08/11/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

pre-existing use for this land. He said that if the councilors assume that it is, it is not a basis for condemnation authority. Instead, he said that LECls e present service area would be grandfathered into the plan. Under 1 and use laws, a pre-existing use is permitted to continue and the City could lay itself open to claims of antitrust activities, by using its power to take customers from one business to give them to another. Mr. Oakley discussed the January 17, 1986, Business Assistance Team memorandum that the councilors received. In February 1985 he said that the councilors asked EWEB to enter into a cooperative study with LEC regarding electrical service to the Willow Creek basin. He said that he believed that the information that the councilors have--to the best of his knowledge--is "not in any way a result of the joint discussions between lEC and EWEB." Instead, he said, "City staff and the Mayor have used the council's directive as a basis for compil i ng thei r own study. II He said that the Willow Creek developers and LEC initiated the January 1985 CH2M Hill study to determi ne the future requi rements of Wi 11 ow Creek, and that the study stated that LEC could continue to serve the area effi ci ent ly and economi ca lly, even wi th the significant growth projections provided by the developers. There was no suggestion that LEC should relinquish this territory. He said that City staff was gi ven a copy of thi s study, but none of the information tha t the councilors have refers to the CH2M Hill study. He asked that the City Council be furnished with that information before it decides which utility should serve Willow Creek. He asked where the money would come from if the City chose to condemn the property at the request of the developers. He cited Article 44 of the City Charter, Subsection 6, which stated that EWEB controls the income of the utilities and the operation, maintenance and improvement of them. He said that Section 44 also grants only to EWEB the power of the City to generate e light and distribute the electricity. He said that the only professional study completed on that area supports that LEC should continue to serve Willow Creek. He said that LEC provided information to City staff and the rough draft--which was distributed by the Business Assistance Team--came to LEC. He said that LEC noted, in writing, errors and omissions to the draft, but the current document does not contain LEC's comments that were noted on that draft. Mr. Oakley said that EWEB serves the area north of Willow Creek and does not now and may not need to cross the certified territory to perform services in its area. He said that LEC has the capacity to serve Willow Creek and the South Hills areas and new lines will be installed as growth occurs. He questioned why EWES built the Willow Creek substation if it does not serve the Willow Creek area. He said that the criteria for choosing a utility to serve Willow Creek should be based on LEC's past performance and its future service capabi 1 it i es. Mr. Oakley discussed the Tampa exercise, which gave each of the utilities an opportunity to provide cost estimates to provide service to a 10 megawatt load. He said that construction costs to build to that system were $1.4 million, and of that $1.4 million, he said that $300,000 could be attributed to the potential consumer. He said that LEC's current construction allowance policy gives consumers credit for the load that will be put on LECls system, based on load factors. He said that the construction allowance for the very e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session August 11, 1986 Page 3