Showing posts with label PUCO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PUCO. Show all posts
Friday, August 2, 2013
(VIDEO) STARK COUNTY BASED NATURAL GAS AGGREGATION BY LOCAL GOV'TS: GOOD OR BAD GOVERNMENT?
On the surface the discussion is whether or not local government action to take collective action to lower the price of natural gas (a prime source of fuel for cooking and heating in Stark County) is a good thing or a bad thing.
Most Stark Countians would likely say it is a "no-brainer." What could be possibly bad about saving consumers money?
However, if one changes the topic and phrase the question of government action in terms of Obamacare (the proponents of which say over the longer haul will save health care consumers money), the matter of government involvement in private sector financial/economic activity becomes much more controversial.
What if it became absolutely clear that Obamacare saved Americans money?
Would Obamacare be seen in a more positive light?
Probably.
Right now, it is open to debate whether or not - when one considers all aspects of the legislation - there is a net savings of money to Joe and Mary Americas and beyond that to business/corporate America.
Unlike some doctrinaire types (e.g. Libertarians and Tea Partiers), most Americans are highly pragmatic and if government action benefits the hoi polloi then it is a good thing.
And given the numbers of participation in Ohio's Natural Gas Aggregation authorized program for local governments to participate in, it is clear that most Stark Countians think government action is just fine.
The Stark County Political Report examined the Ohio statutory authorized (Ohio Revised Code Section 4929.20) natural gas aggregation programs of Stark's cities, villages and (for the unincorporated townships) Stark County government itself and has leaned that by virtue of local governments collecting their citizens into volume bargaining units, participants likely save about $150 annually.
So says Mark Burns of Independent Energy Consultants.
Burns is a consultant with many Stark County governments in setting up and administering their natural gas aggregation programs.
Here is Burns in an appearance before Stark County commissioners on July 17th explaining the county natural gas program.
The particulars of the program are spelled out with precision in this LINK to an Ohio Consumers Counsel website.
It does make a difference as to whether an aggregation program is an opt-out or an opt-in one in terms of participation.
Opt-in, which requires affirmative action on the part of consumers, has only about a 20% participation rate The Report is told whereas opt-out (residents are automatically included and have to take themselves out) come in at a substantially higher rate.
For those Stark Countians who choose not to participate in aggregation, they either accept a default rate or select their own providers.
The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, headed up by Stark Countian and former Republican state Representative Todd Snitchler, provides what it calls an "Apples to Apples" website from which Ohioians/Stark Countians can pick from as an alternative to the local government aggregation program.
Focusing on the current (7/15/2013 - 08/12/2013) Dominion East Ohio (DEO/EOG - East Ohio Gas) "fixed-rate" plan which most Stark County local governments have (see chart above), one can readily see that participating in the local government plan is a financial advantage.
Ohio does have an electric aggregation program in which it appears all Stark County local governments participate in. However, it is an opt-in program that does not require voter approval.
The lesson to be learned from the matter of government participation in what is normally private enterprise activity as far as the general public is concerned, is not so much whether or not government action is acceptable as a matter of political philosophy.
The bottom line question seems to be: Does government involvement/action save me money?
Labels:
PUCO,
stark county commissioners,
Todd Snitchler
Thursday, June 10, 2010
A VIDEO TO WATCH: IS IT THE "ARROGANT" ELECTRIC POWER OR THE AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER?
UPDATE: 06/10/2010 11:30 AM - Here is a copy of the actual e-mail text from AEP's David Wheeler to County Administrator Mike Hanke.
We are in the process of defining the economic impact AEP Ohio
has on the many communities we serve.
We elected to look at the county level as the basis for allocating our tax,payroll, purchased goods / services and philanthropic impacts. I was astounded to learn that in 2009, AEP Ohio spent $71,595,940 in Stark County. We spent just under $31,000,000 in purchased goods and services and nearly $11,000,000 in property and payroll taxes.
I thought you might find this interesting. Have a safe day.
David M. Wheeler
General Manager, Community Affairs
AEP Ohio
We elected to look at the county level as the basis for allocating our tax,payroll, purchased goods / services and philanthropic impacts. I was astounded to learn that in 2009, AEP Ohio spent $71,595,940 in Stark County. We spent just under $31,000,000 in purchased goods and services and nearly $11,000,000 in property and payroll taxes.
I thought you might find this interesting. Have a safe day.
David M. Wheeler
General Manager, Community Affairs
AEP Ohio
ORIGINAL POST
According to an e-mail received by County Administrator Mike Hanke, it appears to the SCPR that American Electric Power (AEP/Ohio Power) is looking for a little love in its service area.
One of the places is with the Stark County commissioners?
A strange place, indeed,
The e-mail sender (David Wheeler, General Manager of AEP's Community Affairs and Economic Development) sent what apparently could be construed to be a private? communication to "County Administrator" Hanke (i.e. Hanke is shown on the accompanying video as saying that he asked Dave for permission to share its contents with commissioners and got permission to do so). Perhaps, Administrator Hanke has a little explaining to do about the implication of private? Didn't he receive this e-mail at the office? If so, per force of the situs of receipt by a public official, it would be a public document. Why would permission to share be needed?
The SCPR has asked Hanke for a copy of the e-mail on the premise that it is a public document. It will be interesting to see what his response is.
In the e-mail Wheeler talks about the large financial expenditures that AEP makes within Stark County and therefore impliedly boosting the Stark County economy.
But nowhere does he talk about the 23% in rate increases that Stark County's Ohio Power customers are to being subjected to over 2009, 2010 and 2011.
The SCPR applauds Commissioner Bosley for coming right back at Hanke with the "what about the huge amount of the dollars AEP is taking from Stark Countians via the gigantic rate increases" (paraphrase) point upon Hanke finishing his "Stark County education moment" on behalf of AEP.
Further kudos to Commissioner Steve Meeks for asking AEP, with Hanke as facilitator, to fund a new grandstand presumably for the Stark County Fairgrounds.
The only worse place for AEP to be looking for Stark County love may have been with the Plain Township trustees. In particular, Trustee Louis Giavasis who was the most active, vocal and energetic Stark County government official opposing the AEP original increase request.
One would think that the likes of AEP would just go away and hide when it gets it way with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO).
It appears that the PUCO cut AEP original request about in half. But many of us of Stark County are not buying that line.
The Report believes that companies like AEP, as a matter of predesigned calculation, ask for unrealistically high rate increases as a first initiative so as to give the PUCO room to cut the increases actually granted to make the PUCO look like it is consumer friendly.
AEP is happy, the PUCO is happy and unsophisticated consumers are happy.
But for those of us who have insight into how the game is played; we truly understand that we have been gamed by American Electric Power and the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.
That's how arrogant these folks are!!!
And they want to be loved? Watch this intriguing video of the exchange between Administrator Hanke and Commissioners Bosley and Meeks.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
DISCUSSION: BOSLEY TO KEEP UP FIGHT AGAINST AEP 24% RATE INCREASE?

CORRECTED
Stark County Commissioner Todd Bosley is THE public official who started the Stark County fight against a rate increase filed by American Electric Power (AEP/Ohio Power [locally]).
The initial AEP request was for 52% over three (3) years. The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) split the difference with AEP settling on 24% increase over three years.
Listen to Commissioner Bosley being interviewed by WKSU's Karen Schaefer below:
Labels:
AEP,
Commissioner Bosley,
PUCO,
WKSU Karen Schaefer
Monday, February 16, 2009
DISCUSSION: WILL THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OHIO (PUCO) CONSIDER AEP'S USE OF CORPORATE AIRCRAFT (PERSONAL USE) IN ITS RATE INCREASE CASE?

UPDATE: From a source: "... THE 2007 FERC [Federal Energy Regulatory Commission] filing for AEP, and Mike Morris' compensation package include $289,865 of "Personal Use of Company Aircraft.'' (Michael G. Morris-Chairman of the board, president and chief executive officer)
The STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) passes on a little tidbit to readers about what AEP (Ohio Power) is doing with some of the revenue it raises from electricity users.
The tidbit is from a friend of The Report who has connections inside the utility world, to wit:
A friend of mine was at a party with some of the AEP big shots and she said they were bragging that the company owns three jets -- and makes them available to the bosses for personal travel. I'm assuming we're paying for that, too.Do you wonder whether or not member of the Stark County legislative caucus has any interest in looking into this bit of information?
How about it Oelslager, Okey, Schuring, Slesnick, Snichler and Shiavoni?
Labels:
AEP,
American Electric Power,
PUCO
Friday, February 13, 2009
A SCPR GRAPHIC EDITORIAL
Labels:
AEP,
PUCO,
The Rep,
The Repository
Saturday, January 24, 2009
DISCUSSION: STARK COUNTY LEGISLATORS COST STARK COUNTY $55,200 IN 2009 ($140,000 - 2011?) ON COUNTY BUDGET VIA UNFUNDED MANDATE!

Who should pay for the operation of the Stark County Law Library?
Lawyers and other users - right?
Not right.
In its collective wisdom the Ohio General Assembly including Stark Countians Kirk Schuring (R - 29th Senate), Scott Oelslager (R - 51st Ohio House), John Hagan (now term limited out R- 50th), John Boccieri (now 16th District congressman - but then D - 33rd - Senate), Steve Slesnick (D 52nd - Ohio House) and Mark Okey (D - 61st which included a part of Stark County) voted to reverse direction on who pays for the operations of the Stark County Law Library.
Now yours truly is a lawyer and a dues paying member of the Stark County Law Library.
But should I and my colleagues-at-the-bar and other users of the library be subsidized by Stark County taxpayers?
A resounding no! - so says the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report).
Kelli Young of The Repository reported on 1/22/2009 that a Stark County Board of Commissioners obligation to pay for the library on a phased out basis was abruptly reversed in December, 2008 when the Ohio General Assembly completed action on HB 420 to re-institute - immediately - an non-reimbursed (from state of Ohio funds) mandate that Ohio's counties (of course, including Stark) pay for the operation of county law libraries.
If you were to ask any of the supporters of HB 420 whether or not they are in favor of "unfunded mandates," undoubted they would also say an unequivocal no.
What these legislators hide behind is no one pointing out chapter and verse where the rhetoric doesn't match the action.
One of the missions of The Report will be to go and check on how these folks vote on "unfunded mandates" and report to Stark Counties name, rank and serial number of the offending legislators.
There is nothing like a "high intensity light" on an legislative activity to put the actions in the public spotlight.
So thank you Stark County - courtesy of your Stark County legislators - for the subsidy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









