This text was pulled from the PDF automatically and may contain mistakes. The PDF is the official record, so check it before relying on this.
Page 1
UTILITY COMMITTEE
The Utility Committee Meeting was held on June 22, 2015 at 5:20 p.m. with Chairman Hutchison
presiding. Members present were Mr. Cole, Mr. Neil, and Mr. Blakeman. Ms. Stewart was absent.
Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 5:29 p.m.), Mr. Sudler (departed at 5:21 p.m.),
Mr. Hosfelt (departed at 5:22 p.m., returned at 5:33 p.m., departed at 5:35 p.m.), Mr. Hare (arrived at 5:32 p.m.,
departed at 5:40 p.m., returned at 5:56 p.m.), and Mr. Slavin (departed at 5:32 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was
also present (arrived at 5:34 p.m.).
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously
carried.
HOUSE BILL NO. 171 AMENDING TITLES 9 AND 22 OF THE DELAWARE CODE
RELATING TO TAXES ON SPECIAL BETTERMENTS
Members were advised that House Bill No. 171 establishes a Telecommunications Tax
Modernization Review Group to study and make recommendations for establishing a future funding
mechanism to replace the property tax on telecommunications equipment and addressing the
projected decrease in revenue to the counties, municipalities and school districts from the transition
to new technologies throughout the State. The resulting mechanism should be revenue-neutral to
the localities and competitively neutral to providers of like services. To encourage investment in
broadband infrastructure, this bill also caps the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at
FY15 rates and eliminates the tax as of June 30, 2018.
Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that a proposed revision for
House Bill House Bill 171 (Attachment #1). Mrs. Mitchell stated that the revised bill eliminates the
provisions of the original bill establishing the Tax Modernization Review Group and eliminates the
repeal of the tax as of June 30, 2018. To encourage investment in broadband infrastructure, it retains
the cap on the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at 2015 levels, and clarifies that the
cap only applies with respect to communication providers that are currently subject to the tax and
specifies that the limitations on county and municipal taxation will apply as well to school districts
and Business Improvement Districts. At the present time this tax is paid only by landline
telecommunication providers and not cable companies.
Mrs. Mitchell explained that she served with former Representative Darryl Scott on a related
committee several years ago and that those in the telecommunication industry felt that they were
being taxed unfairly on the betterments tax versus other providers. The committee was to look at
different alternatives, but when Rep. Scott did not run again, this did not occur. The proposed
amendments aimed for consistency among all providers of telecommunications equipment.
Mrs. Mitchell stated her understanding that the current proposal was to work with each community
to try to obtain consistency.
In response to Councilman Hutchison, Mrs. Mitchell confirmed that the General Assembly would
be voting on the amendment on June 23, 2015. She indicated that she agreed with the proposed
amendment but not the bill as originally written, and this is what she relayed to the parties that were
involved in this.
Page 2
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 2
Responding to Mr. Neil, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she did not believe the bill would pass during the
current session, stating that there did not seem to be enough support for it.
OVERVIEW OF CITY UTILITIES
At the request of Chairman Hutchison and for the benefit of new members of Council,
Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, provided a brief overview of the various utilities that the City of
Dover provides to its residents and customers. Mr. Koenig stated that the City’s power system had
its 100th anniversary within the last few years and the water system dated back to roughly 1882;
therefore, the City had been in the public utility business for many years, which had been a benefit
to the City and its customers. [City Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequently during the meeting,
Mr. Blakeman advised members that the City’s electric utility came online and began generating
power on January 1, 1900, and received a 100-year award from the American Power Association
in 2000; therefore, the utility had been generating power for the City of Dover for 115 years.]
Mr. Koenig explained that the City of Dover was granted a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity by the State of Delaware to provide electric services in a service territory. The City of
Dover proper consists of approximately 24 square miles, and the City’s electric territory is
approximately 74 square miles, which extends to Little Creek, Port Mahon, down into
Kitt’s Hummock, which includes the Dover Air Force Base and areas south of Route 10, and then
comes up and intertwines with the City limits. On the north side, the territory is in line with City
limits. Mr. Koenig informed members that when property is annexed into the City, there is usually
a letter of agreement where the franchise providing service prior to the annexation is transferred to
the City’s electric system. He noted that no financial transaction takes.
Mr. Koenig advised members that the City of Dover built a power plant in the 1960s at McKee Run
which included two (2) 17 MW units called Unit 1 and Unit 2. In the early 1970s, Unit 3 was added,
which is roughly 103 MW, and in approximately 1990, the VanSant combustion turbine was added.
Mr. Koenig stated that at that point the City was producing power for the demands of its service
territory; however, over the last two and a half decades the City had gravitated toward being part of
a regional power supply grid called the PJM system. The City is no longer a primary producer of
power but produces power when called upon by the grid. He indicated that the City’s generation
capacity is approximately 170 MW.
Mr. Koenig explained that Council voted to retire Units 1 and 2, consisting of 34 MW of power, in
Power Year 2018 for budgetary reasons. Council had considered replacing those units with either
a purchase power agreement or new units that would offer Dover power generation well into the
future. Related discussions had been ongoing for approximately four (4) years, and Mr. Koenig
stated that it was hoped that staff would be bringing agreements regarding power supply forward to
Council for consideration.
Mr. Koenig stated that the Calpine Corporation had come before Council to obtain authorization for
a 618 MW facility for two (2) units, the first of which was for the Garrison Energy Center, which
became commercially available on June 1, 2015, began producing power to the grid, and became the
City’s largest water customer overnight. Prior to the unit coming onto the grid, the thought was that
once it did, Dover would not be called upon to generate power; however, that had not been the case.
Page 3
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 3
Mr. Koenig reiterated that power generation is a very fluid and complicated environment, making
it difficult to determine when Dover will be called upon to produce power. He stated that there are
many producers inside the grid, but some are being retired and coming offline because they are old
coal technology. Mr. Koenig stated that the call for who runs and who does not changes on a daily
basis. When nuclear power plants are offline for maintenance, many more facilities are called up
than when these plants are online and available. Mr. Koenig advised members that there had been
some difficulty with gas supply in the last couple of weeks, and he hoped to find out more about that
issue in meetings with The Energy Authority and Eastern Shore Natural Gas. He referenced to
inconsistences with gas transmission and expressed his belief that this was due to the heavy demand
of the new Calpine facility.
Mr. Koenig indicated that the Electric Fund is tagged at roughly $89M of revenue in this year’s
budget, and this money is used to cover the cost to purchase power from the system as well as the
capital plan, which includes vehicle purchases, equipment purchases, line replacements, substation
upgrades and/or replacements, and replacement of both large and small transformers. This revenue
also supports needs related to facilities and infrastructure and a transfer from the Electric Fund to
the General Fund. In the FY 16 budget, approximately $10.85M will transfer from public utilities
directly into the General Fund, $10M from the Electric Fund and $850,000 from the
Water/Wastewater Fund.
Regarding the electric utility, Mr. Koenig stated that the City serves approximately 23,000
customers, ranging from single-family houses all the way up to the Dover Air Force Base. A cost
of service study was performed to properly allocate costs and identify what the rates should be for
each class of customer. Mr. Koenig noted that the City of Dover residential electric rates are the
lowest in the State of Delaware but the commercial rates are not the lowest.
Mr. Koenig stated that the water and sewer system service territory is not quite as big as the electric
service system. He noted that the City serves areas outside its corporate limits and has
interconnection agreements with Tidewater Utilities, who purchases water from the City in the
northwest portion of the City and supplies subdivisions northwest of the City. In addition, Tidewater
purchases water from Dover through the Lakeland interconnection for the Lakeland Mobile Home
Park and businesses on South State Street. Mr. Koenig stated that the City’s relationship with
Tidewater over the last decade had been very good, noting that Tidewater has four (4) of Dover’s
top 20 meters.
Mr. Koenig explained that the water and sewer systems are accounted for separately to ensure that
the cost of water is covered by the water charge and the cost of sewer by the sewer charge; however,
these funds are intermingled in a water and sewer enterprise fund. Total revenues expected in FY16
were $19.3M, including new revenue projected from the Calpine facility. Mr. Koenig advised that
originally, the water system revenue was estimated to be about $1.6M and the sewer system in the
$300,000 range. He indicated that the water system consists of approximately 14,000 to 15,000
meters, requiring a lot of manpower for care and maintenance. Water quality complaints were
expected when Calpine came online but not many complaints were received. It was hoped that water
quality would improve since water would be moving quickly through the system on that part of the
City due to Calpine’s demand.
Page 4
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 4
Mr. Koenig stated that improvements were proposed over the long term for the water system,
including potentially developing another aquifer, noting that if this will be necessary if Calpine
builds a second generating unit. He indicated that the City has a 1.5M gallon water tower under
construction presently at the Garrison Oak Technology Park, which is the City’s largest tower by
about 50 percent and another 1M gallon tower was scheduled to be built in the north middle quadrant
of the City pending final resolution on a site. This would offset fire demands and provide additional
elevated storage for supply. Additional improvements will be made to the system through pipe
replacements.
Mr. Koenig advised members that staff expected to return to Council to review rates, explaining that
efficiency had affected the City’s water utilities. Plumbing codes had changed, and low-flow fixtures
and low-flush toilets had significantly reduced household water usage. In the 1980s, a generic house
used 300 gallons of water per day, and now a generic house uses 250 gallons per day, a drop of 50
gallons per day, which was a significant change when multiplied by 8,000 to 10,000 households.
Mr. Koenig stated other changes also affect the water/wastewater utility. In the early 1990s,
Proctor & Gamble expanded their paper-making process, which put a significant demand on the
water system of approximately 600,000 gallons a day. However, in the last 10 years, they had
stopped making that product at that location and water demand decreased by 600,000 gallons per
day. He indicated that it is difficult to make up for these types of fluctuations in production and
revenue. On the electric side, Mr. Koenig informed members that a push for more efficient air
conditioning systems was affecting the electric utility. It was expected that electric load, even with
growth, may be relatively flat over the next few years due to the implementation of systems using
less power. He indicated that these are the types of variables used to set rates, determine how to
recover fixed costs, develop revenue projections for future budgets, and review revenues for current
budgets.
In regard to the sewer utility, Mr. Koenig stated that in the early 1970s, the City built a sewage
treatment plant at the old PW2 warehouse location at the end of Water Street, which came online in
about 1971. The plant was in operation for only a couple of years when the City transferred all of
its waste to Kent County. Mr. Koenig expressed his opinion that the City was very fortunate to be
with the County system because it is not necessary to do any of the related permitting or worry about
the actual treatment of waste water coming out of of Dover. All flow from the City of Dover is sent
to the County by contract and they have an obligation, under their Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) permit and Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) permits, to
treat the City’s waste and deliver it to the Murderkill River in a state that is equal to or better than
drinking water quality. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City was benefitting today from not having to
run its wastewater treatment plant.
In terms of infrastructure, Mr. Koenig stated Dover has approximately 40 pump stations, which vary
from small stations serving eight (8) to 10 houses, to large pump stations like the Puncheon Run
station that serves industrial flow coming out of Kraft and Procter & Gamble. Mr. Koenig pointed
out that it is critical that those stations work, noting that Dover had gone through replacement and
renewals on the wastewater side, and backup generation was being constructed at those facilities
Page 5
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 5
because the potential for overflows into streams and rivers or onto the ground would be significant
if the power goes out. Mr. Koenig stated he is grateful that Dover has such a reliable system with
very few system-wide outages, noting the impact a power outage can have, such as sewage backing
up in people’s homes.
Mr. Koenig pointed out that owning its own utilities places the City in a good position to attract
businesses; however, it require a lot of hours and manpower to run those enterprises. Because of the
enterprise funds, the City recovers at least the cost associated with running them, and the intent of
Dover’s public utilities is to return money to the General Fund as internal profit for going through
the pain of having to run the utilities, noting that they are 24/7 operations that require a lot of
manpower, capital, and time from the Mayor, Council, and staff to keep systems functioning. He
expressed his opinion that the City is in much better shape through owning the utilities as it can
better control its own destiny.
In response to Mr. Neil regarding the cost to buy power if the City were not a generator, Mr. Koenig
explained that the City’s power plant and combustion turbine act as a physical hedge for the City,
which provides leverage in buying power. It was his belief that Mr. Harry Maloney, Electric
Director, may have estimated this cost at roughly $2M. With no ability to generate, the City would
be completely at the risk of the market sale price. Because the City has its own generation, the
market stops at the City’s cost to produce into the market. Even though this cost can be relatively
high in some cases, it is much less than if the City were at risk in the market. He noted that during
really cold days this past winter, the per megawatt hour cost exceeded $1,000, $1,500, or $1,800 per
hour; therefore, having generation gave an actual physical hedge that provided leverage in buying
in the market.
Responding to Mr. Neil regarding whether a deal had been attained with Calpine, Mr. Koenig
advised that the City did not have a deal worked out with Calpine on paper at this time. He stated
that some regulation issues are being discussed with the EPA that have a significant impact on the
products and prices that would be offered in the marketplace. Although the framework was in place,
no one was willing to strike a price until those issues are resolved. Mr. Koenig stated that once they
are resolved, staff would come before Council with a proposed agreement.
Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the City’s industrial rates, Mr. Koenig advised that
commercial and industrial rates are grouped together and the City’s rates rank in the middle to upper
end.
TEA/NAES REPORTS (MARCH AND APRIL)
The TEA/NAES Monthly Reports for March and April 2015 were provided to members to enable
them to monitor electric sales and revenues received, which will provide a better understanding of
any fluctuations that occur and allow the opportunity to make improvements if deemed necessary.
Mr. Blakeman expressed his preference for having actual PJM invoices included in the TEA/NAES
reports versus the format used in the April report. In response to Mr. Blakeman, Mr. Koenig stated
that would contact TEA/NAES to make this request.
Page 6
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 6
DISCUSSION ITEM PROPOSED DURING THE FY 2015/16 BUDGET REVIEW
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Power Plant Operation
Mr. Scott Koenig. City Manager, stated that a motion was made during the FY 2015/16 budget
review that the City consider performing a cost/benefit analysis of its power plant operation.
Mr. Koenig stated that in the five (5) year forecast, the power plant was slightly negative in cash
during one (1) year but positive in all other years. Mr. Koenig noted that a one (1) year cost/benefit
analysis would not be beneficial since a decision could not be made based on a return of one (1) year
and stated the need to define the timeline of the analysis. He stated that, without question, owning
the physical plant and having the ability to contract its operation and oversee its contracts would be
the right thing to do for the benefit of customers. Mr. Koenig felt that reviewing it on an annualized
basis would provide only a snapshot, whereas a profile over years showed it had been a benefit to
the City and would continue to be in the foreseeable future.
Responding to Mr. Blakeman regarding the life expectancy of Unit 3, Mr. Koenig stated that
Mr. Harry Maloney, Electric Director, estimated there would be approximately 10 years before there
were concerns regarding its life expectancy. When discussing the life expectancy of Units 1 and 2,
North American Energy Services (NAES) engineers had indicated that the units could last as long
as desired, depending on what the City wanted to put into them. Mr. Koenig indicated that the
projected life expectancy of the turbine was roughly 50 years. He advised members that the City was
doing everything it could to get it to 50 years, and when closing in on this time frame, would make
decisions on whether to maintain or replace that unit. Mr. Koenig stated that replacement would cost
roughly $1M per MW; therefore, replacing it would be more than a $120M expense.
Mr. Blakeman questioned if decreased prices due to the impact of older coal-fired generation units
being replaced with gas turbines had been a concern when considering the life expectancy of this
unit. He felt that it may be priced out of the market and not be called to run. Responding,
Mr. Koenig stated that this was a concern; however, The Energy Authority (TEA) does a good job
of looking at those numbers on an annualized basis. He reiterated that in spite of initial concerns that
Dover would not be called upon once Calpine was on board, that had not been the case, but could
potentially be in the future.
Mr. Blakeman stated his opinion that Calpine may be asking to put in a second unit a year from now.
Mr. Koenig concurred that this was a possibility.
Responding to Mr. Hutchison regarding the projected cost associated with keeping Units 1 and 2
running, Mr. Koenig stated that the consensus was that it would be more cost effective to the City
to build new generation versus maintaining the current units or to execute a purchase power
agreement.
Mr. Neil moved to defer Item #5, Updates, to the July 13, 2015 Utility Committee Meeting. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried.
Page 7
UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 7
By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 5:58 p.m.
James Hutchison, Sr.
Chairman
JLH/TM/mfk/js
S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2015\06-22-2015 UTILITY.wpd
Attachments
Attachment #1 - House Substitute No. 2 for House Bill No. 171
Page 8
ATTACHMENT #1
Utility Committee Meeting 06/22/2015
SPONSOR: Rep. Bennett & Sen. Hall-Long & Sen. McDowell
Reps. Hudson, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst,
Schwartzkopf, M. Smith, Viola; Sens. Blevins, Lavelle,
Poore, Simpson
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
148th GENERAL ASSEMBLY
HOUSE SUBSTITUTE NO. 2
FOR
HOUSE BILL NO. 171
AN ACT AMENDING TITLES 9 AND 22 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO TAXES ON SPECIAL
BETTERMENTS.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE:
1 Section 1. Amend § 8101(e)(8), Title 9 of the Delaware Code, by making deletions as shown by strike through
2 and insertions as shown by underline as follows:
3 § 8101. Property subject to county taxation.
4 (e) Special betterments, whether or not also considered to be improvements, shall include and be limited to the
5 following:
6 (8) Poles, wires, cable and conduit for distribution of telephone communication services either above or
7 below ground; provided, however, that in no event shall the amount of tax imposed on communications providers
8 that were paying tax on such property as of June 30, 2015, exceed the amount actually paid by such provider to each
9 political subdivision in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015;
10 Section 2. Amend §2001, Title 22 of the Delaware Code, by making deletions as shown by strike through and
11 insertions as shown by underline as follows:
12 § 2001 Limitation of municipal taxing powers.
13 (a) Every municipal corporation in this State, regardless of population, shall only have the power to impose, levy,
14 assess, or collect a tax of any kind whatsoever as expressly authorized in its municipal charter or this title.
15 (b) Any provision in a municipal charter granting the municipal corporation "all powers," or any derivation
16 thereof, shall not be construed as exempting the municipal corporation from the limitation set forth in subsection (a) of this
17 section.
Page 1 of 2
HD : KL : TEH Released: 06/17/2015 12:42 PM
1031480198
Page 9
18 (c) The amount of tax imposed on a communication provider who was being taxed as of June 30, 2015, by
19 municipal corporations on poles, wires, conduit and cable for distribution of telephone communication may not exceed the
20 amount of tax actually paid by such provider to each municipal corporation in fiscal year ending June 30, 2015.
21 Section 3. The restrictions imposed on the counties’ and municipalities’ taxation of poles, wires, cables and
22 conduit for distribution of telephone communication services in Sections 1 and 2 above shall also apply to school districts
23 and Business Improvement Districts.
SYNOPSIS
This substitute bill eliminates the provisions of the original bill establishing the Tax Modernization Review
Group and eliminates the repeal of the tax as of June 30, 2018. To encourage investment in broadband infrastructure, it
retains the cap on the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at 2015 levels, and clarifies that the cap only
applies with respect to communication providers that are currently subject to the tax and specifies that the limitations on
county and municipal taxation will apply as well to school districts and Business Improvement Districts. At the present
time this tax is paid only by landline telecommunication providers and not cable companies.
Page 2 of 2
HD : KL : TEH Released: 06/17/2015 12:42 PM
1031480198