PGE's Continuing Misinformation Campaign
The letter below was sent to the Oregonian as a letter to the editor by a PGE employee. My response is at the end of Mr. Price's letter.
Oregonian Letter to the Editor
February 18, 2006
City gets in PGE’s way
I’ve been in the power generation and distribution industry for 25 years. I’m currently a Portland General Electric employee, and I’ve never worked for more ethical and public-spirited people than our local management team.
PGE once was a locally owned, publicly traded company that provided great service and low electric rates. PGE currently provides electricity with 99.9 percent reliability at rates that are mid- to low range for a metropolitan area the size of Portland when compared to nationwide.
PGE is trying to shed its former owner, Enron, and become again what it once was.
The city of Portland, led by Commissioners Randy Leonard and Erik Sten, is trying to derail that effort. Do you believe that Leonard, Sten and the flying circus known as Portland city government would really provide lower rates and the same reliability?
These are the very same folks who brought you the water bureau mess and the $15 million, no wait…$45 million, no wait…$55 million aerial tram. Do you really want to put yourself at their mercy?
John Price
Damascus
Response
February 18, 2006
To the Editor:
PGE employee John Price’s letter to the editor requires a response.
Consistent with other misleading comments coming out of the managers of PGE, Mr. Price wrote:
“PGE currently provides electricity… at rates that are mid- to low range for a metropolitan area the size of Portland when compared to nationwide.(emphasis added)”
Heck, I’ll bet if PGE compared the rates it charges to those, oh, I don’t know, say in Uzbekistan, they would be a real bargain.
However, if Mr. Price and his PGE bosses compared their rates to their closest competitor here in Oregon, PGE rates are 31% higher for residential and 39% higher for businesses than Pacificorp.
You can be assured that the management of PGE will continue to avoid comparing themselves to local utilities –public or private- anytime soon.
Why are PGE’s rates so much higher than any other local utility? I intend to find out conclusively the answer to that question. PGE’s electric rates are the subject of a current investigative process that the city of Portland is engaged in that inspired Mr. Price to write his letter to the editor.
As far as Mr. Price throwing out this red herring:
“These are the very same folks who brought you the water bureau mess and the $15 million, no wait…$45 million, no wait…$55 million aerial tram.”
Sure, we have made mistakes. However, add up all of the costs of every mistake Mr. Price points to and it is still a fraction of the amount of money PGE collected in taxes that it did not pay but, rather, converted to a cash cow for itself and its parent company Enron…every year!
Additionally, we have copies of emails between top PGE managers making it clear that PGE charged rate payers for taxes they knew would not be paid but would, rather, “increase the net income” of PGE.
If that is not illegal, it should be.
Finally, any mistakes the city of Portland makes are fully and publicly vetted. PGE, on the other hand, obfuscates, misleads and changes the subject to the weather or global hunger when pressed for details on the issues I have written about here.
Mr. Price may have placed himself next in line for a promotion at PGE, however, he continues a dubious PGE strategy of misleading Oregonians in order to divert attention from PGE management's troubling actions.
Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard
1221 SW 4th Ave.
Portland, Oregon
503-823-4682
|
February 18, 2006 |
Randy Leonard | Comments (100 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: blue | Feb 18, 2006 1:54:40 PM
Dear Commissioner Leonard,
Thanks for your leadership on PGE. I lived in Southern California when PGE/Enron was creating artificial shortages to spike the ratepayers in that state during the 1990's. Thankfully, I lived in an area that was served by the municipal DWP rather than in an Edison/PG&E area so my bills didn't increase appreciably, and we never suffered a loss of power like friends in areas controlled by those private utilities did.
Now I live in McMinnville, where the residential rates charged by the municipally-owned Mac Water & Light are $0.0385 per kilowatt hour -- less than half the rate charged by PGE in nearby Newberg with less downtime over the last 5 years.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 1:54:41 PM
"Randy, why don't you resign your council seat and go back to the legislature and do something about it. You are costing Portlanders (thankfully not me) too much in your commissioners job."
Hmmm. Another personal attack by "Charlie from Gresham" that avoids dealing with the facts.
You have a theme...anti union, pro business and...all anonymous.
I will consider your insights and recommendations in that context.
Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 1:58:11 PM
Keep them in context and take them to heart my friend....and you'd be SOOOO surprised to know that we are indeed friends socially! I actually enjoy you too!
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 2:01:11 PM
"...you'd be SOOOO surprised to know that we are indeed friends socially!"
E Tu Brute?
OR
"With friends like you...."
Posted by: Eric Berg | Feb 18, 2006 2:34:53 PM
Randy,
Keep it up! Erik Sten and you have this Portland resident's thanks and support.
Eric Berg
Posted by: paulie | Feb 18, 2006 3:43:21 PM
The reason PGE's rates are higher is because they shut down Trojan. PGE then started buying electricity at the market rate. For a while, PGE customers enjoyed very reasonable rates. Then the rates jumped up during the California enery crisis. Electicity prices on the open market are much higher than they were prior to 1999. PGE is a distribution utility that is approximately 45-50% owner contolled. If the city were to take over PGE, the city would have to purchase about half of the electricity on the open market just like PGE does now. What will be accomplished by private ownership? Witness the water department. Soon the city will be sticking it to Portlanders with higher sewage charges. Two years ago Tim Boyle said, " The city of Portland should stick to its knitting and only do the things that it does well."
Posted by: doretta | Feb 18, 2006 3:45:15 PM
At least a tram has a chance of being useful.
What are we getting for the privilege of being sucked dry by PGE-- designer electricity? I agree they do a good job of delivery but so do other companies at significantly less cost. For that matter, they did fine themselves before Enron artificially inflated prices and perfected their tax dodge. As Randy noted, they won't be comparing their rates to other companies local rates any time soon.
As for the "let us go back to being a nice locally-owned, publicly traded company," that's a pipe dream. The only way for PGE to be locally owned again is if the city or some similar entity buys it. It might be independently publicly traded for a while but the same forces that made PGE a part of Enron are still ruling the world.
You'd think that after getting a glimpse of the plans our friends from Texas had for them, most PGE employees would be a bit smarter about this by now. Then again, PGE has had millions of our dollars with which to run an relentless propaganda campaign aimed at both employees and the public so I guess it's not really surprising.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 18, 2006 3:55:31 PM
Then the rates jumped up during the California enery crisis. Electicity prices on the open market are much higher than they were prior to 1999.
Yes, let's just ignore that Enron/PGE manipulated the market to create the "energy crisis".
Witness the water department. Soon the city will be sticking it to Portlanders with higher sewage charges.
Yep, higher sewage charges based on federal mandates. It's going to get brutal, that's for sure, especially now that the feds are trying to change the rules on us 3/4 of the way through the process. Of course, I'd say that if PGE were in charge of making that work, we'd see the same increase in sewer rates plus a surcharge to make sure the shareholders would make more money on top of the increases. What do you think the city could have done differently that would have prevented sewer rate increases?
Posted by: paulie | Feb 18, 2006 4:05:51 PM
The city of Portland is notorious for putting off and putting off and putting off tough financial decisions. Raw sewage was being dumped into the Willamette River. The EPA got involved.
Posted by: Steve | Feb 18, 2006 4:11:04 PM
Mr Leonard - Since you think PGE charges such higher rates than a PUD would, tell us again why this would be any different than BullRun water rates?
They are the highest in the nation and enough to cause long-time customers (Wilsonville and Tualatin) to look some place else for water?
I am not against a PUD, I am against the CoP running a PUD based on your history.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Feb 18, 2006 4:11:47 PM
Commissioner Leonard:
I'm much more troubled by the spike in my NW Natural Gas bill than my PGE bill. Despite flat year-on-year consumption, and a 50% rise in the underlying commodity price, my monthly bill has doubled! How is that possible?
I'm all for local oversight, but it appears that you have subjected PGE to excessive scrutiny while giving NW Natural a free pass. Fair is fair. I can send you a copy of my NW Natural account history if you would like a case study.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 18, 2006 4:44:13 PM
Raw sewage was being dumped into the Willamette River. The EPA got involved.
Yes. I'm still waiting to hear what PGE would have done differently from what the city did.
Posted by: paulie | Feb 18, 2006 5:03:27 PM
Watch out for the left hook from the suburbs when they tell Portland they can keep Bull Run.
Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 6:33:22 PM
DORETTA....A privately run enterprise would have invested in regular maintenance and system upgrades rather than wait until things are so bad that a Federal mandate becomes inevitable.
The years of ignoring the problem are not Randy Leonards fault.....not Erik Sten's fault. It took decades of neglect for the infrastructure of the water system to reach this sad state. All the pet projects over the years....yes even Neil Goldschmidt's pet project of building the downtown transit mall....should have come AFTER needed maintenance and investments in critical infrastructure.
But that's just not the Portland way.
Posted by: Mr. Magoo | Feb 18, 2006 6:41:24 PM
Randy - I wish you folks would quit pussy-footing around and just condemn PGE assets and take over. Public power providers are consistently less expensive than profiteer-operated power. Every minute you waste means more and more local dollars bleeding out to Wall Street. Let's help out businesses and households here at home by operating our own power utility.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Feb 18, 2006 6:59:42 PM
Charlie--
You act as if Portland is the only city that has done this. Cities across the U.S. have had to go through the exact same thing. They've dumped sewage into rivers and lakes for generations (ask all the people who've gotten sick in the Great Lakes area because of sewage in the water). It takes some time to come up with a new plan and then implement it.
And yes, a private company wouldn'y done the same thing-- they'd have done worse. Or have you forgotten about all the private companies that have been dumping things worse than sewage into our waterways for years?
As someone who has seen the men in suits (and I don't mean business suits) out cleaning up messes more times than she can count on two hands and has seen more superfund sites than many of you, I can assure you that private companies would've likely done worse.
You should have seen the Brio Refining Superfund site in Texas. It was so bad that people had to leave their homes and couldn't take most of their stuff with them-- it was all contaminated. We're talking about an entire community-- homes, schools, fire station, and more. This was a brand new community, and those poor people lost everything, in addition to the fact that many of them got sick. What happened there is at least ten times worse than what the city did to the river-- not that what Portland did isn't bad, but it could be a lot worse.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 7:09:24 PM
Steve-
Bull Run water rates are not among the highest in the nation. Bull Run water is among the cheapest in the nation. In fact, Portland residents pay the cheapest water rates in the region.
Our sewer rates are high, but that is not to be confused with water rates.
As far as the issue of Tualatin Valley threatening to go to the Williamette for their drinking water, try to get more balanced information than what the Tualatin Valley Water Board issues in their press releases. They are negotiating with us for a new 20 year contract and are attempting to influence those negotiations with various public relations ploys.
As in the case of PGE, that won't work either.
Posted by: Alice | Feb 18, 2006 7:38:35 PM
Given that water and sewer services are on the same bill, it is difficult to distinguish between them. I was told (would love to know if it's true) that the system assumes all water going into the house must exit via the sewer system. Ergo, since they meter input (water), but don't measure output (sewer), it's an academic distinction at best. It's like saying left shoes are free, but right shoes cost $400/each. The left shoes are hardly cheap, if you have to buy shoes from just that one vendor.
If I can't buy one without the other then you're going to have a hard time persuading me the water is "cheap". I'm averaging $135/month for a family of three, and we have natural landscaping (no irrigation), low flow showers and toilets, and super efficient Whirlpool dishwasher and laundry (front-loader).
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 7:45:53 PM
All I can do, Alice, is give the facts. People are going to put whatever spin their predisposition frees them to do.
All sewer rates that I am aware of are tied to water consumption. Our sewer rates are high due to the combined sewer overflow project. Before that started our combined sewer/water rates were below average. When the bonds are paid off on the project, the cost should be below average again.
The fact is that the water portion of our sewer rates are among the lowest in the nation for arguably the best water in the world.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Feb 18, 2006 7:58:45 PM
Randy--
All the cities I've ever covered during my years in community newspapers all based their sewer rates on water consumption as well. That certianly does seem to be the norm.
Posted by: Talk radio | Feb 18, 2006 9:57:05 PM
Randy,
Why do you hate power company workers?
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 10:00:13 PM
I am cool with the workers. It's their bosses I am not too fond of.
Posted by: Alice | Feb 18, 2006 10:15:02 PM
Then we can agree that "cheap" water rates are only half of the equation: expensive sewer rates are the other half of the equation.
Given the low level of current spending on modernization and replacement of our 40 to 100 year old sewer infrastructure (which is entirely unrelated to the Big Pipe), it will be a very long time before Portland ratepayers will see a decrease in sewer rates.
Ergo, our combined water and sewer rates will likely exceed neighboring communities for some time to come. Why? Because a newer community (think Wilsonville or Beaverton) doesn't have the same backlog of deferred maintenance and crumbling infrastructure. And their elected officials are not worried about the political backlash of increasing sewer rates to adequately begin to address the backlog of repair and replacement of sewer infrastructure.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 18, 2006 10:21:32 PM
I am not sure why you are making the statements you are. I do know your comments are not supported by what is actually happening in maintaining our sewer and water infrastructure.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Feb 18, 2006 10:49:02 PM
PGE and its progenitors have been lying to Oregonians for the better part of a century. How else to convince people to continue paying more for electric power than is necessary? Privately owned power in the land of falling water has been a scam of historical proportions that has sucked the life out of Oregon's economy like a parasitic lamprey.
The game started long before Enron and will continue until Oregonians learn to think for themselves and read electric rate comparisons.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 12:02:16 AM
Then we can agree that "cheap" water rates are only half of the equation: expensive sewer rates are the other half of the equation.
Hard to agree given that there is no equation. How much water you use is used to estimate how much sewer you use. The RATES are dependent on the costs of the independent systems.
I could use the same language to talk about private companies. "Expensive electricity rates are only half the equation: expensive natural gas rates are the other half of the equation." Actually, that makes more sense than the water/sewer connection since part of the reason the cost of natural gas has skyrocketed is that we are wasting it as fast as we can to make electricity.
Posted by: Tenskwatawa | Feb 19, 2006 12:13:53 AM
#
Part of the thread seems like it is trying to get bent into the old apples and oranges switcheroo. This way:
Electricity we just go out and make more in our own backyard, no transmission line from the dam needed.
Bull Run water, (or Willamette River water, take your pick), they ain't making any more. Catch rain water in our backyard, I suppose.
The City managing water distribution is a completely different process than managing electricity generation and distribution.
Randy, new projects -- starting with a tram redesign -- should make twice their own electricity on the project site. So the project does not need to buy PGE generated electricity, and on-site excess generation is sold, (and helps fund the project), in competition with PGE.
Forget water and sewage for now, different topic with different problems. This is about the false representations for PGE, which the newspaper propogates (knowing the falsity), which the TV news announcers rip-and-read as TV news, which citizens in Troutdale read (or watch) and believe and write a letter to the editor which the newspaper picks (from dozens of alternatives) to prove the false PGE misinformation stuck in someone's memory.
But that entire feedback loop -- lies to citizens who then recite back the lies -- does not make the initial false misinformaion true or valid.
#
Posted by: Dan Meek | Feb 19, 2006 12:24:37 AM
Paulie is wrong about Trojan. In the early 1990s, Trojan had become the most expensive operating nuclear plant in the nation, costing over 8 cents/kWh just to run. After it suffered yet another steam generator tube failure in November 1992, PGE shut it down and did detailed analysis showing that it would cost less to leave it closed than to try to repair it.
The reason electricity prices spiked in 2000-2001 was the Enron-induced phony energy crisis, assisted by PGE and others. I kind of doubt that PGE, in deciding to close Trojan permanently in January 1993, anticipated that by 2000 the West Coast would be experiencing the largest fraud in energy markets in history. That fraud then subsided in July 2001, after FERC imposed regional price caps.
Even if Trojan had been repaired (even it that were possible), whether it could have lasted even another 8 years is questionable. In any event, PGE's overall market purchases of power have been priced far below what was the operating cost of Trojan, not to mention the cost of generating additional high-level radioactive wastes.
Posted by: Steve | Feb 19, 2006 8:29:31 AM
"Our sewer rates are high, but that is not to be confused with water rates."
What difference does it make why we pay high rates for water/sewer? I am only saying the same thing would happen if you ran PGE.
At first you would drop the rates to get this in. Then all of sudden Beaverton would pay more for power than CoP. Then instead of fixing PGE plant on a normal schedule (like the sewer system) you would take the money for things like trams (don't worry Sam will "find" some money to make it happen because Homer wants it), conv center hotels, Armory Theaters and PFDR shortfalls.
Then 15 years down the road we don't have enough power and we would have to buy power at inflated rates and then we are in a worse place than we are now. Or Tualatin/Wilsonville finds cheaper power and you would have to raise power rates to CoP people to cover.
PS - Not everyone who disagrees with you running a PUD is a PGE employee or PR hack. If you could stick to the issues instead of ad-hominem attacks, it would help your credibilty.
Posted by: Alice | Feb 19, 2006 9:27:19 AM
Doretta:
Water and sewer cannot be purchased or billed separately in Portland: you can't choose to buy one without the other. By comparison, I can choose to limit my Natural Gas (NG) consumption through conservation or by substituting electricity consumption.
I can cover my roof with photovoltaic cells and charge batteries in the basement, and go off the electric grid. I can buy a diesel gen-set and produce my own electricity, subject to noise and zoning restrictions. I can even replace most household appliances (oven, stove, water heater, clothes dryer) to run on NG.
It is difficult (if not illegal?) to go off the water and sewer grid within city limits. To compare sewer/water to gas/electric is truly apples and oranges.
A commenter above complained they experienced a much larger increase in the NW Natural Gas bill than they've seen in their PGE bill, but the City of Portland is only investigating PGE. Why is that?
I believe the Mayor and the City Council feel like they were the handsome groom at a "runaway bride" wedding ceremony: their hurt feelings are playing a role in the public relations war. They think they were duped by PGE, and they're still pissed.
As for the consumption of NG in electricity production, you are half right. Historically, NG was an inefficient method of producing electricity (because much of the thermal energy was wasted). The ineffiencies were economically insignificant when wholesale NG prices were below $2/Mcf (from 1987 to 1998), and then prices started to rise. The newer facilities include a co-generation capability that consumes the excess thermal energy which is generated, making NG fired electricity plants more efficient at BTU recovery than other hydrocarbons.
Natural gas is cleaner than coal, which remains the single largest fuel for U.S. electricity production (at 53% of total U.S. megawattage, only 7% here in Oregon). The U.S. Coal Foundation estimates we have sufficient domestic supplies of coal to last 250 to 300 years (at current consumption rates). Current U.S. NG reserves at estimated to last 30 to 60 years, but Canada likely has twice that amount.
Posted by: sarah | Feb 19, 2006 9:38:08 AM
I have a hard time getting excited about anything Randy or Eric claim is "good for the people". Sorry, Randy (and yes, I realize you don't care what I think), but it's true.
If either one of these fellows had even the slightest amount of experience in the real world, vs. paid-by-yours-truly type positions, I might have more faith in your ability to be unbiased and logical about things. The fact is, government jobs are pretty cushy as a whole. Good retirement, good benefits, job security, etc. That's just not common for the rest of us regular Joe's. It used to be that government worked for the people. Here in Portland, the people (taxpayers) work for the government. Something seems awfully wrong where one of the largest employers in the city is the government.
I believe your statements about how awful PGE is, just as much as I believe PGE's statements about how much good they are doing. Somewhere in the middle of both sides is probably where the truth lies.
Posted by: TK | Feb 19, 2006 11:43:11 AM
For those worried that a PUD system would see a drop-off in service, infrustructure investment, etc, you need look no further than other large-scale PUDs in the NW (those with comparable # of ratepayers, purchasing power from the same sources). Do a news search on Snohomish PUD, located north of Seattle. Because they're accountable to their ratepayers --the taxpayers-- and not shareholders, they did the muckraking to build a case against Enron. They presented tapes, memos, emails, and statistical data implicating deliberate actions to cheat their ratepayers. Wow, what a concept.
Like most utilities, PUDs are absolutely obsessed with customer service, often more so. I worked as a consultant to the NW utilties, and I can attest that Snohomish PUD, Clark (County) PUD, Eugene Water & Electric Board, Tacoma Power, Seattle City Light, City of Ellensburg (WA)-- ALL OF THEM CITY OR PUD POWER-- were simply outstanding in their lazer-focus service-first mentality. Pride in being the best, pride in finding every last efficiency or maximizing every precious drop of budget. No need for bloated PR/advertising/branding budgets, just enough revenue to keep safe lines, call centers staffed with folks ready for anything, and the ability to work closely with industrial accounts.
Power is an essential service, for the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. With the BPA, we've been blessed with cheap power that BushCo and others lust for... more corporate control in the NW utility realm will only aid their need to 'sell the farm'. How do rates double what you're paying now sound? They want us to pay what NE is paying... the PUC can regulate margin, but when the price is more... you get the picture.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 19, 2006 12:09:48 PM
Sarah-
I do care what you think. However, I am not, nor never have been, a person who ignores misstatements of facts. It would be much easier to just smile and say "well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree", however, that is not who I am.
Steve, in a comment above, states I make ad hominem attacks on people I do not agree with. That is just not true.
Some in our state behave as though people who run for and are elected to office leave their right to disagree with comments made, no matter how factually wrong, at the door. I am sorry, I could not disagree more strongly with that philosophy. In fact, I believe one of the biggest mistakes elected officials make is not responding to baseless charges and comments. Not responding leads some otherwise fair observers to conclude that maybe the charge, no matter how wild eyed, has some basis in truth.
We are engaging in a debate in this community about the behavior of PGE. Discuss whether or not you agree that it is OK for PGE management to engage in buying and selling electricity to themselves (Death Star) in order to raise their prices at the PUC. Discuss whether you agree it is OK for them to charge you for state, federal and local taxes in your bill that they never intended to pay and instead keep to increase their net income.
However, if I disagree with you do not interpret that as me not caring what you think. Further, because I take issue with something someone says that does not amount to an ad hominem attack (replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself.)
A fair reading of the comments both in this thread and my original post do include ad hominem attacks, but not by me.
As far as my track record on managing the bureaus I have been assigned (911 center, Bureau of Development Services (building permits) and the Water Bureau), Steven Duin wrote a piece a couple of weeks ago that praised Development Services as being the only city bureau that had an increase in customer satisfaction amongst Portland citizens.
He also praised the 911 center for reducing call waiting times when a citizen calls 911 while simultaneously having its budget and staffing levels reduced.
I have worked hard to improve how people are treated when getting a building permit. I have also required managers at the 911 center that historically have not answered 911calls to begin answering them.
Those changes, and many others that deserve their own post at BlueOregon, are directly reflected in the improved operations at both of those bureaus that has been recognized and praised by our most cynical frequent users.
The Water Bureau will soon join the ranks of BDS and the 911 center as a proactive, efficient, lean and mean water delivery machine.
Let the discussion continue. But please, let’s stick with the facts.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Feb 19, 2006 12:23:31 PM
Commissioner Leonard:
Why not focus your compliance efforts on policy matters that lie completely within your jurisdiction? Once you have your own house in order, you will have greater moral authority to create a new Electric Utility Oversight function within the City of Portland.
For example, the City of Portland has refused to implement EPA regulations designed to protect us from cryptosporidium. Rather than wasting Portland's resources on a federal lawsuit intended to skirt compliance, or continuing your Quixotic campaign against PGE, I would prefer you direct your energy towards finding the most cost effective way to meet the EPA regulations. The Feds usually win these debates, and a protracted lawsuit is unlikely to lead to the most cost effective implementation of a cryptosporidium treatment facility.
You may recall the political brouhaha that followed President Bush's 90-day delay of the implementation of reduced EPA drinking water standards on arsenic (signed by President Clinton as he left office).
Based on the response from the Left, you would have thought Bush was going to increase arsenic in our water. In fact, the Bush EPA agreed that a reduction from 50 parts per billion (ppb) was good public policy (the existing standard dated from 1942), but they disagreed as to whether or not 10 ppb was the appropriate level.
They also knew many western municipalities were dependent on groundwater supplies that did not comply with the new 10 ppb standard.
Because of Nebraska's uniquely high dependence on groundwater, frequently from dispersed well fields, the cost to many Nebraska communities will be extraordinarily high," the delegation wrote in a statement signed by Sens. Chuck Hagel, a Republican, Ben Nelson, a Democrat, and Reps. Lee Terry, Doug Bereuter and Tom Osborne, all Republicans.
The lawmakers said the state estimates the standard will affect over 78 water systems and cost Nebraska over $120 million.
"Clearly, money spent on implementing this new rule means either less funding elsewhere in a community's budget or a dramatic increase in water rates for consumers, without a corresponding increase in the level of health benefits to the citizens of the community," the delegation stated in an article in the Omaha World Herald.
Now, I know all the lefties just LOVE Chuck Hagel, so I'm inclined to wonder: if Nebraska was forced to comply with these "expensive" clean water regulations, why should Portland be seeking an exemption.
More to the point: if you want to wag your finger at PGE and say "how dare YOU push the envelope of what's legal" then you ought to look in the mirror and recognize the EPA may feel the same way about Portland and its refusal to comply with the cryptosporidium regulations.
Get your own house in order before claiming to have the time, energy, and intellectual capital necessary to regulate PGE.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 19, 2006 12:31:48 PM
"...I would prefer you direct your energy towards finding the most cost effective way to meet the EPA regulations."
The cost for us meeting that regulation is in the neighborhood of one half billion dollars. I would support installing the filtration system if it would do any good. However, the only ones benefiting from the filtration plant will be filtration plant manufacturers.
We have the cleanest, purest water in the world. The EPA's regulation grew out of an incident in Milwaukee, Wisconsin where a sewage pipe broke that ran through their drinking water source. We have no such possibility here in Portland.
Hopefully you are as offended at PGE fleecing you for money in each of your electric bills for taxes that end up in their pocket as you are that a manufacturer of filtration plants will get no business in Portland.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 1:06:10 PM
I believe your statements about how awful PGE is, just as much as I believe PGE's statements about how much good they are doing. Somewhere in the middle of both sides is probably where the truth lies.
Your choice isn't believing Randy or believing PGE. You can look at the evidence and decide for yourself. The Oregonian, Willamette Week and others have laid the facts out pretty clearly. Most of those facts are verifiable, if you are skeptical of them also. You can look up PGE's rates as compared to local PUDs. You can read the text from Enron where their traders joked about their underhanded schemes inflating prices and "screwing Grandma".
You can even look back at the posts in this thread and note for yourself that of all the people who have come out of the woodwork to criticize Randy and the city not one of them has challenged the facts he presented about PGE. Randy says PGE is engaging in misinformation and they retort with "look over there" (sewer rates, cryptosporidium) like my grammy-in-law does when she pretends she's cheating at cards. At least she's just pretending.
If you do that fact checking, you will find that the facts are not "somewhere in the middle" in this one but solidly on the side of the case Randy is making.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Feb 19, 2006 1:26:15 PM
If governments always followed WBAII's directive to perfect the basics before taking on anything new, there wouldn't have been a Louisiana Purchase, Social Security, Medicare, Space Program, or a myriad other government acts that most of us would miss.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 1:27:25 PM
Water and sewer cannot be purchased or billed separately in Portland: you can't choose to buy one without the other. By comparison, I can choose to limit my Natural Gas (NG) consumption through conservation or by substituting electricity consumption....
You really like the misdirection thing, don't you, Alice? You can certainly choose to limit your water consumption and save on your sewer rates. You could even buy your water elsewhere or put in your own water collection and treatment and get your sewer services for free, or nearly so. With electricity and natural gas rates both rising very rapidly I'm not sure that the ability to switch between them is all that useful--and good luck with those photovoltaics, there's a reason every house doesn't already have them. Not that I think any of that is particularly relevent to the current discussion. In any case, it wasn't me who injected water and sewer issues into the discussion of PGE, that was you and your friends.
How natural gas compares to coal for making electricity is not relevant. Using natural gas to make electricity is still much less efficient than using it directly for appliances and heating. The transmission losses alone are significant.
It seems to me stunningly shortsighted to feel good about the fact we may have only 30 years worth of natural gas left and yet are using it up at an ever increasing rate.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Feb 19, 2006 1:27:54 PM
If the EPA regulations are unnecessary, why is Portland the only city in the United States threatening to sue for an exemption?
Perhaps the City of Portland knows more about water quality than the EPA.
I've include several links below for people who would like to learn more. Suffice it to say they appear to know what they're talking about.
this link will take you to the fascist chemistry department at Duke University
additional fear mongering from those nutwings at SAFEWATER.org (girlymen for sure)
here's the actual rule published by the EPA...WARNING: VERY BORING
They're all probably just shills for the filtration and treatment industry. Take it with a grain of salt (but be sure to boil the water first)!
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 1:35:40 PM
What difference does it make why we pay high rates for water/sewer? I am only saying the same thing would happen if you ran PGE.
Now there's a nice example of blind faith. Facts don't matter, reasons don't matter, all that matters is Steve is just sure that anything the city (or presumably, even a PUD) does will be more expensive. Why? Because he just knows it.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 2:13:15 PM
A privately run enterprise would have invested in regular maintenance and system upgrades rather than wait until things are so bad that a Federal mandate becomes inevitable.
Would they? As someone pointed out earlier, there were a lot of private companies dumping a lot of very noxious stuff into the river back when that's just what everyone did, including cities. Everyone already knew pollution in the Willamette was a big problem by the late 1920's. Did they all see the regulations coming and revamp their systems to stop polluting? Well, no, many of them just polluted for as long as they could get away with it and then declared bankruptcy and left the messes they had already created for someone else to clean up.
Deferred maintenence is an issue but not the one that's caused our sewer rates to skyrocket lately. The original design that combined stormwater runoff and sewage into the same system is the main culprit. That system was mostly in place by the mid-1930's. It hasn't been an easy problem to fix. As our understanding of pollution has grown the city has spent a lot of money making it better. Personally, had I been around when the big pipe project was settled on, I'd probably have argued for spending significantly more to dig up half the streets in Portland and uncombine the sewer and stormwater runoff once and for all. But of course, most of the people here who think the sewer rates are all due to mismanagement would have been the first to scream bloody murder at what that would have cost.
Posted by: doretta | Feb 19, 2006 2:25:41 PM
If the EPA regulations are unnecessary, why is Portland the only city in the United States threatening to sue for an exemption?
Perhaps the City of Portland knows more about water quality than the EPA.
Perhaps the City of Portland just knows more about Portland water quality than the EPA? Perhaps the situation with the water supply for the City of Portland is different from those the EPA normally deals with?
No one has suggested that cryptosporidium is never a problem anywhere. None of the sources you linked to addressed the situation in Portland directly.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Feb 19, 2006 2:43:47 PM
The letter2editor above is classic Gard&Gerber propaganda. If uses the same form as several anti-PUD letters I have seen.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Feb 19, 2006 2:54:39 PM
Commissioner Leonard:
First, thank you for listening, and for engaging in dialogue. Most of your fellow commissioners lack the time or courage to do so. I hope it benefits your reelection efforts, or at least helps you keep in touch with opinions that other venues might not welcome.
I wonder if that "half-billion dollars" estimate for EPA compliance is the high-ball alernative to the Tram's $15 million low-ball estimate? You might want to ask staff to double check all their spreadsheets.
Irrespective of the final cost of compliance with the EPA's "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule", the City of Portland needs to effectively manage and improve their existing city owned utilities: water and sewer.
Once you've got water and sewer infrastructure all squared away, then you can begin to address the remaining unmet infrastructure needs within the City's purview: neighborhood sidewalks, street paving, and pedestrian safety/pathways. I'm not looking for "perfection" (as suggested by Tom Civiletti), just a few baby steps in the right direction. When was the last time the city improved a "sand & gravel" street in an existing neighborhood (without formation of an LID)? Is that less important than the Burside Couplet, the Armory, the Tram, or Tryon Farm?
You need to get your own house in order before trying to take on additional (highly complex) businesses, like public power.
Posted by: Randy Leonard | Feb 19, 2006 3:32:06 PM
Bruce-
We are not taking on public power. We are engaged in a process to make sure the rates PGE charges are not based on fraud, improper cost allocation or energy market manipulation. The issue of whether or not PGE becomes a Public Utility District is moot for the time being.
I am approaching the inappropriate actions of PGE no differently than I did the culture surrounding issuing building permits in Portland, some of the dysfunction that previously existed at the 911 center or the top down management style at the Water Bureau.
PGE, in my view, is far from a free market business. It is a regulated monopoly that has an incentive to increase costs that their rate of return is based on. As many eyes as can watch an organization like that, the better.
I actually enjoy debates when they are focused on the issue at hand. It is the only thing I miss about being in the Oregon Legislature.
I have participated in debates in the blogosphere that are among the best I have been involved in (a late night discussion on Jack Bogs site re: gay marriage is the best example). Unfortunately, I have been involved in discussions in this same forum that have caused me to swear I will never engage again (clearly, I was upset at the moment and I am venturing out again).
Thank you for your kind comments. I greatly appreciate them.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Feb 19, 2006 3:49:11 PM
Thank you for taking time out of your weekend, Commissioner Leonard! Lest anybody think I'm a water quality nerd, I'm taking my son for a walk on the banks of the Willamette River. Enjoy the sunshine!
Cryptosporidium does kill people, which is more than has been alleged against PGE (so far). It would be naive to believe it can't happen here, because it's happened in Jackson County, Oregon in 1992. It's happened twice in British Columbia, and their surface water is just as pristine as Bull Run. Safe water or cheap power? Choose only one to concentrate on.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports, "Cryptosporidium oocysts are widespread in U.S. raw water sources in both pristine and polluted areas..."
here's a list of 6 outbreaks in the last 20 years
10,000 residents of Kelowna got very sick
Uh-oh...Cryptosporidium outbreaks in Iowa...
even pristine OREGON experienced a cryptosporidium outbreak in February 1992
But the City of Portland's water bureau says it can't happen here. If Portland gets their exemption, I'll be installing an undersink filters for my drinking water (the best ones have demonstrated their capability to filter cryptosporidium).
Posted by: Ramon | Feb 19, 2006 5:05:57 PM
Commissioner Leonard's Continuing Misinformation Campaign
The Portland Police & Firefighters' Disability and Retirement Fund is ... no problem! There is no ongoing fraud or abuse, there is no unfunded liability, and there is no cause to make changes at present.
The world must look different when you've been Chief of the powerful Portland Firefighters' Union and are both a PERS and PP&FDRF beneficiary. You can pose as Progressives' poster child even as you enact Regressive costs onto the ordinary Joe. You can keep a straight face while taking the position that what's good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander. And you get away with it. What a con job!
Although it would be a mistake to single out this Commissioner, it will become possible to take him seriously about others' misinformation, perhaps, after he retires from public "service".
Meanwhile, the rest of us would be well served by opening our eyes to the reality that public sector union politics has become a dependable deadweight to political progressivism.
Posted by: Tenskwatawa | Feb 19, 2006 7:21:33 PM
#
The popular support lopsidedly favors condemning PGE and bringing its bookkeepings out to public view and oversight. The same persons who "run" it, in terms of electricity expertise, would go on running it.
The only ones losing their job and obscene wages would be the junior ENRON exec's -- but just as intent as the full-grown despots at rape and ruin of the realm -- from the greed-sick management.
Perp-walk 'em. See, I think they think that people simply don't like them. No, really, 'we' people are intending on convicting 'you' into prison, dear managers. Yeah, 'we' don't like you, but that's merely old-fashioned: you earned the enmity. The point is people's disrespect is the least of your worries. You have misappropriated and stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from this community. That's grand theft. That's your worry.
#
Posted by: Alice | Feb 19, 2006 7:48:39 PM
Tenskwatawa:
If you took a poll of a 1,000 Portlanders and ask them who they would rather see take a perp walk:
A). Peggy Fowler
or
B). Erik Sten
I'm guessing Sten would get at least 60% of the votes, on name recognition alone. My point is: you are an unreliable source for evaluating "lopsidedly popular support"! As much as you think you represent the conscience of progressive Portland, there are many others who feel just the same way. The ideologues are always on the other side of the political spectrum, don't you know.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Charlie in Gresham | Feb 18, 2006 1:47:21 PM
"If that is not illegal, it should be"
Randy, why don't you resign your council seat and go back to the legislature and do something about it. You are costing Portlanders (thankfully not me) too much in your commissioners job.
"any mistakes the city of Portland makes are fully and publicly vetted"
Cmon Randy! Before one mismanaged boondoggle gets fully vetted there's another one waiting in the wings.
Give the PGE deal a rest. You and Sten are WAY WAY out of your league and just pissing away tax payers money that could be put to better use.