My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/27/2014 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2014
>
10/27/2014 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/4/2018 4:33:45 PM
Creation date
3/23/2016 8:53:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
10/27/2014
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Book and Page
64
Supplemental fields
FilePath
H:\Indian River\Network Files\SL00000E\S0004AA.tif
SmeadsoftID
14155
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
32 municipal utilities based on current rates - that is, the City's <br />Residential rate would be 8th lowest of the 33 Florida municipal <br />utilities. Current information on the rates charged by Florida's <br />cooperatives is not readily available, but at $113.93 per 1,000 kWh, <br />the City's rate would be lower than all but one of Florida's <br />electric cooperatives, based on their rates in effect as of December <br />31, 2012. (This is the most current information generally <br />available, from the Florida Public Service Commission's report, <br />Statistics of the Florida Electric Utility Industry, 2012. The 2013 <br />edition of this publication is not yet available.) <br />Potential Additional Rate Reduction Measures <br />I have also attached a table showing potential additional rate <br />reduction measures that the City may be able to implement, including <br />potential savings amounts and timing of such measures. <br />Regarding retirement of the Vero Beach Power Plant, it is <br />possible that there will be additional savings from the retirement <br />in that the City would likely have to invest additional capital in <br />the Plant to keep it running; however, these savings would be in <br />comparison to the costs that the City would otherwise incur, so the <br />result is that rates would likely be lower than they would otherwise <br />have been if the Power Plant were to continue in operation, but we <br />cannot say with certainty that the retirement would actually lower <br />rates from current levels. <br />Regarding the option of financing Transmission & Distribution <br />capital spending with debt, there are potential annual cost and rate <br />reductions available from doing so. In simple arithmetic terms, <br />replacing $3 million of capital spending in a year with a year's <br />worth of debt service (on the order of $225,000-$250,000 per year), <br />would reduce the Electric Utility's required revenues by about $2.7 <br />million per year. One concept is that the City might pursue this <br />course for 2-4 years, with a view toward returning to the current <br />practice of financing T&D capital spending from current revenues in <br />2018 or 2019, when it is hoped that the debt service costs <br />associated with the Stanton Project will be eliminated upon <br />retirement of the existing Stanton Project debt. Those bonds are <br />scheduled to be retired no later than October 1, 2019, and when we <br />asked OUC whether they plan to undertake any significant capital <br />spending measures on the Stanton Unit 1 Plant, they indicated that <br />they do not. The Stanton Project debt service runs about $8.7 <br />million a year on average, and the City's share is 32.521 percent, <br />or about $2.8 million per year. <br />However, you and the City Council should note that both the <br />City's Finance Commission and Utility Commission have recommended <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.