My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/17/2014 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2014
>
12/17/2014 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/4/2018 3:41:12 PM
Creation date
12/20/2016 11:34:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
12/17/2014
Meeting Body
Town of Indian River Shores
City of Vero Beach
Subject
Mediation Meeting Electric Utilities
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />b. Is located in a noncharter county; <br />c. Has between 30,000 and 35,000 retail electric customers as of September 30, <br />2007; and <br />d. Does not have a service territory that extends beyond its home county as of <br />September 30, 2007. <br />§ 366.04(7), Fla. Stat. (2008). <br />40. The City is an "affected municipal electric utility" subject to the requirements of <br />Section 366.04(7). In filings before the PSC, the City has admitted that: (i) it serves the City of <br />Vero Beach and the Town, both municipalities in Indian River County; (ii) Indian River County <br />is a noncharter county; and (iii) the City's service area does not extend beyond Indian River <br />County. Furthermore, the City's audited financial statement for 2007 expressly notified the <br />public that the City had 33,442 retail electric customers as of September 30, 2007. Upon <br />information and belief, the City also represented to the PSC and to credit rating agencies that it <br />had in excess of 33,000 retail electric customers in 2007. <br />41. Prior to passage of Section 366.04(7), consistent with established electric utility <br />industry practice, the City quantified its retail customers by counting the number of separate <br />meter accounts. <br />42. After Section 366.04(7) became law, the City disavowed its prior customer counts <br />set forth in its audited financial statements and has now has asserted that it is not subject to <br />Section 366.04(7) because the City had less than 30,000 customers as of September 30, 2007. In <br />reversing itself and claiming that it had less than 30,000 retail electric customers the City has <br />adopted a novel and erroneous customer count method which for the first time counts individuals <br />with multiple meters as a single "customer". <br />10 <br />gs <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.