HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-05-1996 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RICHMOND.INDIANA,SERVING AS A BOARD
IN CHARGE OF THE OPERATION OF THE RICHMOND POWER&LIGHT PLANT
MONDAY. MAY 6.1996
1 The Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana, serving as a Board in charge of the operations of the
2 Richmond Power& Light Plant met in regular session at 7 p.m. Monday, May 6, 1996, in the Council Chambers in
3 the Municipal Building in said City. ChairpersonLarry Parker presided with the following Councilmembers in
4 attendance: Howard "Jack" Elstro, Etta Lundy, Bruce Wissel, Sarah "Sally" Hutton, Robert Dickman, Alan
5 Stamper,Bing Welch and Geneva"Gene"Allen. The following business was had to-wit:
6
7 Councilmember Wissel moved to add Resolution No. 3-1996 to the agenda,second by Councilmember Stamper
8 and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
9
10 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 15.1996
11
12 Councilmember Hutton moved to approve the minutes of the previous meeting as prepared, seconded by
13 Councilmember Welch and on a unanimous voice vote the motion was carried.
14
15 APPROVAL OF BILLS. INVESTMENTS AND TRANSFERS
16
17 Upon recommendation of the Finance Committee, Councilmember Stamper moved to approve the following bills
18 for payment,seconded by Councilmember Hutton and by unanimous voice vote the motion carried.
19
20 Bills Already Paid
21 Payroll and Deductions 223,763.16
22
23 Investments Purchased From:
24 Cash Operating Fund 2,100,000.00
25 Bond Sinking Fund
26 Utility Bond Reserve Fund
27 Depreciation Reserve Fund 1,392,657.54
28 Insurance Reserve Fund
29 Consumer Deposit Fund
30 Cash Reserve Fund
31 Group Insurance Fund
32
33 Total Investments 3,492,657.54
34
35 Transfer from Cash Operating Fund to:
36 Cash Reserve Fund for Payment
37 to City in lieu of taxes
38
39 Transfer from Cash Operating Fund to:
40 Depreciation Reserve Fund
41 for Property&Plant
42
43 Transfers from Depreciation Reserve to:
44 Cash Operating Fund
45
46 Transfers from Consumer Deposit to:
47 Cash Operating Fund,
48
49 Transfers from Utility Bond Reserve Fund to:
50 Bond Sinking Fund
51
52 Transfers from Cash Operating to ;
53 Interest and Bond Principal
54 Bond Sinking Fund
55 56
Cash Reserve Fund
Utility Bond Sinking Fund
57 Depreciation Reserve Fund
58 Insurance Reserve Fund
59 Consumer Deposit Fund
60 Interest and Bond Principal
61 End of Month Petty Cash
62 Revenue Bonds
63 Interest Coupons Redeemed
64 Bond Coupons
65 Miscellaneous Bills Already Paid 1,729,586.00
Total Prepaid Invoices 5,446,006.70
Less EFT/Direct Deposit of Payroll (43,476.62)
Total Prepaid Invoices 5,402,530.08
Totaa Bills Not Paid 644,126.13
Grand Total 6,046,656.21
RP&L Minutes Cont'd
May 6, 1996
Page 2
1 REMARKS BY CHAIRPERSON
2
3 Chairperson Parker had no comments.
4
5 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6
7 There was none.
8
9 STREET LIGHT COMMITTEE REPORT
10
11 Councilmember Stamper said he had a petition for street lights in his district and the residents were asking why
12 they had not been approved. Councilmember Elstro said he thought the Board had agreed that no more street
13 lights would be installed until the City pays something on the light bill. Councilmember Hutton agreed. President
14 Parker asked Councilmember Elstro to call the requested meeting within the next 10 days then added that it has
15 been stated publicly that the City is not able to install any street lights because of lack of funds, but there will be
16 the meeting that was requested and that announcement will be made.
17
18 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
19
20 There was none.
21
22 REPORT BY GENERAL MANAGER
23
24 General Manager Irving Huffman opened bids for a 1996 6-cylinder truck with a pick up body and asked for
25 approval of the proof of publication in the April 18 and April 25 issues of the Palladium-Item. Councilmember
26 Welch so moved, second by Councilmember Allen and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
27
28 Huffman read bids received from Brookbank Auto Center for$13,669 less a trade in of$1,000 for a net of$12,669
29 and an estimated delivery time of three days;Studebaker Buick for$13,389 less a trade in of$700 for a net of
30 $12,689 and an estimated delivery time of 60 to 105 days;and Fred First Ford for$13,375 less a trade in of$500
31 for a net of$12,875 and a delivery time of four to six weeks. Councilmember Elstro moved to refer the bids to the
32 general manager for tabulation, evaluation and recommendation,second by Councilmember Hutton and the
33 motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
34
35 Jim Daugherty,referring to an April 18 letter sent to the Board,talked about roof repairs. He said that the repairs
36 asked for if approved will put approximately 2/3 of the roof back up to condition. He added that last year RP&L
37 did extensive repairs to the other 1/3 of the roof.After this newly requested work is done, Daugherty said, only
38 minimal maintenance and preventive maintenance will have to be done for the next 15 years. In answer to a
39 question by Councilmember Allen, Daugherty said there is insurance on that,noting it is a 20-year warranty
40 through B.F.Goodrich.The total bid from Enterprise Roofing was for$62,891;T.W. Estes for$63,900;and Field
41 Roofing for$66,400. Daugherty recommended to accept the bid from Enterprise Roofing as the lowest most
42 responsive bid.Councilmember Stamper so moved,second by Councilmember Welch and the motion was carried
43 on a unanimous voice vote.
44
45 Huffman said he had sent a letter April 22 to the Board members informing them that the LIFAC project had come
46 to an end. He said the$21 million project was installed for the purpose of figuring out what percentage of
47 collection of sulphur dioxide could be accomplished with their type of system. He said they found RP&L was
48 runnng from 70 to 75 percent. He added that they did not know, however,that if RP& L put on a recirculation
49 process whether or not they could get that up to 80 percent collection which would be very good. Huffman said it
50 was determined that enough had been learned from the project to bring it to an end.
51
52 Huffman said RP & L benefitted from the project and had made a rough evaluation of the hardware they have
53 intact in the plant and it is around$10 million.He said the reactor vessel itself is 110 feet high and is made of
54 stainless steel, adding that the unit is not going to rust and it is in moth ball condition. He said if, in the future,
55 sulphur dioxide rules are tightened it will be necessary to start the reactor. He explained that RP& L went into the
56 project with one of two conclusions.The first is that the project be torn down and the building put back as it was
57 before.The second, is to leave it in place and it will be turned over to RP&L. He said it would be to RP&L's
58 benefit to keep it in place and in order to make it a binding proposition, he said, he had volunteered to pay$1 for
59 the facility. He said the letter he sent to the Board members is a provision for him to go ahead and sign for this
60 material.
61
62 Councilmember Allen asked why the project is in moth ball condition and Huffman answered if it doesn't have to
63 be operated that is great because there is an operating cost. However,there is no storage cost. Huffman said it
64 was indicated that if RP&L reactivates the project and it requires engineering service that should come from ICF
65 Kaiser and Tampala since Kaiser served as a consulting engineer and Tampala designed and built the system.
RP&L Minutes Cont'd
May 6, 1996
Page 3
1 Councilmember Dickman asked what the odds were that RP& L would use this system again. Huffman
2 responded that he did not know what EPA is proposing,adding that RP& L is at the mercy of EPA. In answer to a
3 question about the cost of removal, Huffman said the salvage value would be greater than the cost of removal.
4 Councilmember Wissel asked whether or not RP&L would be in violation of any rules if Kaiser and Tampala
5 were not used and Huffman answered that both are reputable firms.Councilmember Wissel asked Bever to check
6 into the issue and Councilmember Stamper asked Bever to look at the LIFAC contract.
7
8 Councilmember Welch commented that since this is a pressure vessel it carried pressure and potential danger
9 and Huffman answered that there is very little pressure,thus presenting very little danger. He said he felt
10 comfortable in accepting this project for$1 and said he would make the contract available to the City Attorney to
11 review so it can be sent in. Councilmember Dickman said if RP&L never uses this system again there would
12 never be any benefit and Huffman answered that it is just like an insurance policy. Councilmember Dickman
13 asked if the wording could be changed to"make every effort"to use Kaiser and Tampala and Huffman said he
14 would have trouble with that.Councilmember Lundy said it is obvious there would be no vote on this tonight and
15 she suggested the issue be tabled so Bever can get some answers.Councilmember Elstro reminded his fellow
16 Councilmembers that this is a$21 million project RP&L is getting and suggested new members go to RP&L
17 and look at the project. President Parker said the issue would be discussed at the next meeting.
18
19 ChairpersonParker explained Resolution No.3, noting that the RP& L Board of Directors will handle the meetings
20 in the same manner as Common Council according to Richmond Code 30-14. He said it will follow a modified
21 Roberts Rules of order.Councilmember Wissel commented that it had become obvious that there are some
22 differences of opinion on the Board as to what its responsibilities are in conducting the affairs of RP& L.He said
23 he sees this as the setting of ground rules,wanting to keep the discussion open, noting that these are rules with
24 which all members should become familiar. Councilmember Elstro moved to adopt Resolution No.3-1996,
25 second by Councilmember Dickman and the motion was carried on a unanimous voice vote.
26
27 Councilmember Dickman stated that about a month ago he had asked Herschel Philpot,financial manager of RP
28 &L,about the copies of the coal contract and hauling contract he had received, noting that they had been signed
29 but there were no prices. He said he had not heard from anyone.Huffman said coal contracts are not bantered
30 around,however, RP&L being a public entitly,they are all open for review. He added that the price bid in a public
31 bidding is always 5 to 10 percent higher than a negotiated bid because the world,and well as your competitor,
32 knows what it is going to sell for. He said RP &L has a consultant who has been working with the utility who tries
33 to get the market prices,but since the utility is an open entity and Councilmember Dickman wants to see the
34 prices, Huffman said he can come to the RP &L office tomorrow and he will go over them in detail.
35
36 Councilmember Dickman said again that he did not understand why the 60-page document was run off for him as
37 blank and why the pertinent data was gone. Huffman said he will make arrangements to meet with
38 Councilmember Dickman and go over the figures with him to keep those figures from becoming public.
39
40 Councilmember Stamper said he noticed that RP&L did have a consultant and paid him more than$5,000 last
41 year and asked how much that is an hour? Daugherty noted that coal contracts are negotiated on a long term
42 basis, adding that RP&L knows where the sources are and who has the reserves. Huffman said when a contract
43 is given to a supplier they are buying millions of dollars worth of coal per year and that supplier has to assure
44 them that he has reserves of comparable coal in the ground to last the length of the contract. He said you can buy
45 spot market coal cheaper but there is no assurance there will be coal there tomorrow.
46
47 Councilmember Allen said during the budget process she asked about the new car for Huffman and was told it
48 was in his contract.She said she has found that not to be true. She stated that becaue of the pending rate case
49 and the other expenses she would like to move that the Board not buy a new car for the general manager this
50 year. Her motion was seconded by Stamper. Councilmember Hutton said the car is purchased every two years.
51
52 The motion failed on a five to four roll call vote as follows:
53
54 Ayes:Wissel, Dickman,Stamper and Allen (4)
55 Nays: Elstro, Lundy, Hutton,Welch and Parker(5)
56
57 ADJOURNMENT
58
59 There being no further business,on a motion duly made,seconded and passed the meeting was
60 adjourned.
61
62
63
64
65 Larry Parker, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Norma Schroeder, City Clerk