Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - October 7, 1981 (48).,.rte CONSIDERATION Following introduction of the matter by Councilman. OF RESOLUTION Hughes with a report being presented on the meeting OF THE PROJECT that had been held with local financial analysts, Council, MEMBERS IN THE on motion of Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, Katnich CALAVERAS second, indicated its willingness to stay in the Calavaras PROJECT Project at this time and authorized the increased financial commitment for the Calaveras Project amounting to $97, 318 to be charged against the Utility Outlay Reserve Account by the following vote: Aye s: Councilmen - Hughes, Katnich, Murphy and McCarty Noes: Council -men - Pinkerton Absent: Councilmen - None Council directed Staff to obtain an update on the previously scheduled NCPA tour of the project site. Following introduction of agenda item "i" - "Calaveras Project - Bond and Notes Ordinances" and a lengthy discussion, Council took the following actions: a) On motion of Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, Hughes second, Ordinance No. 1238 Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lodi authorizing the Issuance of Public Power Revenue Bonds by Northern California Power Agency (North Fork Stanislaus River Hydroelectric Development Power Project) was introduced. • b) On motion of Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, Hughes second, Ordinace No. 1239 - Ordinace of the City Council of the City of Lodi Authorizing the Issuance of Notes by the Northern California Agercy (North Fork Stanislaus River Hydro- electric Development Power Project) was Introduced. pF � i tl i Northern California Power Agency 770 Kiefy Boulevard . Sanla Clara. California 95051. (408) 248.3422 ROBERT E. GRIMSHAW General Manager September 8, 1981 T0: Participants in the Calaveras Project fROM: Robert E. Grimshaw SUBJECT: Trans,-littal of Resolution No. 81-56 -. Enclosed is a copy of a resolution of the Project Members in the Calaveras project, adopted August 27, 1981, increasing the total financial commitment of the Members of NCPA for the Calaveras project, under the existing Phase 2 agreement, from $2,012,000 to $3,000,000. This letter and the resolution are official notice to you of the increase. If you are willing to accept your share of this increase, and pay it as billed by NCPA, you need do nothing. If, on the other hand, you do not want to participate in the increase, or want to withdraw from the Project, ,Lou must act within 30 days after receipt of this letter. Sections 6, 7, and 8 of the Calaveras Member Agreement (dated June 26, 1980) prescribe the procedure you should follow for partial or total withdrawal, and the result. The substance of it is that you must give NCPA written notice, within the 30 -day period, of either nonparticipation in the increase, or with- drawal from the Project. If you do give that notice, your percentage partici- pation in the Project will be reduced, or eliminated. Please check with this office, or general counsel, if you have any questions at all about this matter, so that there is no misunderstanding. Yours truly, 41- BERT . GRIMSNAW � General Manager Enc. cc: Martin McDonough S�-Y 1l01 -AN rn C RESOLUTION NO. 81-56 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY BE IT RESOLVED by the Project Members under the "Member Agreement for Financing of Planning and Development Activities of the Calaveras Hydroelectric Project", dated as of June 26, 1980, herein called "Member Agreement", that an increased financial commitment to the Project thereunder, to a total financial commitment of $3 million, is hereby authorized within the meaning of Section 6 of said Agreement; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Assistant Secretary of 11CPA is hereby requested to mail copies of this resolution to all Project Members by registered mail, return receipt requested, and that such mailing shall constitute the "written notice of such proposed increase" within the meaning of Section 6; and the increase pro- vided for in this resolution shall take effect as to each Projecf Member thirty days after the receipt of the notice by such Member, except and to the extent that any Member may follow the withdrawal provisions of Section 7 of such Member Agreement. Vote Abstained Absent City of - Alameda Biggs Gridley Nea 1 dsbur �� • ' Lodi g Lompoc Palo Alto AF_ Redding Roseville Santa Clara �� Ukiah Plumas-Sierra ADOPTED AND APPROVED this a7 " day of 1981. I E- Increased Financial Commitment Calaveras Project Authorized by Resolution 81-56 Assessed to pate Balance Alameda 10.88% $107,495 Biggs .42% 4,150 Gridley 1.00% 9,880 Heatdsburg 1.43% 14,128 Lodi 9.85% 97,318 Lompoc 2.18% 21,538 Palo Alto 22.92% 226,450 Plumas-Sierra 1.5.5% 15,314 Redding 9.41% 92,971 Roseville 6.24% 61,651 Santa Clara 31.08% 307,070 Ukiah 3.04% 30,035 01 $3,000,000 2,012.000 $ 988,000 AP < ` OUNCIL C011' MUNICAT("N TO: THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: THE CITY MANAGE" O"K1 • SUB.NECT: CALAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DATE I NO. Sept. 24, 1981 The attached data has been prepared in response to Council's request at tiie September 16, 1981 meeting, for additional information regarding the Calaveras Project. This data is based on material provided to NCPA by Engineering Consultant R. W. Beck, in reports dated August 25, 1981 and September 3, 1981, copies of which are available in the office of the Utility Director. In these reports, six scenarios (cases) are developed using different revenue bond interest rates and PG&E rate increase assumptions, etc. Three of these cases (No.'s 1, 5 S 6) have been selected as appropriate for analysis, as to their impact on Lodi; one of the three (Case 5) has been studied in greater detail. The assumptions associated with each of the three are tabulated below: Case 1: Base case, which assumes the following: 1. Construction cost and schedule per Engineering Consultant, Btchtel, estimate. 2. Bond interest rate equal to 13%. 3. PG&E energy costs based on 100% of proposed rate increase. Case 5: Same as Case 1, except bond interest rate of 11%. Case 6: Same as Case 5, except 50% of proposed rate increase is assumed. The City has the alternative of marketing (i.e. laying off) its share of the output of the Calaveras Project during the early years. However, this type of arrangement is somewhat complex and full of uncertainty at this time. Therefore, it is considered beyond the scope of this report. To date, the City of Lodi has paid assessments amounting to $197,000 for the Calaveras Project. An additional special assessment of $98,500 has recently been received, and is unpaid at this time. -T David K. Currys Utility Director a. CAIAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT SAVINGS (PENALTY) $*1000,000 Year Case 1 (13%) Case 5 (11x)2 Case 6 (11X21 2 PG&E 1985 2.061 2.061 1.678 1986 0.321 0.976 0.251 1987 - 3.638 - 2.328 - 2.978 1988 - 3.336 - 2.026 - 2.740 k 1989 - 3.051 - 1.740 - 2.515 1990 - 2.740 - 1.423 - 2.268 1991 - 2.412 - 1.099 - 2.011 1992 - 2.010 - 0.696 - 1.697 1993 - 1.614 - 0.299 - 1.386 1994 - 1.195 0.121 - 1.057 1995 - 0.747 0.571 - 0.707 1996 - 0.245 1.074 - 0.313 1997 0.233 1.604 0.100 40 -year term 30 -year term 9,1'24/81 0 1 40 -year tern 130 -year teras O 9/24/81 CALAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ENERGY COST C PER KWH Year PG&E Case 1 (13X)1 Case 5 (11X)2 1935 8.0 0.5 0.5 1986 8.7 8.1 6.9 1987 9.4 16.1 13.7 1988 10.0 16.2 13.8 1989 10.8 16.4 14.0 1990 11.5 16.6 14.1 1991 12.4 16.8 14.4 1992 13.3 17.0 14.5 1993 14.2 17.2 14.7 1994 15.2 17.4 15.0 1995 16.3 17.7 15.2 1996 17.4 17.9 15.5 1997 18.6 18.1 15.7 1 40 -year tern 130 -year teras O 9/24/81 W AVERAS HYDiOOELECTRIC PROJECT ENERGY COST C PER KWH Year PG&E Case 6 (1121 1/2 PG&E) 1985 6.6 0.4 1986 7.1 6.6 1987 7.6 13.1 1988 8.2 13.2 1989 8,7 13.4 1990 9>3 13.5 1991 10.0 13.7 1992 10.7 13.8 1993 11.5 14.0 1994 12.3 14.2 1995 13.1 14.4 1996 14.0 14.6 1997 15.0 14.8 1 30 -year term 9/24/8i 4 CAIAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT H. R1 -2 -3 -4 1985 1990 YEAR 1995 ;e 6 9/24/81 7.0 .0 17 . 1! pi - W � �ROELECTRIC P� ' SXI,AVBRA 1985 '1 OR . u 1 95 17.5 1500 12,5 13 10.0 v �n 8 7.5 5.0 2.5 CAI.AVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 1985 1990 1995 YEAR 9/24/81 1 Interest on debt $ Deflator index 3 Penalties 4 Savings 9 Benefit/Cost Benefit/Cost Ratio (Prior to Ratio (Totals) Bond Retirement) 6.33 3.91 2.63 2.08 1.49 1.36 9/24/81 CAIAVERAS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT PRESENT WORTH COMPARISON - GSE 5. 117.1 Benefits4 Prior Benefits Interest Years to Total Cost43 to Bond Retirement Subsequent to Bond Retirement Total Benefit94 Net Benefits4 Rate2 Break Even $*110001000 $*i.000,Q00. $*1.000,000 ,$*1,000,000 $*1,000,000 10% 15.5 4.99 19.53 12.06 31.59 26.6 15% 17.0 3.70 7.70 2.02 9.72 6.02 20% 19.0 2.80 3.82 0.35 4.17 1.37 1 Interest on debt $ Deflator index 3 Penalties 4 Savings 9 Benefit/Cost Benefit/Cost Ratio (Prior to Ratio (Totals) Bond Retirement) 6.33 3.91 2.63 2.08 1.49 1.36 9/24/81 rr313�4 i9u"I�1 TIR�1 3.flL�I C A iii OS 1 13 E5fi r20 70 s .44 7 i .. .y. r Lt3a3 ��'�11 _ r"? a i}lIS : 1AILL RAi IS /�-'CON ATION COPY: Off' THE 'FOLLOW iSEs$ALE% z :" r 70 REPLY 6Y: MAILGRA,:4; SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL, '• FREE P'H0 �9339553�# T Rti L0 1 12 10. tits 1 133A FST .CA FPL GAIL", `SI FPLE Cr�R1M ::iJCrA::RPi Di `f I�;.GM COPT MESSAGE 95051 h r d r ARD.1110 CALA ERAS PIRtSECT L©D1 IS IN IIVTRQDUCED'. ORbi1 A ICE {��i �O D_S k ; y. �A L C R L I m f :'r r Pti :,0?� LOIr.v1'1 9..41 scR 'o..,• '. -: r 10ssCf11'3P MGM 'G:MS1,OA S 4' Y .. .y. a r"? z :" r 70 REPLY 6Y: MAILGRA,:4; SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL, '• FREE P'H0 �. D1 C t AA- J i .. X.' S `F l's ft I w4 4 a 1 ...,. .r .. :'. v y � i 4 �" T( PLY ®Y MAtLCiRAM. SEE REVERSE SLOE FOR WESTERN UNION'8 TOLL -,'FREE PHONE NUMBERS' 100 to so Z O J J 70 CONII� -IN v i t7 so Z i 4 LL 50 O 40 O 3 F -- w 30 ao w cc a° i-. .20 j z 10 ! PRESENT "RTH 1485 DOLLARS 100% OF PROJECT OUTPUT USED BY NCPA 8 10 11 12 13 14. 16 BOND INTEREST RATE M i HIGRISR CONII� -IN 8 10 11 12 13 14. 16 BOND INTEREST RATE M i Continued October 7, 1481 b) Mrs. T. R. Kettleman, 642 N. Ciuff Ave., Lodi c) Mr. Henry Reynolds, 725 Costa Drive, Lodi d) Mr. Donald E. Geiszler, 836 N. Cluff Ave., Lod! Following a lengthy discussion, on motion of Council- man Pinkerton, Katnich second, Council took the following action regarding the Kettleman and Geiszler Parcels: If the proposed Ciuff Avenue Assessment District proceeds. 1) Upon dedication of the required _street right -of -via 3r for the ultimate street improvements, the City will be responsible for the installation of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk and required driveways. 2) All paving fronting these parcels would be the responsibility of the assessment district. 3) The assessment district would install water and sewer fronting each parcel and the property 'owner would be required to pay for the water and sewer facilities at such tune as they desired service. No action was taken at this time on the, Reynolds and LaMaie parcels. On motion of Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, Katnich second, this public Hearing VMS continued to the regular Council meeting of November 4, 1981.: