"If that is not illegal, it should be"

Randy, why don't you resign your council seat and go back to the legislature and do something about it. You are costing Portlanders (thankfully not me) too much in your commissioners job.

"any mistakes the city of Portland makes are fully and publicly vetted"

Cmon Randy! Before one mismanaged boondoggle gets fully vetted there's another one waiting in the wings.

Give the PGE deal a rest. You and Sten are WAY WAY out of your league and just pissing away tax payers money that could be put to better use.

"Randy, why don't you resign your council seat and go back to the legislature and do something about it. You are costing Portlanders (thankfully not me) too much in your commissioners job."

Hmmm. Another personal attack by "Charlie from Gresham" that avoids dealing with the facts.

You have a theme...anti union, pro business and...all anonymous.

I will consider your insights and recommendations in that context.

Keep them in context and take them to heart my friend....and you'd be SOOOO surprised to know that we are indeed friends socially! I actually enjoy you too!

"...you'd be SOOOO surprised to know that we are indeed friends socially!"

E Tu Brute?

OR

"With friends like you...."

Randy,

Keep it up! Erik Sten and you have this Portland resident's thanks and support.

Eric Berg

Mr Leonard - Since you think PGE charges such higher rates than a PUD would, tell us again why this would be any different than BullRun water rates?

They are the highest in the nation and enough to cause long-time customers (Wilsonville and Tualatin) to look some place else for water?

I am not against a PUD, I am against the CoP running a PUD based on your history.

Commissioner Leonard:

I'm much more troubled by the spike in my NW Natural Gas bill than my PGE bill. Despite flat year-on-year consumption, and a 50% rise in the underlying commodity price, my monthly bill has doubled! How is that possible?

I'm all for local oversight, but it appears that you have subjected PGE to excessive scrutiny while giving NW Natural a free pass. Fair is fair. I can send you a copy of my NW Natural account history if you would like a case study.

DORETTA....A privately run enterprise would have invested in regular maintenance and system upgrades rather than wait until things are so bad that a Federal mandate becomes inevitable.

The years of ignoring the problem are not Randy Leonards fault.....not Erik Sten's fault. It took decades of neglect for the infrastructure of the water system to reach this sad state. All the pet projects over the years....yes even Neil Goldschmidt's pet project of building the downtown transit mall....should have come AFTER needed maintenance and investments in critical infrastructure.

But that's just not the Portland way.

Randy - I wish you folks would quit pussy-footing around and just condemn PGE assets and take over. Public power providers are consistently less expensive than profiteer-operated power. Every minute you waste means more and more local dollars bleeding out to Wall Street. Let's help out businesses and households here at home by operating our own power utility.

Steve- Bull Run water rates are not among the highest in the nation. Bull Run water is among the cheapest in the nation. In fact, Portland residents pay the cheapest water rates in the region.

Our sewer rates are high, but that is not to be confused with water rates.

As far as the issue of Tualatin Valley threatening to go to the Williamette for their drinking water, try to get more balanced information than what the Tualatin Valley Water Board issues in their press releases. They are negotiating with us for a new 20 year contract and are attempting to influence those negotiations with various public relations ploys.

As in the case of PGE, that won't work either.

Given that water and sewer services are on the same bill, it is difficult to distinguish between them. I was told (would love to know if it's true) that the system assumes all water going into the house must exit via the sewer system. Ergo, since they meter input (water), but don't measure output (sewer), it's an academic distinction at best. It's like saying left shoes are free, but right shoes cost $400/each. The left shoes are hardly cheap, if you have to buy shoes from just that one vendor.

If I can't buy one without the other then you're going to have a hard time persuading me the water is "cheap". I'm averaging $135/month for a family of three, and we have natural landscaping (no irrigation), low flow showers and toilets, and super efficient Whirlpool dishwasher and laundry (front-loader).

All I can do, Alice, is give the facts. People are going to put whatever spin their predisposition frees them to do.

All sewer rates that I am aware of are tied to water consumption. Our sewer rates are high due to the combined sewer overflow project. Before that started our combined sewer/water rates were below average. When the bonds are paid off on the project, the cost should be below average again.

The fact is that the water portion of our sewer rates are among the lowest in the nation for arguably the best water in the world.

Randy, Why do you hate power company workers?

I am cool with the workers. It's their bosses I am not too fond of.

Then we can agree that "cheap" water rates are only half of the equation: expensive sewer rates are the other half of the equation.

Given the low level of current spending on modernization and replacement of our 40 to 100 year old sewer infrastructure (which is entirely unrelated to the Big Pipe), it will be a very long time before Portland ratepayers will see a decrease in sewer rates.

Ergo, our combined water and sewer rates will likely exceed neighboring communities for some time to come. Why? Because a newer community (think Wilsonville or Beaverton) doesn't have the same backlog of deferred maintenance and crumbling infrastructure. And their elected officials are not worried about the political backlash of increasing sewer rates to adequately begin to address the backlog of repair and replacement of sewer infrastructure.

I am not sure why you are making the statements you are. I do know your comments are not supported by what is actually happening in maintaining our sewer and water infrastructure.

PGE and its progenitors have been lying to Oregonians for the better part of a century. How else to convince people to continue paying more for electric power than is necessary? Privately owned power in the land of falling water has been a scam of historical proportions that has sucked the life out of Oregon's economy like a parasitic lamprey.

The game started long before Enron and will continue until Oregonians learn to think for themselves and read electric rate comparisons.

<h1></h1>

Part of the thread seems like it is trying to get bent into the old apples and oranges switcheroo. This way: Electricity we just go out and make more in our own backyard, no transmission line from the dam needed. Bull Run water, (or Willamette River water, take your pick), they ain't making any more. Catch rain water in our backyard, I suppose.

The City managing water distribution is a completely different process than managing electricity generation and distribution.

Randy, new projects -- starting with a tram redesign -- should make twice their own electricity on the project site. So the project does not need to buy PGE generated electricity, and on-site excess generation is sold, (and helps fund the project), in competition with PGE.

Forget water and sewage for now, different topic with different problems. This is about the false representations for PGE, which the newspaper propogates (knowing the falsity), which the TV news announcers rip-and-read as TV news, which citizens in Troutdale read (or watch) and believe and write a letter to the editor which the newspaper picks (from dozens of alternatives) to prove the false PGE misinformation stuck in someone's memory.

But that entire feedback loop -- lies to citizens who then recite back the lies -- does not make the initial false misinformaion true or valid.

<h1></h1>

"Our sewer rates are high, but that is not to be confused with water rates."

What difference does it make why we pay high rates for water/sewer? I am only saying the same thing would happen if you ran PGE.

At first you would drop the rates to get this in. Then all of sudden Beaverton would pay more for power than CoP. Then instead of fixing PGE plant on a normal schedule (like the sewer system) you would take the money for things like trams (don't worry Sam will "find" some money to make it happen because Homer wants it), conv center hotels, Armory Theaters and PFDR shortfalls.

Then 15 years down the road we don't have enough power and we would have to buy power at inflated rates and then we are in a worse place than we are now. Or Tualatin/Wilsonville finds cheaper power and you would have to raise power rates to CoP people to cover.

PS - Not everyone who disagrees with you running a PUD is a PGE employee or PR hack. If you could stick to the issues instead of ad-hominem attacks, it would help your credibilty.

Doretta:

Water and sewer cannot be purchased or billed separately in Portland: you can't choose to buy one without the other. By comparison, I can choose to limit my Natural Gas (NG) consumption through conservation or by substituting electricity consumption.

I can cover my roof with photovoltaic cells and charge batteries in the basement, and go off the electric grid. I can buy a diesel gen-set and produce my own electricity, subject to noise and zoning restrictions. I can even replace most household appliances (oven, stove, water heater, clothes dryer) to run on NG.

It is difficult (if not illegal?) to go off the water and sewer grid within city limits. To compare sewer/water to gas/electric is truly apples and oranges.

A commenter above complained they experienced a much larger increase in the NW Natural Gas bill than they've seen in their PGE bill, but the City of Portland is only investigating PGE. Why is that?

I believe the Mayor and the City Council feel like they were the handsome groom at a "runaway bride" wedding ceremony: their hurt feelings are playing a role in the public relations war. They think they were duped by PGE, and they're still pissed.

As for the consumption of NG in electricity production, you are half right. Historically, NG was an inefficient method of producing electricity (because much of the thermal energy was wasted). The ineffiencies were economically insignificant when wholesale NG prices were below $2/Mcf (from 1987 to 1998), and then prices started to rise. The newer facilities include a co-generation capability that consumes the excess thermal energy which is generated, making NG fired electricity plants more efficient at BTU recovery than other hydrocarbons.

Natural gas is cleaner than coal, which remains the single largest fuel for U.S. electricity production (at 53% of total U.S. megawattage, only 7% here in Oregon). The U.S. Coal Foundation estimates we have sufficient domestic supplies of coal to last 250 to 300 years (at current consumption rates). Current U.S. NG reserves at estimated to last 30 to 60 years, but Canada likely has twice that amount.

I have a hard time getting excited about anything Randy or Eric claim is "good for the people". Sorry, Randy (and yes, I realize you don't care what I think), but it's true.

If either one of these fellows had even the slightest amount of experience in the real world, vs. paid-by-yours-truly type positions, I might have more faith in your ability to be unbiased and logical about things. The fact is, government jobs are pretty cushy as a whole. Good retirement, good benefits, job security, etc. That's just not common for the rest of us regular Joe's. It used to be that government worked for the people. Here in Portland, the people (taxpayers) work for the government. Something seems awfully wrong where one of the largest employers in the city is the government.

I believe your statements about how awful PGE is, just as much as I believe PGE's statements about how much good they are doing. Somewhere in the middle of both sides is probably where the truth lies.

For those worried that a PUD system would see a drop-off in service, infrustructure investment, etc, you need look no further than other large-scale PUDs in the NW (those with comparable # of ratepayers, purchasing power from the same sources). Do a news search on Snohomish PUD, located north of Seattle. Because they're accountable to their ratepayers --the taxpayers-- and not shareholders, they did the muckraking to build a case against Enron. They presented tapes, memos, emails, and statistical data implicating deliberate actions to cheat their ratepayers. Wow, what a concept.

Like most utilities, PUDs are absolutely obsessed with customer service, often more so. I worked as a consultant to the NW utilties, and I can attest that Snohomish PUD, Clark (County) PUD, Eugene Water & Electric Board, Tacoma Power, Seattle City Light, City of Ellensburg (WA)-- ALL OF THEM CITY OR PUD POWER-- were simply outstanding in their lazer-focus service-first mentality. Pride in being the best, pride in finding every last efficiency or maximizing every precious drop of budget. No need for bloated PR/advertising/branding budgets, just enough revenue to keep safe lines, call centers staffed with folks ready for anything, and the ability to work closely with industrial accounts.

Power is an essential service, for the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. With the BPA, we've been blessed with cheap power that BushCo and others lust for... more corporate control in the NW utility realm will only aid their need to 'sell the farm'. How do rates double what you're paying now sound? They want us to pay what NE is paying... the PUC can regulate margin, but when the price is more... you get the picture.

Sarah- I do care what you think. However, I am not, nor never have been, a person who ignores misstatements of facts. It would be much easier to just smile and say "well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree", however, that is not who I am.

Steve, in a comment above, states I make ad hominem attacks on people I do not agree with. That is just not true.

Some in our state behave as though people who run for and are elected to office leave their right to disagree with comments made, no matter how factually wrong, at the door. I am sorry, I could not disagree more strongly with that philosophy. In fact, I believe one of the biggest mistakes elected officials make is not responding to baseless charges and comments. Not responding leads some otherwise fair observers to conclude that maybe the charge, no matter how wild eyed, has some basis in truth.

We are engaging in a debate in this community about the behavior of PGE. Discuss whether or not you agree that it is OK for PGE management to engage in buying and selling electricity to themselves (Death Star) in order to raise their prices at the PUC. Discuss whether you agree it is OK for them to charge you for state, federal and local taxes in your bill that they never intended to pay and instead keep to increase their net income.

However, if I disagree with you do not interpret that as me not caring what you think. Further, because I take issue with something someone says that does not amount to an ad hominem attack (replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself.)

A fair reading of the comments both in this thread and my original post do include ad hominem attacks, but not by me.

As far as my track record on managing the bureaus I have been assigned (911 center, Bureau of Development Services (building permits) and the Water Bureau), Steven Duin wrote a piece a couple of weeks ago that praised Development Services as being the only city bureau that had an increase in customer satisfaction amongst Portland citizens.

He also praised the 911 center for reducing call waiting times when a citizen calls 911 while simultaneously having its budget and staffing levels reduced.

I have worked hard to improve how people are treated when getting a building permit. I have also required managers at the 911 center that historically have not answered 911calls to begin answering them.

Those changes, and many others that deserve their own post at BlueOregon, are directly reflected in the improved operations at both of those bureaus that has been recognized and praised by our most cynical frequent users.

The Water Bureau will soon join the ranks of BDS and the 911 center as a proactive, efficient, lean and mean water delivery machine.

Let the discussion continue. But please, let’s stick with the facts.

Commissioner Leonard:

Why not focus your compliance efforts on policy matters that lie completely within your jurisdiction? Once you have your own house in order, you will have greater moral authority to create a new Electric Utility Oversight function within the City of Portland.

For example, the City of Portland has refused to implement EPA regulations designed to protect us from cryptosporidium. Rather than wasting Portland's resources on a federal lawsuit intended to skirt compliance, or continuing your Quixotic campaign against PGE, I would prefer you direct your energy towards finding the most cost effective way to meet the EPA regulations. The Feds usually win these debates, and a protracted lawsuit is unlikely to lead to the most cost effective implementation of a cryptosporidium treatment facility.

You may recall the political brouhaha that followed President Bush's 90-day delay of the implementation of reduced EPA drinking water standards on arsenic (signed by President Clinton as he left office).

Based on the response from the Left, you would have thought Bush was going to increase arsenic in our water. In fact, the Bush EPA agreed that a reduction from 50 parts per billion (ppb) was good public policy (the existing standard dated from 1942), but they disagreed as to whether or not 10 ppb was the appropriate level.

They also knew many western municipalities were dependent on groundwater supplies that did not comply with the new 10 ppb standard.

Because of Nebraska's uniquely high dependence on groundwater, frequently from dispersed well fields, the cost to many Nebraska communities will be extraordinarily high," the delegation wrote in a statement signed by Sens. Chuck Hagel, a Republican, Ben Nelson, a Democrat, and Reps. Lee Terry, Doug Bereuter and Tom Osborne, all Republicans.

The lawmakers said the state estimates the standard will affect over 78 water systems and cost Nebraska over $120 million.

"Clearly, money spent on implementing this new rule means either less funding elsewhere in a community's budget or a dramatic increase in water rates for consumers, without a corresponding increase in the level of health benefits to the citizens of the community," the delegation stated in an article in the Omaha World Herald.

Now, I know all the lefties just LOVE Chuck Hagel, so I'm inclined to wonder: if Nebraska was forced to comply with these "expensive" clean water regulations, why should Portland be seeking an exemption.

More to the point: if you want to wag your finger at PGE and say "how dare YOU push the envelope of what's legal" then you ought to look in the mirror and recognize the EPA may feel the same way about Portland and its refusal to comply with the cryptosporidium regulations.

Get your own house in order before claiming to have the time, energy, and intellectual capital necessary to regulate PGE.

"...I would prefer you direct your energy towards finding the most cost effective way to meet the EPA regulations."

The cost for us meeting that regulation is in the neighborhood of one half billion dollars. I would support installing the filtration system if it would do any good. However, the only ones benefiting from the filtration plant will be filtration plant manufacturers.

We have the cleanest, purest water in the world. The EPA's regulation grew out of an incident in Milwaukee, Wisconsin where a sewage pipe broke that ran through their drinking water source. We have no such possibility here in Portland.

Hopefully you are as offended at PGE fleecing you for money in each of your electric bills for taxes that end up in their pocket as you are that a manufacturer of filtration plants will get no business in Portland.

If governments always followed WBAII's directive to perfect the basics before taking on anything new, there wouldn't have been a Louisiana Purchase, Social Security, Medicare, Space Program, or a myriad other government acts that most of us would miss.

If the EPA regulations are unnecessary, why is Portland the only city in the United States threatening to sue for an exemption?

Perhaps the City of Portland knows more about water quality than the EPA.

I've include several links below for people who would like to learn more. Suffice it to say they appear to know what they're talking about.

this link will take you to the fascist chemistry department at Duke University

additional fear mongering from those nutwings at SAFEWATER.org (girlymen for sure)

here's the actual rule published by the EPA...WARNING: VERY BORING

They're all probably just shills for the filtration and treatment industry. Take it with a grain of salt (but be sure to boil the water first)!

The letter2editor above is classic Gard&Gerber propaganda. If uses the same form as several anti-PUD letters I have seen.

Commissioner Leonard:

First, thank you for listening, and for engaging in dialogue. Most of your fellow commissioners lack the time or courage to do so. I hope it benefits your reelection efforts, or at least helps you keep in touch with opinions that other venues might not welcome.

I wonder if that "half-billion dollars" estimate for EPA compliance is the high-ball alernative to the Tram's $15 million low-ball estimate? You might want to ask staff to double check all their spreadsheets.

Irrespective of the final cost of compliance with the EPA's "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule", the City of Portland needs to effectively manage and improve their existing city owned utilities: water and sewer.

Once you've got water and sewer infrastructure all squared away, then you can begin to address the remaining unmet infrastructure needs within the City's purview: neighborhood sidewalks, street paving, and pedestrian safety/pathways. I'm not looking for "perfection" (as suggested by Tom Civiletti), just a few baby steps in the right direction. When was the last time the city improved a "sand & gravel" street in an existing neighborhood (without formation of an LID)? Is that less important than the Burside Couplet, the Armory, the Tram, or Tryon Farm?

You need to get your own house in order before trying to take on additional (highly complex) businesses, like public power.

Bruce- We are not taking on public power. We are engaged in a process to make sure the rates PGE charges are not based on fraud, improper cost allocation or energy market manipulation. The issue of whether or not PGE becomes a Public Utility District is moot for the time being.

I am approaching the inappropriate actions of PGE no differently than I did the culture surrounding issuing building permits in Portland, some of the dysfunction that previously existed at the 911 center or the top down management style at the Water Bureau.

PGE, in my view, is far from a free market business. It is a regulated monopoly that has an incentive to increase costs that their rate of return is based on. As many eyes as can watch an organization like that, the better.

I actually enjoy debates when they are focused on the issue at hand. It is the only thing I miss about being in the Oregon Legislature.

I have participated in debates in the blogosphere that are among the best I have been involved in (a late night discussion on Jack Bogs site re: gay marriage is the best example). Unfortunately, I have been involved in discussions in this same forum that have caused me to swear I will never engage again (clearly, I was upset at the moment and I am venturing out again).

Thank you for your kind comments. I greatly appreciate them.

Thank you for taking time out of your weekend, Commissioner Leonard! Lest anybody think I'm a water quality nerd, I'm taking my son for a walk on the banks of the Willamette River. Enjoy the sunshine!

Cryptosporidium does kill people, which is more than has been alleged against PGE (so far). It would be naive to believe it can't happen here, because it's happened in Jackson County, Oregon in 1992. It's happened twice in British Columbia, and their surface water is just as pristine as Bull Run. Safe water or cheap power? Choose only one to concentrate on.

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports, "Cryptosporidium oocysts are widespread in U.S. raw water sources in both pristine and polluted areas..."

here's a list of 6 outbreaks in the last 20 years

Milawaukee wasn't the first or last occurrence, here's a story on the 2001 cryptosporidium outbreak in Kamloops, B.C.

10,000 residents of Kelowna got very sick

Uh-oh...Cryptosporidium outbreaks in Iowa...

even pristine OREGON experienced a cryptosporidium outbreak in February 1992

But the City of Portland's water bureau says it can't happen here. If Portland gets their exemption, I'll be installing an undersink filters for my drinking water (the best ones have demonstrated their capability to filter cryptosporidium).

Commissioner Leonard's Continuing Misinformation Campaign

The Portland Police & Firefighters' Disability and Retirement Fund is ... no problem! There is no ongoing fraud or abuse, there is no unfunded liability, and there is no cause to make changes at present.

The world must look different when you've been Chief of the powerful Portland Firefighters' Union and are both a PERS and PP&FDRF beneficiary. You can pose as Progressives' poster child even as you enact Regressive costs onto the ordinary Joe. You can keep a straight face while taking the position that what's good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander. And you get away with it. What a con job!

Although it would be a mistake to single out this Commissioner, it will become possible to take him seriously about others' misinformation, perhaps, after he retires from public "service".

Meanwhile, the rest of us would be well served by opening our eyes to the reality that public sector union politics has become a dependable deadweight to political progressivism.

<h1></h1>

The popular support lopsidedly favors condemning PGE and bringing its bookkeepings out to public view and oversight. The same persons who "run" it, in terms of electricity expertise, would go on running it.

The only ones losing their job and obscene wages would be the junior ENRON exec's -- but just as intent as the full-grown despots at rape and ruin of the realm -- from the greed-sick management.

Perp-walk 'em. See, I think they think that people simply don't like them. No, really, 'we' people are intending on convicting 'you' into prison, dear managers. Yeah, 'we' don't like you, but that's merely old-fashioned: you earned the enmity. The point is people's disrespect is the least of your worries. You have misappropriated and stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from this community. That's grand theft. That's your worry.

<h1></h1>

Tenskwatawa:

If you took a poll of a 1,000 Portlanders and ask them who they would rather see take a perp walk:

A). Peggy Fowler or B). Erik Sten

I'm guessing Sten would get at least 60% of the votes, on name recognition alone. My point is: you are an unreliable source for evaluating "lopsidedly popular support"! As much as you think you represent the conscience of progressive Portland, there are many others who feel just the same way. The ideologues are always on the other side of the political spectrum, don't you know.

Randy, I think you are doing a great service for the pge customers!!!!!

Alice, that's your guess. You're guilty of what you condemn; you don't speak for me, or a LOT of other progressives. Sten and Leonard are doing the people's work. Exhibit A:

"If that is not illegal, it should be."

Bravo, Randy. That is exactly the kind of moral, logical sensibility that we need when dealing with immortal corporate profit zombies.

I agree with Mr Magoo; PGE is a monopoly! Move in, nationalize the local energy industry (or municipalize, I guess) and provide the same services (or better) for cheaper, because the City is not incorporated, and is not mandated to make a profit!

CaElan MacDipshiT:

NOT GUILTY...I said "I'm guessing" which was a wee bit less assertive than Tenskey's assertive tone. Besides which, are you even old enough to vote?

How about, "If it's not illegal, it's legal" so leave PGE alone, or change the law.

Frankly, I'm surprised nobody else (besides Charlie in Gresham) jumped on that remark: is Commissioner Leonard now ready to admit that his previous assertions of illegality were premature or overblown?

Now get back on the phone and start dialing for impeachment. I'm pretty sure that's why Cheney shot his buddy: he's probably heard about your effective grassroots machine out in Oregon that's bound and determined to make him President. The pressure is obviously affecting his mojo.

A series of emails amongst PGE managers in October 2001 discusses retroactively amending their tax returns for 2 years to attribute more of their profit from other PGE operations to Multnomah County for the sole purpose of levying the Multnomah County income tax.

All by itself, that should raise any fair minded persons suspicions.

However, it gets more interesting (damning).

The same emails also make it clear that the amount of extra taxes that PGE wants levied against Multnomah County rate payers will increase PGE's net income by the amount the tax will increase their customers bills while increasing PGE's tax liability to Multnomah County by 0%.

I was being too generous saying that if that were not illegal it should be.

Alice, Thank you for revealing yourself as just another sarcastic Republican.

There are serious Republicans I admire, most recently Cong. Tom Davis and his committee's investigation into Katrina response.

Maybe there is the difference--Davis and his committee did a lot of hard work to investigate what went wrong in the Katrina response. And then there are the sarcastic variety who just call names and don't propose solutions.

Doretta:

The U.S. Surgeon General (Vice Admiral Richard H. Carmona, M.D.) gave a speech on Preparedness and Pharmacy Science on March 29, 2003:

The goal was to plan and put in place a coordinating system on the local level that would allow cities to respond immediately to any terrorist threat, even before state and federal assistance arrived.

In the 1990s the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began to enhance the nation’s epidemiological and laboratory systems.

That’s when we began looking at what the threat might look like, whether a biological threat like smallpox, anthrax, or plague, or something that could be distributed through the food or water system, such as salmonella or cryptosporidium, or even a chemical agent like sarin or mustard gas.

My point is: just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it can't happen tomorrow. If the good guys have figured out that cryptosporidium is an efficient way to compromise a metropolitan water system (and incapacitate a city), what makes you think the bad guys haven't figurex it out?

Cryptosporidium outbreaks, while quite rare, can happen at any time and at any place. It is unlikely to kill a healthy adult, but the very young, the elderly, and anybody with a compromised immune response are very much at risk. Many more people will get violently ill (lasting day or weeks) than will die. There is a single pharmaceutical approved for treatment (nitazoxanide), and it would be in very high demand during a major outbreak.

I have an 18 month-old son and all of his drinking water is filtered. I'm not quite paranoid enough to worry about his bathwater or what he drinks when visiting friends or relatives, but that doesn't mean I doubt the potential harm represented by cryptosporidium.

skim through a few pages of this link from the University of Arizona, and tell me you wouldn't be happy to pay another $10/month for safer water

That said, you're absolutely right. I should invest in a filtration system irrespective of what the City of Portland decides to do. Lord knows it could take them another 5 or 10 years of negotiations before they do the right thing. Honestly, tell me this sounds like an issue that deserves less attention than our electricity rates?

I am glad to hear Mr Leonard admit this is not about a PUD anymore. I am NOT against a PUD, just the CoP running it. Why not put more teeth into the PUC regulating rates if that is the end goal? It already exists, it just needs more spine.

Doretta - If you can find a competitive government vs. private sector services where government does better, I'd be interested. I was thinking of USPS (vs. FedEx/UPS) and schools (vs. private schools).

Doretta - If you can find a competitive government vs. private sector services where government does better, I'd be interested. I was thinking of USPS (vs. FedEx/UPS) and schools (vs. private schools).

When private schools are required to take all comers (incl. physically and mentally handicapped) and don't have any more rights to expel students than public schools, then I'll accept that any private school is better than any public school (what Steve seems to be saying).

What about the big Edison School splash awhile back? Are parents in all those schools happier now than with the old public schools?

Maybe someone has some research about privatized correctional facilities--as I recall, there was a study awhile back that saying escape rates were worse in private prisons.

But this is a topic on energy companies, Steve. Do you really want us to believe that public power back to the days of Charles McNary (why do you think there is a dam named after him?) has been worse for the general public than PGE under Enron?

Or is this about ideology more than about real world results?

<h1></h1>

Indeed, guilty of what you accuse, Alice. You are one the PGE propaganda informs. The only treatment (not to say 'remedy') which sometimes improves the circumstance's understanding is: adding more info. What I call, Don't try to change minds. Fill them.

It is a ridulous waste of time to fend falsity and foster consensus among voices deliberately set to refuse consensus. As Ben the Franklin put it: It is impossible to get a man to understand something his continued employment depends on him not understanding. There is not the time to waste. Personal ax-grinders and kneejerk disputatious ones -- though a minority, still respectably mouthy -- face a tough love deaf ear to their tantrum-toned outcries.

Look, PGE must be operated by the municipality. It isn't even a case of raiding it. PGE cracked up and bereft itself of good business practice and infested itself with management malfeasance and misperformance -- the broken bankrupt business model falls into Portland's lap and civic puriew, that's what the case is. Public stewardship of PGE is inevitable and foregone, get over it. The certainty of it doesn't matter, there's not time to hystorickify it, but if you go to investigate it on your own time, to your own satisfaction, then look to see private business 'owners and management' planning and performing criminal extortion and commercial fraud. Playing with people's lives dependent on supply of municipal utility, by reckless disregard for and disruption of that supply, for private enrichment.

There is not even enough time to be merciless in prosecuting the individual dastards. They know who they are, leave them loose to outrun the guilt in themselves the rest of their lives. With no electricity, wherever they live.

Because that's what is on us. No electricity. I realize my propoundings in this appear as easily dismissible as the sack-cloth soothsayer sandwich-boarding the sidewalk with "The world ends tomorrow, the sky is falling." Yet, for electricity, evidence keeps accumulating data points trending to an end, abruptly.

The data in a prior comment, giving some percentages of US electricity generated by coal-, oil-, natural gas-powered sources, presents margin-of-error sense that without those fuels there's no electricity. And we are almost without those fuels. That's the "the sky is falling" similar statement that people recoil and cringe in denial from and refuse to investigate. APSO dot org, I guess, if there could be one place to start. What there is to research is the oil production numbers at the well head. Nevermind where it is or the politics to get it to some other place. Just the facts, Sherlock. The oil coming out of the wells is declining, rapidly, like 2005 down 8% under 2004 figures, worldwide. By the numbers. By the assurances of spokespersons being distributed as press release, (which is the thread topic), there is no shortage, production is only temporarily down and is going to resume and increase former levels next year and into the foreseeable future ... and you can believe the boilerplate if you read it. Their mouths are writing checks their oil supplies can't cash, according to the well-head data points.

And, as the earlier citation of projected (global) natural gas supply lasting 30 years, which doretta points out is not. that. long., is also wrong. Or, just not supported by the well-head numbers. Effectively, natural gas co-exists with crude oil, find one and you find them both, exhaust one and you exhaust them both. The "the sky is falling" alarm is, again, and again and again and again, to offer my voice as one who has been investigating and tracking the talk, saying oil ends -- the earth runs out of oil, just as clearly as I can say that, clear and unambiguous -- the earth runs out of oil in, oh, five years. Maybe it's three years. Maybe it's ten. And runs out of natural gas at the same time. The whole discussion of an LNG terminal in Oregon is ridiculous distraction: there ain't gonna be natural gas to liquify. And the Coos Bay or North Bend proposal to bring natural gas in there and lay an 18-inch gas line from there to Reno, or farther, all signed and press release'ed and wired in and projected underway ain't never gonna carry the first million btu equivalents in it, because there ain't any. People can't believe it.

Oil and political and spokespeople potentates are lying and have been lying to us, everyone, humankind actually, in representing the natural resource extents on earth. Mostly they lied for tax breaks, which favor overstating the oil in a discovery. And a dozen other ways, skip the details, (or go look them up). Notice, too, the pattern of potentates lying to us -- oh, say, global warming, or anti-evolution, or free-lunch atomic energy electricity, or simply close range look at ENRON/PGE lying to us about the supply of electricity -- wherever you look, the empowered ones feed media mesmerism with rose-colored glasses, and that's what people go on, and don't see the tragedy almost here, like a comet hurtling in and the insiders with advance news think they can a.) keep others from finding out, and b.) save themselves somewhere, (on an isolated island?), and leave everyone else to suffer.

When there is no oil and is no natural gas and PGE stops making electricity, it don't matter whether the City is running it or the present gang of criminals is running it, when there ain't no electricity TO RUN!!

Some comment above worked out a supposition of performance that included the clause "fifteen years from now, such-and-such would be ..." No. It won't. Try to consider the possibility that the people around the world who know from oil and natural gas when they say the supply is in steep decline that they might know what they are talking about, and let it soak in for a little while what that means, and what it means in your life, before jumping into action to dispute it. 'It' says, Nothing will be as it is today, five years from now.

Imagine saying that to the residents of New Orleans and Louisiana and Mississippi one year ago.

Which is where I am going to segue-and-out with this, a report in today's Denver Post. Several people have frozen to death in that city this weekend because the electricity and natural gas stopped. Notice the barely mentioned short phrase a ways into the story, as a dangled participle that may fall off the end of its sentence in any next editor's edit: "...coupled with a limited supply of natural gas ...."

Denver winter blackouts , Denver Post.

...As the mercury dropped to minus 13 degrees Saturday, Denver's frigid temperature shattered the date's previous record low of minus 3, set in 1880.

While the forecast calls for a period of relatively warmer weather starting today, people all over the Front Range were coping with the chill.

Xcel was forced to implement rolling blackouts to more than 300,000 metro-area customers on Saturday because of high demand for heat and electricity, coupled with a limited supply of natural gas, which Xcel uses to generate electricity.

"This was put into effect to control any further damage to the system," said Xcel media spokesman Tom Henley.

The controlled outages, which relieved the grid, began at 8:50 a.m. and were implemented in 30-minute increments to 100,000 customers at a time, Henley said. Everyone's power was restored again by 10:45 a.m., he said.

Rolling outages also occurred in Eagle, Grand Junction, Vail and Aspen. ...

<h1></h1>

<h1></h1>

For get the "APSO dot org" mentioned. As an arbitrary good starting point, go here: Peak Oil dot org.

<h1></h1>

Dan:

Is it possible there are disadvantages to being A V E R Y L A R G E electric utility like PGE? Some kind of reverse economy of scale?

I'm thinking about additional expenses for environmental liability, more health-dependent consumers (that require subsidized back up power), higher incidence of slow-pay customers, greater vehicular and line maintenance costs, more charitable giving demands, more "deep pocket" seeking claimants or marginal slip and fall lawsuits?

I don't have any allegiance to PGE, but I have a hard time understanding how the cost of delivering electricity would miraculously fall, beyond the obvious "profit" savings.

Did they send the $77 million and $16 million dollar figures to Enron, assuming it would be paid, or is that asking too much information in light of the pending legal matters?

Is the culpability local, Corporate, or gaming the IRS code?

<h1></h1>

Don't mean to be mean, but a lot of the trolling sounds like people who took the conclusion of newspaper and TV -- because, after all, it was in the newspaper, it was on TV, it MUST be true, (but it's not, the newspaper and TV are lying to us, probably because they own stock in ENRON/PGE but that's just speculation, the grilling questions need to be directed at the newspaper and TV to ask them why they deliberately lied and lie to us), and now are searching (in phrases such as 'is it possible that ...'), for the facts of it.

I just like the zinger: 'What's the conclusion on which your facts are based?'

<h1></h1>

"Or is this about ideology more than about real world results?"

LT - It is about real world results. I am not happy either looking at my power or gas bill. I am only ask we focus on rates by putting more teeth into the PUC. Then if we want a PUD, make it someone else besides the city of Portland. They have a poor track record of making things cheaper, unless you know of somthing they have lowered prices on besides $1M condo tax bills.

On schools, OK, how about Vanouver schools (which get less per student) vs. PPS? On competition, how about Las Vegas (95% return, if you play slots) vs. Oregon State Lottery (<50% return.)

Tenskey:

Please tell me that all your considered conclusions are supported by objective facts. I would love to think you actually believe in all the conspiracy theories you write about. It's posts yours (above) that inspired my pseudonym, because when I read your writings, I feel like Alice in Wonderland.

How would you like to live in Looking-glass House, Kitty? I wonder if they'd give you milk in there? Perhaps Looking-glass milk isn't good to drink--But oh, Kitty! now we come to the passage. You can just see a little PEEP of the passage in Looking-glass House, if you leave the door of our drawing-room wide open: and it's very like our passage as far as you can see, only you know it may be quite different on beyond. Oh, Kitty! how nice it would be if we could only get through into Looking- glass House! I'm sure it's got, oh! such beautiful things in it!

Commissioner Leonard -

I'm with Steve. I'm not necessarily against a PUD, but I don't trust the CoP to run it. WAAAAYYYYY too many fiascos witnessed in my limited 12-year habitation here. And seemingly, no accountability for those fiascos. None.

And I can see it already - 2% of all electricity receivables earmarked for public art. (tongue only slightly in cheek)

The other person who seems to be making sense here is WBA2 - We have plenty of issues in Portland already that need attention.

I think a lot of folks here are in the same boat as me - they want to see a track record of sound decision-making (which we feel hasn't been the case) and accountability before we get behind a PUD.

Alice wonders if there might be some reverse economies of scale in the utility business. Interestingly, I've heard PGE supporters play it both ways, arguing that a large utility like PGE has special problems that raise costs, while arguing that County-based PUDs would be more expensive because they'd be smaller. The stats are quite clear. Public power IS CHEAPER! Folks who continue to counter undeniable reality with political rhetoric make themselves look quite foolish.

Kari,

If public officials willing to discuss issues here have every aspect of their responsibilities attacked by the same crew of trolls, the public officials are likely to stay away. I think it would be good to keep the discussion on subject to some extent. .

I just learned that Cryptosporidium was only recognized as a human pathogen in 1976, and there were 12 waterborne outbreaks in North America from 1985 to 1997 (when the below article appeared in the Annual Review of Public Health. Other outbreaks likely went undetected.

ENVIRONMENTAL ECOLOGY OF CRYPTOSPORIDIUM AND PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

Author: Joan B. Rose, Department of Marine Sciences, University of South Florida, 140 7th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701.

Cryptosporidium has become the most important contaminant found in drinking water and is associated with a high risk of waterborne disease particularly for the immunocompromised.

There have been 12 documented waterborne outbreaks in North America since 1985; in two of these (Milwaukee and Las Vegas) mortality rates in the immunocompromised ranged from 52% to 68%.

Public health officials should consider a communication program to physicians treating the immunocompromised, nursing homes, develop a plan to evaluate cases of cryptosporidiosis in the community, and contribute to the development of public policies that limit contamination of source waters, improve water treatment, and protect public health.

Heck, they're even worried about "unexplained intestinal ailments" in the Gray Lady, the NYT

Thank you, Tom.

Civiletti:

Am I a troll because I disagree with you? What about Tenskey, is he a troll too?

Alice- I have no problem with any of your insights or comments.

There are other comments here, however, that really are nothing more than personal attacks.

Being anonymous, I suspect some of them have a personal interest in preserving the cash cow that is PGE just the way it is. Thus, they throw out red herrings and make personal accusations and attacks in order to divert attention from the main topic...PGE managements improper behavior.

Other anonymous posts are troubling as well. If a person is motivated to use a pseudonym solely to preserve their anonymity history is replete with good examples of that.

However, if a person uses a pseudonym for the sole purpose of making personal, nasty comments without having to be accountable for their vitriol("Charlie from Gresham" and "Ramon" come to mind) that is an entirely different matter. Not only does it speak to their character, as Tom C points out, it dissuades other elected officials from entering the discussion.

I actually take no small amount of ribbing from friends because I subject myself to the likes of the two I refer to above. However, I keep at it because I do think overall the blog can and should be a forum where ideas are debated among hopefully more than just people who agree with each other.

I particularly appreciate your comments, Alice, because while we may not come from the same place philosophically, you are honest ("yeah, I am gonna buy stuff in Portland, catch me if you can" (rough quote...gave me quite a chuckle at 3 in the morning)).

Keep at it...I and others enjoy your perspective.

Alice,

I would consider someone a troll who made lengthy and persistent remarks on subjects that have little to do with the original post, or who repeated ad hominem attacks.

Tenskwatawa's remarks may be rambling at times, but he doesn't loose sight of the issue, and he doesn't write simply to make trouble.

Thank you, Frank. I appreciate it.

Tom:

When did I "loose" sight of the issue? When I disagreed with your deeply held opinions?

My only ad-hominem attack was against Caelan, when he suggested that my "guessing" about the outcome of a hypothetical poll is the same as Tenskey saying, "The popular support lopsidedly favors condemning PGE."

Tenskey has no idea what percentage of the public favors the condemnation of PGE. If he had such a poll, I'm sure he would have cited it. And what constitutes "lopsided" support: 80% in favor? I disagreed with his subjective assessment, and said that I would "guess" there are just as many Portlanders that are sick of Erik Sten's socialism as they are Peggy Fowler's alleged misdeeds. Caelan asserted I was guilty of the same grandiosity as Tenskey, which simply wasn't true.

Some of you are so blinded by your own sanctimonious liberalism, that you're afraid to shout "bullshit" when warranted. Speaking truth in the face of Leftist Demagoguery is not trolling.

Freedom of expression is a two-way street.

Alice writes>>Because a newer community (think Wilsonville or Beaverton) doesn't have the same backlog of deferred maintenance and crumbling infrastructure. And their elected officials are not worried about the political backlash of increasing sewer rates to adequately begin to address the backlog of repair and replacement of sewer infrastructure.<<<

hee hee. Good one. Never heard of the great water-wars of West Linn, eh?

My sister was on the West Linn City Council during earlier years of "the war". (She replaced a councilor who quit mid-term because he/she (can't remember which) couldn't stand another minute of the abuse citizens were pouring out on their elected's then. The Council was trying to repair and extend a crumbling system straining under the development pressures of their growing burb.

It tore the Council apart and they utterly failed to get the votes for nessesary repairs and expansion of the system. That was at least 10 years ago, and last I heard they were STILL trying to get something moving...(er, no pun intended.)

As for Beaverton and the rest -- they've got their own issues -- and worries about backlash - with huge new infrastructure costs to extend services, such as, oh, I dunno, you think maybe, sewer and water? to new subdivisions. Just wait till the fighting really gets going over who's going to pay for that...

Dear Editor:

John Price of Damascus (City gets in PGE'a way - February 18) wrote, "I've never worked for more ethical and public-spirited people than our local management team"

Does that mean that the Northwest cities comparable to Portland, the Tacoma Power, and the Seattle City Light which have much lower electricity rates than PGE are less efficient and less ethical than the PGE President Peggy Fowler lead management team who sold PGE out to Enron gobbling up 1.5 billion (not million) dollars (Deal partly replenishes money lost on Enron - February 18) of PGE employees retirement funds?

Comparing the electricity rates with the tram construction money is like comparing the apples and oranges. Mr. Price should come out of the darkness and read under PGE powered lights to find out how much more he is paying day and night than the Eugene Water and Electric Board, and the McMinnville Water and Light customers are saving from their electric bills for each kilowatthour they use. That would be a good lesson on mathematics, electric rates, ethics, and public-spirit he would learn.

Shantu Shah 6637 SW 88th Place Portland, OR 97223 PH: 503-245-1722

Tom Civiletti: your unflinching defense of Tenskawata has taken understatement to a new level, to wit:

"Tenskawatawa's remarks may be rambling at times?"

Blue Oregon posters may lean to the left at times.

Monica Lewinsky felt Clinton may not have meant everything he said.

The City of Portland's relationship with PGE may be tainted by their rebuffed acquisition efforts.

I found a scathing review of Portland, Oregon's poltical leadership and civil service prepared by the NYC Bureau of Municipal Research...Read page 42 to learn the origins of today's sewer infrastructure debacle (think Big Dig while you're reading):

granted the information is a bit dated, but the more things change, the more they stay the same

Anne Dufay: I made no reference to West Linn, you did.

That said, infrastructure demands occasioned by new development is much easier to fund than repair and replacement of 100 year old pipes. Why? Because you can put some (if not most) of the costs on the developers (systems development charges) plus you get new property tax revenue from those properties on top of any up front collections.

That it took the elected officials of West Linn a decade to reach some form of consensus only underlines my point. Commissioner Adams has acknowledged the increasing backlog of deferred water and sewer maintenance, yet Commissioner Leonard (above) seems to believe that our sewer rates will be going down in the future. I don't think so.

Alice,

Doretta is correct. I was not thinking of you when I wrote about trolls. Sorry I did not make that clear.

Anyway, I find Tenskwatawa's remarks interesting. His passion and sense of concern are apparent, and he is not afraid to aproach an issue from an unexpected angle. But, hey, we're off subject here.

<h1></h1>

Well, the day's reading ("Backgroung to Modern Thought," C.D.Hardie, [Watts & Co.1947]), finds the gem I needed: "It may be that in attempting to be brief I have exaggerated one side of the story, but I would urge a hostile critic to remember Mark Twain:'The worst of me is that I exaggerate so; it is the only way I can approximate the truth.'"

My exclaiming a lopsided support for public sunlight into ENRON/PGE embezzlement bookkeeping and crimes, is based on the firsthand accounts of the City Council candidate interviewed on Torrid Joe's blog, (I'm sorry for not having the names readily, someone can help if this doesn't get you there, Alice), in which she attested her biggest surprise (during the hundreds(?) of house parties she attended in gathering 1000 five-dollar contributions), was the thorough strength of support for a PUD on the hoods, whereas she had thought the support was weak based on newspaper slights of it; and, if elected, (for Salzman's seat, that name I remember), she might be the clinching vote for it and that would be somewhat of a reversal, driven by constituent contact.

[Editor's note: Long, off-topic ramble about peak oil deleted.]

Yikes!

Dan & Alice: To add to the analysis, you might also consider looking at other municipal PUDs and publically-owned electric utilities throughout the nation. Los Angeles, the country's second-largest city, is served by public power. So is the city of Alameda, CA, as well as Sacramento, CA, the latter of which is quite comparable to Portland in size.

All three places have lower rates than the cities in California served by PG&E.

So, when Dan points out all of the smaller public utilities in the Northwest who have cheaper rates because they are public, don't just take this to mean that small places can have cheap public power. Any place can have cheap public power, regardless of size. The reason power is cheaper when it's public? Removal of the profit motive reduces costs when it comes to monopolized utilities. The only money spent is the money necessary to operate the system. There is no wasted money on bonuses, shareholders, advertising, PR, or legal expenses to defend against public power takeovers.

Randy: Thank you and Erik so much for pursuing this issue. I wish, however, that you were still attempting to turn PGE into an institution of public power. I believe that the City of Portland could turn PGE into a very lean electric utility by employing all of the rank-and-file workers, while eliminating the fraud, waste and management bloating at the top.

I worked briefly for the PGE Environmental Affairs office during the 90s, after the whole Trojan ordeal (which I have never compleely forgiven PGE for -- they wasted how much on defeating that ballot measure to close Trojan, only to turn around and... close Trojan? Yet another unnecessary corporate expense!)... and I must say that PGE runs a pretty tight ship, and they (pre-Enron takeover) had a good sense of corporate stewardship and environmental responsibility. Just like the City of Portland. Sure, Trojan is a stranded expense that must be dealt with... but eventually, it will be.

My point: I fully support turning PGE into an institution of public power, I think the facts support the assertion that this will lead ultimately to lower rates (or at least to a reduced increase in rates in comparison to corporate power), and I trust the City of Potland, or a PUD run by Oregonians, to do as good or a better job than PGE, pre-Enron, did in delivering power to Oregonians.

Would public power still be cheaper if all of PGE's employees are granted entry into PERS? I know many of them lost some or all of their 401(k) equity when Enron's stock became worthless.

How much would that cost?

You wouldn't form a PUD and then let the employees fend for themselves in retirement? That wouldn't be fair.

From today's Oregonian:

PacifiCorp: Lift rates 13.2 percent Energy - The new request to regulators comes as the outcome of a rate case and acquisition of the utility are pending

Friday, February 24, 2006 TED SICKINGER PacifiCorp filed a request with Oregon utility regulators Thursday seeking an increase in electricity rates of $112 million, or 13.2 percent, to take effect in December.

Portland-based PacifiCorp is the state's second-largest electric utility, serving 535,300 customers in the state. Its request comes on top of a 3.17 percent rate increase that the Oregon Public Utility Commission granted the utility in September. That was about a quarter of PacifiCorp's original request, and the company's request for the PUC to reconsider that decision is pending.

Maybe the City could put in a higher bid than Warren Buffet, and still have money left over to reduce rates?

I have responded to Randy's original post here on my own blog. You can find it at:

http://www.floop.com/blog.html

From KGW's website:

State says PGE properly paid taxes, Portland disagrees

full text of William McCall's KGW report is available here

The first paragraph says:

Portland General Electric paid its income taxes properly and without any additional cost to ratepayers after it was purchased by Enron Corp. in 1997, state regulators said in a report released Thursday.

..........................................What's that hissing sound?

That's hot air spewing out of the hole the PUC just ripped in Commissioner Leonard's and Sten's PGE/Enron conspiracy theory!

here's the 51 page report from the Public Utility Commission

PDF slides and audio recordings available here

Hell hath no fury like a public power bid scorned. I'm sure a formal letter of apology will be forthcoming from the City Leaders.

WBAII,

Ha ha, ha ha ha. You see OPUC as some impartial arbiter of this issue. OPUC is a classic example of an industry captured regulator. They have already refused to consider recouping ratepayers' stolen $700 million, and are dragging their feet on implementing the new legislative prohibition on private tax collection.

Check out, also, the court's rejection of PGE's OPUC approved collection of profit on defunct Trojan nuclear power plant.

Bruce- I am not motivated by Enron's refusal to convert PGE to a Public Utility District.

I am motivated by a company that is doing business in our city that is taking advantage of our citizenry....just as I was when I discovered two years ago that there were businesses that were flaunting the city's business license requirements. I initiated a crack down on them that has seen those efforts increase city collection from scofflaw businesses to the tune of $10 million.

The report by the PUC staff was nothing short of shocking. Just one example is that the staff glossed over PGE changing its accounting methods 3 times in 3 years...at minimum an IRS NO-NO and a source of tens of millions of "free" dollars that line PGE execs pockets at a time their front line workers have been completely screwed out of their 401k's.

More details will follow soon, but just know that I will not be rolled by a half assed analysis spoon fed by PGE that continues to put it to Portalnders and PGE front line workers.

Commissioner Leonard:

I sincerely admire your tenacity. But what if you're wrong? Is this where you want to distinguish yourself: as the uninitiated.

If the IRS and SEC don't prosecute PGE's alleged misdeeds, and the PUC and FERC both take a pass on any enforcement action, does it make sense for the City of Portland to charge full steam ahead, lawyers at battle stations?

Eventually (or, tomorrow), ask yourself: does the City of Portland benefit from a legal showdown? I'm no lawyer, but I would bet that PGE can afford a more experienced and specialized "utility regs/tax law" legal team than can the City of Portland. If your head is handed to you on a plate by the Supremes or a Federal Court (after untold millions in legal fees), it will make your tenacity look quixotic (at best) or vindictive and misguided (or worse).

I'm not suggesting that your position is entirely unsupported by the facts. I honestly don't know enough about the facts or the law to form an informed opinion. But as the old saying goes: where the facts don't support PGE, they will argue the law; where the law makes PGE look weak, they'll argue the facts.

On the other side of the ledger, you should read John Price's rebuttal with an open mind, and try to imagine that (just maybe) PGE is not the evil corporate villain that fits conveniently into the portrait that you (and others) have painted.

It is within the realm of possibility that PGE was just a backwater sub-plot in the Enron debacle. I have no dog in this fight, but my gut instinct tells me there is a train wreck coming, and now is the time for diplomacy and detente, not battle stations.

My guess is that you're not motivated by politics, but by misguided lawyers or consultants (who have a vested interest in an extended billable hours fight). My mind wanders to a bunch of drunk cowboys daring one of their buddies to sneak into the corral and hope on a bull named Twister, or Pistol Whipped. C'mon Randy, you're not afraid of him are ya?

Quoting from the NY Times magazine (on a story about Professional Rodeo and the Pro Bull Riders):

In fact, it is the bulls that have, until recently, garnered more attention. The rider's job is to stay on the bull for a full eight seconds; the bull's job, obviously, is to toss him. And so the bull's job, as it turns out, has considerably more dramatic flair for the uninitiated.

the full article is worth a read, if you've got some time to burn

What has become amazing to me in this debate is how PGE has successfully won over the Oregonian editorial board, PUC staff and other smart and otherwise independent thinking Oregonians.

I have spent much time familiarizing myself with the issues I am focused on. I have discovered emails written in 2001 from PGE top managers that clearly say PGE will retroactively attribute more of their profits to Multnomah County for the sole purpose of charging the Multnomah County income tax. The emails also make it clear that the retroactively collected tax will not be paid to the county but will, rather, increase PGE's profits by the amount of the county tax collected.

Further, after analyzing PGE's financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission, we believe that PGE has been charging twice for the Multnomah County income tax. Once built into the rates and second as a specific add on to the biller.

However, PGE refuses to turn over the working papers that could exonerate it.

One needs not to be a psychic to conclude that PGE's working papers would in fact prove charging twice for a tax that they in fact never paid. If not, they would happily show us why we are wrong.

What I learned at the PUC this past Thursday is that the staff is woefully outmatched by PGE/Enron attorneys and accountants. Just sitting and listening, our Tax expert (he is a CPA/Attorney that is recognized as one of the leading experts in the US on acquisitions and tax consequences) was shocked at the mistakes the PUC staff was making in describing various transactions.

PGE's frustration is tied to the fact that they aren't able to roll me the way they have every other force they have come into contact with. The moment they want this to come to an end, they can deliver to my office the documents the city has requested.

Commissioner Leonard:

If you're right about the duplicate tax collection, it may be possible to demonstrate it without additional documentation. Assuming you have not alienated the PUC, they ought to have lots of detail into how the rates were constructed, and what taxes were built into the rates.

If it turns out you are right, then who is the proper authority to ajudicate and punish? The IRS, the SEC, the PUC? Certainly not the City of Portland, except for the possibility that your team "discovered" it.

If it turns our you are wrong, then I would submit that your experts may have benefitted from misleading you.

No matter how deeply held your opinions are, no matter how much research that you and your staff have dedicated to this investigation, you still need a fallback strategy that acknowledges the possibility (no matter how remote it seems today) that you could be mistaken.

Alternately, you may be right on the facts, but find it extremely difficult to get the appropriate regulator to undertake an enforcement effort against a "new and reconstituted" PGE. Does that mean the City of Portland should step into the gap?

You might discover that your recently discovered (1931?) authority to regulate utilities within Portland City Limits does not extend to the collection of county taxes. You may be technically correct, but lack the legal standing to assert your authority.

As you may be aware, the Courts are not always the best place to find justice. Right and wrong rarely enter into those discussions.