More than 30 Eugene residents attended the Eugene Water and Electric Board’s meeting Tuesday night to voice their opinions and offer suggestions as to how the board should handle its inevitable price increase.
EWEB board members agreed that a price increase was inevitable last fall when the energy crisis, which has left California with rolling black-outs, hit the Northwest. The board asked the EWEB staff to formulate some ideas as to the best way to handle an increase.
Dick Varner, EWEB’s fiscal services supervisor, presented the board with three options for a rate increase Tuesday, including a flat rate of $.006 per kilowatt hour, and two models for an inverted rate, which would charge a higher amount per kilowatt hour for higher energy use.
Several board members stated before discussion began that they would not take action at the meeting, but would take more time to consider their options after listening to public opinion.
Eugene residents had learned about the proposed plans for the rate increase because of increased media coverage. EWEB spokeswoman Cathy Hamilton said public support has been split equally between a flat rate and an inverted rate.
Those who spoke at the meeting voiced support and opposition specifically for the inverted rate models proposed. EWEB Vice President Peter Bartel said before the meeting that the board was seriously considering using an inverted rate model because it would encourage conservation.
Those who oppose the inverted rate model said it would punish those who consume a large amount of energy but can’t pay for it because they are on fixed incomes, such as the poor and the elderly.
“The inverted rate model is asking only part of the community to shoulder the bulk of energy costs,” Craig Mayne said. “Just because someone is a heavy user of energy does not mean that they are a wasteful user.”
Jean Melton is the president of Alvord Taylor, a company that houses low-income residents, specifically those on Medicaid and those with severe developmental disabilities and serious medical conditions. She said the people her company serves can’t help being home all day, and therefore will use more energy and ultimately pay more in energy costs.
“The inverted rates hit those who are helpless the hardest,” Melton said.
Those who favor the inverted rate model said it will fairly distribute the cost of energy to those who use more and aren’t conserving.
“Those who use less should not have to subsidize for those who use more,” Melvin Erickson said. “People need to be motivated to use less electricity.”
Other citizens who spoke think any increase, whether handled with a flat or an inverted rate structure, is unnecessary.
Mari Hern said EWEB needs to look at its practices and tighten its own belt before raising rates.
“Why is the general manager getting a six percent salary increase when rates are going to go up?” Hern said.
The month of January did produce lower loads, or amounts of energy used, which left EWEB in a better financial state. The loads were lower because of warmer weather and increased conservation efforts by area residents. This prompted EWEB Commissioner Sandra Bishop to opt for no rate increase.
“I don’t see a need to raise rates,” Bishop said. “I refuse to be driven by pure economics, and I don’t feel this is an adequate time to look at conservation levels.”
But the other board members will continue to look at the best way to increase rates, while taking into consideration how to best serve the public, Bartel said.
By taking a delay to further consider options, the board members hope to find a way to make landlords responsible for weatherproofing their tenants’ living spaces and better accommodate those on fixed incomes. They will revisit the issue again in March.
“I’m inclined to not only take a delay, but also to work with the staff on various inverted rate programs that will give a conservation incentive and not punish low-income families,” EWEB Commissioner Susie Smith said.
EWEB hears public comment on rates
Daily Emerald
February 6, 2001
0
More to Discover