HomeMy Public PortalAbout09-19-1983 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,- SEPTEMBER. 19, 1983
1 The.Common Council of the City of Richmond, Indiana, . serving as a Board in
2 charge of the operation of the Richmond Power & Light Plant, met in regular
3 session September 19, 1983 at the hour. of 7::OO,p..m, in the Municipal Building
4 of said City. Chairman Welch presidedwith the following members present:
5 Messrs. Elstro, Williams, Ms. Henry, Hankinson, Parker and Paust. Absent:
6 Mills and Carter. ' The following business was had, to-wit:
III 7 . .
8 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 6, 1983
9
10 Councilman Hankinson moved the minutes of the. previous meeting be approved as
11 published, seconded by Councilman Parker and on unanimous voice vote the motion
12 was carried. .
13 • ,
14 APPROVAL OF BILLS, TRANSFERS AND INVESTMENTS '
15
16 Councilman Hankinson moved the following bills., transfers and investments be
17 approved as listed on the agenda, seconded by Councilwoman Henry and on unanimous
18 voice vote the motion was carried:
19
20 Approve the following:
21 Bills in the amount,_:of 990,837.1.1
22 Bonds and Interest Coupons 13,538.75
23 , 2 Payrolls • 274,174,79
24
25 Transfers from Cash Operating Fund to: , .
• 26 Cash Reserve. Fund 109,819.25
27 Bond Sinking Fund ' 67,860.00
28
29 Transfers from Depreciation Reserve Fund to:
30 Cash Operating Fund • 147,202.85
III 31 •
32 Investments Purchased
33 Depreciation Reserve Fund 2,792,467.31
34 Bond Reserve Fund 476,195.83
35 Cash Operating Fund . 2,790,000.00
36 Bond Sinking Fund 69,688.55
37 Cash Reserve Fund. . 739,436.25
38 Consumer Deposit Fund • 50,000.00
39
40 REMARKS BY GENERAL MANAGER , ,
41 -
42 General Manager Irving Huffman handed.out copies. of a letter from Robert Ray
43 regarding repair work on the No. 1..cooling tower, . He-is interested in getting
44 work done on one (1) cell this fall. We did have in our budget some work on
45 the cooling tower in unit #2 of which we were a little under budget. We had
46 spent about $24,000 out of the $75,000 budgeted .for anew stack.' There was
47 severe damage to one cell during the winter. A coupling half broke in the fan
48 and the vibration caused structural damage within the unit. .We.want -permission
49 to repair one of these cells in the tower .and.next year will repair two cells .
50 and the following year two (2) more.
51 .
52 The new coned hyperbolic shape gives some additional natural draft effect and.
53 ,increases the efficiency of the tower. We want to put in new decking, new
54 structure members and work on the drift eliminators. The drift eliminators
55 keep the water from spraying out so use less water. The approximate cost is
56 $32,000, which is within what was allocated for other areas.
57 .
58 Councilman. Hankinson moved to authorize the general manager to make emergency
59 repairs to #1 cooling tower and cooling cells as outlined in the presentation,
60 seconded by Councilman Paust and on unanimous voice vote the motion was carried.
61
62 Councilman Parker commented favorably on the rate comparison sheet passed out,
63 by Mr. Huffman saying we were the lowest. among the 1,000 KWH in cities our size
64 and in our area and in the 600 KWH charge we miss by less than a dollar. It
65 shows it is being done properly to be the lowest one and still be a profitable
66 organization. •
RP&L Minutes Cont'd.
September 19, 1983
Page 2
•
1 Mr. Huffman noted a decrease in August and expects another decrease for the
2 last three (3) months of the year'.
3 _
4 Responding to Councilman Elstro's question of why Indianapolis Power & Light
5 beat us in .the 2,000 KWH charge, Mr. Huffman replied that it is mainly in the
6 rate structure', We .have. not had an -increase based a "cost of service" study.
7 When we do go in for the next .rate increase, we will have to run another "cost
8 of service" study and our rates will be structured more ,like Indianapolis.
9
10 Most of the companies in the 2,000 KWH charge bracket are way above us. A lot .
11 of them' have gone to high minimum bill_ charges. Mr. Huffman feels the .next
12 increase will- be sizable. It is not scheduled for- this year and probably not
13 for next. We mayhave to file next year as there is always a six (6) month lag.
14
15 ADJOURNMENT
16
17 There being.no further business on motion duly made, seconded and .passed the
18 meeting was adjourned.
19
20 Bing Welch
21 Chairman
22
23 ATTEST: Nancy V. Beach
24 Deputy Clerk