08/11/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

$750,000 and construction would take place between 1990 and 1995. He said that the LEC total megawatt capacity is currently one and one-half megawatt e excess until a new substation is built. In response to a question from Ms. Schue, Mr. Oakley said that CH2M Hill was asked to study LEC service to the Willow Creek basin--he said it was strictly concerned wi th LEC 's capabil ity to serve the a rea --to the best of hi s knowledge, he said the study had nothing to do with EWEB. Mr. Holmer asked if there were interconnections between LEC and EWES to provide for emergency services. EWEB and LEC representatives said they knew of no such interconnections. Ms. Wooten asked why LEC was interested in maintaining its service to the Willow Creek basin. Mr. Oakley said that without Willow Creek, LEC has no potential for rate reduction and stabilization and LEC woul d lose its potential for increased revenue. He said that LEC has been interested in the Willow Creek area since the 1960's. Mr. Oakley said he thought that the history of the negotiations between EWES on customer exchanges which was provided to the councilors by staff was incomplete and/or selective and could easily be misunderstood. He said that LEC has negotiated customer exchanges in the past and has usually ended up with fewer customers than EWES. He said that these exchanges were always outside of LEC allocated service territory. He said that when LEC applied for exclusive service certification, it did not include any areas that EWES would service. Instead, he said the application covered only areas where LEC's exclusive service already existed, and adjacent areas that were not served by e any utility. He said that if there was service by two utilities in the same general area, LEC did not include it in its application or the PUC order in 1968. He said that Willow Creek has been LEC service territory since 1968. He alleged that Ci ty sta ff were participating in the solicitation of LEC customers to support the change of the electric supplier to Willow Creek. He said that LEC has a contract with each of its members which calls for its members to purchase all their electriCity from LEC. He emphasized this point to ensure the councilors were aware of the contract, as well as of the PUC service territory order. He said that any transfer of LEC consumers would likely increase LEC costs. Mr. Oakley requested that the City Council vote against condemnation of the property. He said that LEC has a legal right to serve the Willow Creek basin and it will fight to support and protect that right. He said that if LEC did not receive assurance tonight that "those efforts by the City staff to interfere with our contractural rights to serve our customers will stop, we will have to ask our attorney to file appropriate legal action to obtain the court order terminating this uncalled for and 1 ega 11y inappropriate activity." He said LEC does not want to litigate, but it does have an obligation to protect its service area. Based on Mr. Oakley's comments, City Attorney Tim Sercombe adv i sed the councilors to conduct their policy discussion openly. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session August 11, 1986 Page 5