to have a municipal power system. ' WHO WOULD RUN IT. I don't feel the city administration can. The City Council will change every two and four years. The Mayor every four years. Every two years, we have people with different dif-ferent view points. It will be up to them to raise the rates. They can raise the rates on anything, sewer, garbage, power, water, wages. The Administration should get a city manager soon so he could help with the problems. Our efficient city government is without one now. If we can't keep in City Managers, who's going to run the power system? On top of some of these problems, the fine sewer system which Cedar City spent $2,000,000 on five years ago still isn't paid for. The city is going to have to rebond $350,000 to finish paying off the sewer project. The city administration ad-ministration alKcity offices) are being evicted from their present offices. This means we will be bonded again for a new city office. The School Board is presently planning for another bond for another school and new additions to present schools. All of these bonds are good, if we can pay ' for them. What happens if we can't pay for these bonds? Two things-1. Raise the mill levy-taxes; 2. Increase rates in Power, sewer, garbage, etc. I don't think we can afford municipal power, much less run it efficiently enough to give us lower power rates. Let's go with Utah Power & Lights purchasing CPN for our power of the future. A concerned citizen Patricia O'Hrien: "I still believe women make it harder lor themselves than necessary. They would do better to stop wringing their hands over what is missing and concentrate on what they have - which is considerably con-siderably more than the, women of previous generations. Forget the statistics, enjoy success, look for interesting people instead of marriage material - and find out what happens." Kevin Phillips: "Business 'rights of free speech - business' rights to speak out effectively on important issues - are being regulated and restricted left and right, yet hardly anybody in the media seems to care. I would suggest to my friends in the press corps that they might want to reconsider this narrowness. If the First Amendment doesn't protect everybody, it may wind up protecting hardly anybody." Editor: I am disturbed with pro-municipal backers' and the members of the South West Power Federation and their attempts to discredit two reputable companies, C.P.National and Utah Power & Light. It what the Federation is offering the people of So. Utah is so good, why can't the plans they have in the making stand on their own merits? Why do they try to convince people of their own worth while trying to destroy their opposition. I have read nothing submitted by either CPN or UP&L that would discredit the Federation. They (UP&L) simply state what they are willing to do and what they are capable of doing for the people of So. Utah based on their year's of doing that which they do best. No pie in the sky promises. No promises of cheap power. No something for nothing. II the Federation has three men with a combined total of 100 years of power expertise imagine how many hundreds of years service the employees em-ployees of CPN and UP&L have. I could use the same method of propaganda the Federation and pro-municipal pro-municipal people are using and say, "I can make a. cake twice as good as Ron and Chris Bakery and only use half the ingredients they use in making theirs." I don't have to prove a darn thing. , Aesop said it best - "Beware that you do not lose the Substance by grasping at the Shadows." ' Anna Mae Perry |