Loading...
96-476�'� �-(' � (-,. ( �, � �1 � � Presented By Referred To Council File # � � � Green Sheet # 3 t S b d RESOLUTION 41� AUL, MINNESOTA 36 Committee: Date WIIEREA5, Northern States Power Company (hereafter, "Company") is a public service corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, which, as a public utility under the laws of Minnesota, at present provides electric and gas service within the City of Saint Paul under franchises which will expire on June 30, 1996, such franchises being Ordinance No. 96-33 (gas) and Ordinance No. 96-34 (electric), which expire on June 30, 1996; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul has two ard'mances under consideration, Ordinance No. 96-417, the "electric franchise;' and Ordinance No. 96-416, the "gas franchise," (collectively, the "franchises") which will grant the Company two franchises commencing on July 1, 1996, and rumung through June 30, 2006; and WHEREAS, under Minnesota law, these franchises will confer on the Company the right to use City streets and other public property for the purpose of operating its electric and gas utility business, in rehxrn for which the law authorizes the City to require that the Company pay the City franchise fees to raise revenue, to defray the increased municipal costs that accrue as a result of the urility operafions in the streets and public property, ar both; and WHEREAS, these franchises employ a different method for computing the amount of the fees than has been applied in the former franchises; and VJHEREAS, the Council desires to state that, in the adoption of these franchises, it relies on certain revenue projections which were prepared and relied on by the representatives of the City and the Company in negofiating these franchises for the purpose of making determinations as to the acceptability of these franchises; and WHEREA5, the Council desires to adopt the following findings of fact (a) to affirm the factual bases for the franchises, (b) to clarify the intent of the Council in adopting the franchises and the various franchise fee provisions in them, (c) to ratify the assumptions used by the City and Company representatives in negotiating and preparing the pending ordinances, and (d) to state the underlying assumptions on which the Council relied in adopting them; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Council adopts and ratifies the following Findings of Fact as to the franchises, indicating where necessary if the Findings relate specifically and exclusively to either the electric or the gas franchise: . / �i� I. FINDINGS OF THE COUNCIL ��� y � � Electric Franchise 1. New Basis for Franchise Fees. The franchise fees required to be paid by the Company in this ordinance aze based on a different formula than the franchise fees which have been paid under past franchise agreements between the Company and the City. Franchise fees in previous agreements were based on a percentage of the Company's gross earuiugs. After October 31, 1996, franchise fees will no longer be collected based on the gross earnings generated by the Company's sale of electric energy within the City. Because of the potential for competition in the sale of electric energy, the Company and the City are agreeing to ixnplement a different franchise fee formula in this ordinance. Current govemment regulation generally prevents customers from having a choice in determiuing their electric energy supplier. It is likely that these regulations will change in the neaz fixture to allow competition in the sale of electric energy through the transportation of electric energy for other suppliers, which is called "wheeling." It is anticipated that the Company will continue to distribute electric energy through its facilities in the City. However, under wheeling arrangements, electric energy may be supplied by other enfities, but wheeled by the Company to vazious Company customers in the City. If wheeling were to occur under a gross earnings franchise fee formula, the City would lose franchise fees and the Company could be put at a competitive disadvantage. The City would lose franchise fees because the Company's gross revenues on which the franchise fees would be based would include only the price chazged for distributing the electric energy and would not include the gross revenues derived from the production and transmission of the electric energy outside the Company's service area. The Company could therefore be put at a competitive disadvantage under a gross earnings formula because the franchise fee would be applied against the total revenue it obtained for selling electric energy in the City, which could include revenue received from producing the electric energy, while the gross eai7iiugs franchise fee could not be chazged on the revenue obtained by Company competitors for producing electric energy. 2. Revenue Stability and Competitive Neutrality. To protect against the risks of wheeling to the Company and the City the franchise fees in this ordinance are an aggregate of two or three components depending upon customer electric energy use and classification. The components are (1) a monthly volume fee based on the amount of electric energy delivered to each customer over Company electric facilities (hereafter, the "Energy Fee"), (2) a monthly meter fee (hereafter, the "Meter Fee") based on the number and type of ineters or meter-equivalent customer accounts, and (3) a monthly amount based on the peak electric energy demand for certain Company customers (hereafter, the "Demand Fee"). It is the intent of this franchise that any electric energy which is delivered to Company customers which aze located within the City is subject to the imposition of the franchise fees as provided in this ordinance and agreement, and in the electric francluse. 3. Fee Formula Approach. The Company and the City have converted the previous gross eaznings franchise fee formula to the new multi-factor formula in the following manner. It was agreed that a multi-factor formula for franchise fees would minimize fluctuations in franchise fees due to weather volatility and minimize burden shifts between customer classes from the existing gross earnings formula. To accomplish this, it was agreed that calendar year 1994 represents normal weather and typical 2 �3r � �-q� �l � - y'1(, electric energy consumption patterns, and therefore a�erage meter counts, peak demand units, and energy units consumed from the 1994 base period were used to project revenues over the term of the franchise. In particular, the 1994 data was used for two purposes in the projection of franchise revenues: (1) After customer class revenue targets were agreed to for each class, franchise fee factors for meter, energy and demand were determined for each yeaz of the franchise by dividing the annual revenue for each class by the actual 1994 meter, energy and demand units and by further adjusting the factors to meet the mutual objectives of the Company and the City. (2) All revenue projections for future years assumed that in those future years meter counts, peak demand units, and energy units would be equal to the actual 1994 counts. To provide moderate growth and stability in franchise fees over the term of the franchise, a Meter Fee was applied to all customer classes, and one or more of the Meter, Demand, and Energy Factors were increased by moderate amounts for the vazious classes in the yeazs 1996, 2000, 2002 and 2004. Gas Franchise 1. New basis for franchise fees. The franchise fees required to be paid by the Company in this ordinance aze based on a different formula than the franchise fees which have been paid under past franchise agreements between the Company and the City. Franchise fees in previous agreements were based on a percentage of the Company's gross earnings. After October 31, 1996, franchise fees will no longer be collected based on the gross earnings generated by the Company's sale of gas within the City. Because of the potential for continued competition in the sale of gas, the Company and the City aze agreeing to impiement a different franchise fee formula in this ordinance. Due to changes in government regulations, certain gas customers, primarily lazge commercial and industrial customers, have been able for several years to purchase gas on the open market from other gas suppliers and use the Company's gas distribution system for transportation of the gas. As a result the City has in the past lost franchise fees because it only received franchise fees based on the amount paid to the Company for the use of its gas transporta6on system and not on the greater dollar amount paid for the transportation gas delivered to the Company system. It is anticipated that transportation gas may soon be auailable to more Company customers which would result in a greater erosion of City franchise fees under a gross earnings formula. 2. Revenue Stability and Competitive Neutrality. This franchise fee formula is intended to protect the City against fiu•ther losses in revenue which would have occurred under a continuation of the gross eamiugs franchise fee. The franchise fees in this ordinance aze an aggregate of two components: a monthly volume fee based on the amount of gas delivered to each customer over Company gas facilities (hereafter, the "Volume Fee"), and a monthly meter fee (hereafter, the "Meter Fee") based on the number and type of ineters or meter-equivalent customer accounts. To protect the City against further losses in revenue, it is the intent of this franchise that any gas which is delivered to Company customers which aze located within the City through ar by means of Company facilities or equipment which is located within the City is subject 3 �B �-z� -9� 9c-y�� to the unposition of the franchise fee as provided in this gas franchise. Loss of futute gas franchise fees is also minimized by requiring existing Company customers not now classified as eligible to take transportation gas to continue to pay franclvse fees based on theu current customer classificarion. 3. Fee Formula Approach. The Company and the City have converted the previous gross earnings franchise fee formula to the new multi-factor formula in the following manner. It was agreed that a multi-factor formula for franchise fees would m;»;,,,;ze fluctuations in franchise fees due to weather volatility and minimi�e burden shifts between customer classes from the e�sting gross earnings formula. To accomplish tYus, it was agreed that calendar yeaz 1994 represents normal weather and typical gas volume consumption patterns, and therefore average meter counts and volumes consumed from the 1994 based period were used to project revenues over the term of the franchise. In particular, the 1994 data was used for two purposes in the projection of franchise revenues: (1) After customer class revenue targets and subtargets were agreed to for each class, franchise fee factors for meter and volume were determined for each yeaz of the franchise period by dividing the annual revenue for each class by the actual 1994 meter and volume units and by further adjusring the facts to meet the mutual objectives of the Company and the City. (2) All revenue projections for future yeazs assumed that in those future years meter counts and volumes would be equal to the actual 1994 counts. To provide moderate growth and stability in franchise fees over the term of the franchise, a Meter Fee was applied to all customer classes, and one or more of the Meter and Volume Factors were increased by moderate amounts for the various classes in the years 1996, 2000, 2002 and 2004. Both Electric and Gas Franchises 1. Charter Requirement. The Council of the City of Saint Paul finds and determines that the franchise fee formulation provided for in this ordinance will provide a franchise fee to the City in a sum equal to at least five (5) percent of the gross eaniings of the Company derived or accruing from the exercise or enjoyment by the Company of the franchise within the City as provided herewith, and that such formulation satisfies the requirements of Chapter 16 of the Charter of the City of Saint Paul, including Sections 16.06 and 16.07 thereo£ If in any particulaz calendar yeaz, the franchise fees collected for tlus franchise do not equal five (5) percent of the said gross earnings of the Company, the Company as franchise holder is specifically relieved of the collection and payment of the difference between the franchise fees actually paid and five (5) percent of Company gross eau�ings. and, be it 4 (v� � 2�-9� II. FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE PROJECTIONS ° l�.�l`1� FURTHER RESOLVED, that the attached E�ibit A(noting that (1) the 1996 projection is an annualized amount while the New Franchises in 1996 are for six months, of which four months aze Interim Fees and two months are New Fees; and (2) the projection of fee revenue for the yeaz 2006 is appro�mately half of the amount for the yeaz 2005) sets forth the projected fee revenues on wluch the Council has relied in approving the franchises in Ordinance Nos. 96-416 and 96-417, that the said E�ibit is hereby incorporated in this Resolution as if it was set forth fully herein, and that the data contained therein aze adopted and ratified by the Council as a basis for the adoption of these franciuses. .�. III. RELIANCE ON AGREEMENT WHEREAS, representafives of the City and the Company l�ave entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, under which the City and the Company will execute an Agreement prior to the effective date of the franchises, which latter Agreement will coufirin agreement on a number of issues azising out of the negotiation of the franchises, including but not limited to a recognition of the importance of the placement of all Company customers in certain classes for the payment of franchise fees, the need for maintaining City revenue despite changes in Company rate taziffs for customers, and the Company's promises to collect franchise fees from customers; now, therefore, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul relies on the promises, undertaking and mutual recognitions contained in such Agreement in adopting these franchises. and, be it IV. AGREEMENT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Mayor and appropriate city officials are hereby authorized to execute that certain Agreement relating to matters ancillary to the New Franchises which the Company has previously agreed, on April 12, 1996, to sign on or before the effective date of the proposed New Franchises. Adopted by Council: Date t (� Adoption Certified by Covncil Secretary By: Approved by Mayor? Date ,� 7�! �1� By_ �iti� ��� Requested by Department of: i � �� a��c� C� �� �'ti' ^ c� ����c e� By: � � r � , Form Approved by City Attorney By: �- Z(v �7�G itpproved by Mayor for Submission to Council <C���y�� By: "I . ����C DEP�RiMENTNFFlCErtOUNGL DATE INITIATED � G�, L� �� GREEN SHEET T FINANCE & MANAGEMENT SERVICES 4-26-96 i INITIAUDAiE CONfACTPERSONBPHONE �DEPARTMENTDIRECTOW �CINCOUNCIL MARTHA LARSON 6-8766) A ���N �CITVATTORNEY -9(� �CRYCLERK NUYBER PoR MUST BE ON COUNCIL ACaENDA BY (DATE) ROVfING O BUDGEf DIRECTOR O FIN. & MGT. SEFVIC D IR. Ma 8 1996 � � MAVOR (ORASSISTANTJ � TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) ACTION REQUESTED: Passage of resolution stating City Council intent in adopting the NSP electric and gas franchises effective July 1, 1996, to June 30, 2006. RECOMMENDATIONS: nppmve (A) or Reject (R) pERSONAL SERVICE CONTFiACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING �UES?IONS: _ PI.qNNING CAMMISSION _ CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION �� Has [his person/firm ever worketl under a contract for this department? — CIB COMMITTEE _ YES NO 2. Has Ihis person/firtn ever been a crty empfoyee? _ STAFF — VES NO _ DiSiRIC7 CoURT _ 3. Does ihis person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTIVE� YES NO Explaln ell yes answers on aeperate sheet and attech to green sheet INITIATINCa PROBLEM, ISSUE.OPPORTUNIN(Who, What, Whan. Where, Why)� The gas and electric franchises use a different method to compute the franchise fees payable to the City, based on a delivery rate structure as opposed to the percentage of NSP gross earnings. This resolution states the factual basis for the franchise, clarifies the intent of the Council, ratifies the assumptions used by the negotiators, and states the assumptions on which the Council relies in adopting the franchise ordinances. ADVANTAC>ES IFAPPROVED: The resolution will be very useful in resolving future uncertainties or misunderstandings as to what the franchise ordinances mean and how they are to be interpreted. �ISADVANTAGESIFAPPFOVED: None. �.a;s�,yp,,; �,s+?s�' -`-• �"m`�.m;,�svis ._. , _� .� _ os'�'�'_ _�: � ��,�,�j W' 1 �;'uj J;� DISA�VANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVED: Resolution of future disputes might be more difficult and less favorable for the City. TO7AL AMOUNT OFTRANSACTION $ COST/REVENUE BUDGE7ED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO FUNDIfdG SOURCE ACTIVI7Y NUMBER FINANCIAL INFORHiATION (EXPLAIN) � � c ea d � � � W Q � w E ;� � al � � � � � L NI d �1.+ � � a � $I � r � ol C N . � � � o O O N � L ° I N T (� O � NI � T � �I O °' � � � �I w � � a � �� �� � w �,I w ` � w � _ Z Q � � a � Z LL � y y t6 U L G7 E 0 N � N U ca � � 3 Y � �x+��$� A �ImImIoIQ R r e �I�IN m _._ ` `v = d o ri= o E� m m� N d Z IL IL -- Y. y . . C . . L t 9 C C C a ..��.���,��� U m �o E E E E E E L m � V U fJ U U F: W � s �� �� � R F n��� R A r � E O Z M � �/�/�� R c. —y'14 � � ; 6 � a w 0 iri w w LL O W g � ROBERTA MEGARD Councilmember CITY OF SAINT PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL May 15, 1996 Counci! President David Thune 310 City Hall Saint Paul MN 55102 Dear Council President Thune: ��—y�ic� ANN D. CIESLAK Legislalive Aitle I intend to abstain from voting on Council Resolutions 96-476, 96-416, and 96- 417. I do not have a legal conflict of interest, as defined in State Statute Chapter 471. However, it is a matter of public recard that I own stock in Williams Companies, Inc. which has business dealings with Northem States Power. I believe it is important for people to have utmost faith and confidence in the actions of their elected officials. Therefore, I will not participate in the discussion of these resolutions and I intend to abstain from voting to auoid the slightest appearance of a conflict of interest. Sincerely, �� Roberta Megard CC: CITY HALL Timothy Marx THIRD FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/266-8640 s�<s M1nuG on Berycled Papee