"I AM - I SAID" neil diamond
Recently Ward IV Councilman Paul Hach sent me an e-mail spelling out his reasons for voting for the AMPGS Meigs County Power Plant. I asked Paul if I could post the letter he sent me on the blog. and with his permission, here is his statement. One contention Paul had was when the recession started and it was the cause for the failure of the plant. Paul believes the recession hit after the final vote was taken to go forward with the plant in February of 2008. Most economists believe the recession hit in November/December of 2007.
Here is his letter, if nothing else, I give Mr. Hach credit for standing up for his convictions.
*************************************************************************************
Why I voted for the AMP-Ohio Meigs County Power Plant Project
Ann McFeatters (News Herald, July 8, 2011) wrote that “Public officials have the responsibility to pay the bills but also to plan for the future, safeguard the public’s assets and protect the environment.”
My decision almost 4 yrs ago (10/15/07) to vote in favor of the contract with the AMP Meigs County Power Plant project was planning for the future. In Painesville, we are used to cheaper electricity than our neighbors – it’s one of the pluses of living in Painesville. Our electricity is cheaper because we generate most of it ourselves – we don’t have to buy all of it off the grid like our neighbors do and live with the fluctuating cost of commodity power since deregulation. (It’s a little like locking in a fixed rate on your 30yr mortgage vs. taking your chances with a variable rate mortgage.)
But our cheap electricity will not last forever. Our power plant is 123 yrs old. The plant is very well maintained but components are becoming obsolete. So knowing that our power plant will eventually not be able to supply the base power load of the city, we on City Council were faced with the decision to either buy electricity at a much higher cost off the grid – or buy into part ownership of a new, efficient power plant which would provide us with a stable source of power at a lower rate.
The new coal-fired plant was not risky – the technology is well known, the fuel source is consistent, and the costs of running a coal fired plant are well known – again, not risky. I don’t consider a 50 yr contract for a power plant risky either – our plant has been running for over 100 years. At the time the economy was growing steadily, the projected power needs of the city were growing, residential and commercial, so that in a few years we would not be able to supply all the base power that we need. In fact, to be able to attract new business to Painesville, being able to supply plenty of power at a reasonable cost is a necessity. Doing nothing was a bigger risk.
(Until other fuels and technologies are as cost effective as coal, we have to balance the need for steady power with the need to protect the environment. The new power plant would have been cleaner and more efficient than our plant now – so to me, that was a step in the right direction.)
3 ½ years ago, on 2/19/08, Council voted again whether to continue our support of the Meigs County project. At that time, although the projected costs of the project had increased, the rate for electricity produced from the new plant would still be much less than the off-the-grid price – so it still made financial sense to continue support of the new power plant project.
Then the recession hit. Commercial demand for power dropped - this caused the wholesale cost of electricity to drop too.
1 ½ years later, after the 2nd vote, in November 2009, the projected construction costs for the new plant rose 37%. That with the drop in wholesale power costs led AMP to cancel the project. With the slow economy, the difference between the cost of electricity from the new plant and the wholesale market dropped.
Our share of the development costs of the project will be paid for with money set aside especially for contingencies like this, it will not be paid for from cost increases in utility bills. The electric fund has about $10 million which will be used to pay our share of the project costs which will be around $2 million.
My responsibility to the people of Painesville is to maintain the quality of services as cost effectively as possible. So I stand by my votes – given the national economy at the time and all the information we had, I feel they were the right decisions to keep the cost of electricity in Painesville as low and steady as possible.
So in 2007 and early 2008, I did not predict the bursting of the housing bubble, the resulting recession, and the effect on construction and utilities costs that followed. But the economy will eventually recover, the demand for electricity will increase, and our power plant will not be able to keep up with the demand. We will have to buy wholesale electricity and watch our electric bills jump, and we will reminisce about when Painesville had cheap electricity.
Paul W. Hach II
Painesville City Council, Ward 4 July 2011
************************************************************************************
UPDATED VERSION 2.0
Why I voted for the AMP-Ohio Meigs County Power Plant Project
Ann McFeatters (News Herald, July 8, 2011) wrote that “Public officials have the responsibility to pay the bills but also to plan for the future, safeguard the public’s assets and protect the environment.”
10/15/07: My decision almost 4 yrs ago to vote in favor of the contract with the AMP Meigs County Power Plant project was planning for the future. In Painesville, we are used to cheaper electricity than our neighbors – it’s one of the pluses of living in Painesville. Our electricity is cheaper because we generate most of it ourselves – we don’t have to buy all of it off the grid like our neighbors do and live with the fluctuating cost of commodity power since deregulation. (It’s a little like locking in a fixed rate on your 30yr mortgage vs. taking your chances with a variable rate mortgage.)
But our cheap electricity will not last forever. Our power plant is 123 yrs old. The plant is very well maintained but components are becoming obsolete. So knowing that our power plant will eventually not be able to supply the base power load of the city, we on City Council were faced with the decision to either buy electricity at a much higher cost off the grid – or buy into part ownership of a new, efficient power plant which would provide us with a stable source of power at a lower rate.
The new coal-fired plant was not risky – the technology is well known, the fuel source is consistent, and the costs of running a coal fired plant are well known – again, not risky. I don’t consider a 50 yr contract for a power plant risky either – our plant has been running for over 100 years. At the time, the economy was growing steadily, the projected power needs of the city were growing, residential and commercial, so that in a few years we would not be able to supply all the base power that we need. In fact, to be able to attract new business to Painesville, being able to supply plenty of power at a reasonable cost is a necessity. Doing nothing was a bigger risk.
(Until other fuels and technologies are as cost effective as coal, we have to balance the need for steady power with the need to protect the environment. The new power plant would have been cleaner and more efficient than our plant now – so to me, that was a step in the right direction.)
Take or Pay contracts are very common – in food commodities and especially the energy industry. There is no other way to finance huge capital projects that benefit many customers. Not many design and construction companies could finance a multiyear, multibillion dollar project all on their own. Take and Pay contracts are written to benefit both sides and to share the risks. There was nothing unusual in the Take or Pay clause in the project contract.
2/19/08: 3½ years ago Council voted again whether to continue our support of the Meigs County project. At that time, although the projected costs of the project had increased, the rate for electricity produced from the new plant would still be much less than the off-the-grid price – so it still made financial sense to continue support of the new power plant project.
Then the recession hit. Commercial demand for power dropped - this caused the wholesale cost of electricity to drop too.
12/08: It’s easy to say we knew in 2007 the recession had started in December of 2007 – but it’s just not accurate. Yes – in December of 2008 (10 months after the 2nd vote), the National Bureau of Economic Research said that we had been in a recession since December of 2007 – but it took a year of economic data to make it officially a recession rather than a shorter “downturn”. And yes - some industries felt it earlier than others. But others were not affected then - I know our business and my wife’s were still busy in 2007 and 2008.
11/09: 1½ years later, after the 2nd vote the projected construction costs for the new plant rose 37%. That with the drop in wholesale power costs led AMP members to cancel the project. With the slow economy, the difference between the cost of electricity from the new plant and the wholesale market dropped.
Our share of the development costs of the project will be paid for with money set aside especially for contingencies like this, it will not be paid for from cost increases in utility bills. The electric fund has a reserve fund which can be used to pay our share of the project costs which will be around $2 million. We don’t know what the final expense cost will be yet - AMP and we as one of its members are still fighting to recover some of the expenses.
My responsibility to the people of Painesville is to maintain the quality of services as cost effectively as possible. So I stand by my votes – given the national economy at the time and all the information we had, I feel they were the right decisions to keep the cost of electricity in Painesville as low and steady as possible.
In 2007 and early 2008, I did not predict the bursting of the housing bubble and the effect it would have on construction and utilities costs– unfortunately, no crystal ball was available. But the economy will eventually recover, the demand for electricity will increase, and our power plant will not be able to keep up with the demand. We will have to buy wholesale electricity and watch our electric bills jump, and we will reminisce about when Painesville had cheap electricity.
Paul W. Hach II
Painesville City Council, Ward 4 July/Aug 2011
26 Comments:
Thank you, Paul. This is probably the most honest and sincere information coming from anyone on council that I have ever heard.
Regardless of when the recession started (officially or personally), at the time of the 2nd vote, the costs of the project had not risen to the point where the project was not beneficial to Painesville.
The economic estimates of the project would still have supplied us with cheaper electricity. That's why I voted for it.
If you would like to contact me to discuss further, my email is phach@sbcglobal.net
Yes, after the fact, the stats show the recession started in late 2007, but nobody new it at the time. Gas prices were $4 a gallon in 2008, because the impression was the economy was still booming. It's easy say when the recession started looking back after a few years, but to go after Paul for that is a little misleading.
Mr. Hach what would cause you to lower yourself to the standards of this blog. I read it for entertainment not to believe the lies and gossip found here.
You have nothing to prove to this nobody. I know of no one who takes the goings on here with a grain of truth.
I must now wonder about you?
Paul Here are some facts I dug up.
Since the beginning of 2007 95 major power plants have been cancelled.
59 in 2007, 24 in 2008, and 12 in 2009. The handwriting was on the wall when you voted for AMPGS.
To now claim no one knew at the time, well someone knew.
If you would have done a little homework you would have noticed this before moving forward in Febuary 2008.
A little History America moved on rail in the early half of the 20th Century. Steam engines powered the trains. 90% of all trains moved under steam power in 1948 yet by 1958 all main-line steam was a thing of the past replaced by diesels. Wonder what would have happened to a railroad the signed a 50 year "take or pay" contract with a locomotive builder? Things sometime change in a hurry as we see electric energy presently is.
Again please don't buy into the "clean coal" theory it's very expensive.
to the post of 10:03.it is very sad , that you are a very naive person. this BLOG is very imformative. things that you would't normally find out, is here on this BLOG.this is the problem with the city.
to PAUL HACH,we did't know the city administration had a teleprompter to tell them what to say about council matters.
Can someone enlighten me about this 10 million dollar electric plant slush fund? Paul it didn't fall out of the sky and it belongs to the residents not for you to pay Las Vegas with our money. Why no questions from you during the debate? The more I hear about this the sicker I get. Do we also have a 10 million dollar water slush fund. Prove where this money came from please!
Take or pay are common? I own alot of stock yet I checked the reason for this finanacing is so that major bond holders in New York will purchase the bonds for the plant. While Painesville and other communities guarantee the notes. Tell me if Painesville suffered a loss of 2 million along with 80 other cities what did Amp Ohio lose? You were the suckers that lost our money. Own up to it for once in your life.
You were warned, yet you and JaHada didn't heed the warnings. This begs the question was there another reason or just stupidity?
The whole time the council and McMahon were debating this 50-year coal plant deal, there were plenty of citizens sounding the alarm and trying desperately to get the council to listen to them. A 50-year anything deal is insane, first of all, a 50-year coal deal in this century is insane, and a 50-year coal plant deal where we OWN the plant, with all that that entails is stupid. Citizens said it over and over again. Somebody should have listened, right Mr. Hach?
I'd also like to see you explain to me about the landfill deal with AMP. Was that $10,000/year for enough electricity to power one home? How many years is that deal? Am I remembering that correctly - I believe I am.
I watch the council meetings when this was debated. To the people that tried to stop this, thank-you. To council especially Joe Hada Mr. Arrogant" you were so sure you were right yet you were so wrong. How much money will the citizens of Painesville lose before your time on council ends? Mr. Hach why are you even on coucil? I have seen no reason to vote for you again. What have you done but cost me and my family more money? You got your mountain of dirt not please move on.
This was a good explaination on why he voted for the coal plant now using his same reasons why then vote against the natural gas plant? Cleaner energy already built,purchasing it though Amp at half the construction costs,if you can believe that.
Why the change Mr. Hach? Cold feet?
Just a heads up. I have been told that that light at the end of the Millstone tunnel... well may be the headlight of a train.
Seems the Wise Owl,now believes the Queen may have a legal problem that may be a problem for the Queens Kingdom as well as the rabbits getting honey for their burrows?
More to come in the next week. Remember it was a Sheriff sale.
Please,no posts will be excepted on this post unless it deals with Painesville's and/or Paul Hach reason to chose to vote for AMP-OHIO or Painesville utilities. Re submit your comment about illegals where they should be. I refuse to bar the rally team from this site but you must get into the right comment section. Not everything is about illegals, atleast to most of us.
Dear Mr Hach; this is the time to and place you choose to debate the AMP the Ohio resolution? Really?
Mr Hach, where have you been for the last five years?
The blog was used extensively to discuss and debate the the deal with AMP Ohio and NOW you want to tell us why?
How dare you come to this forum and try to defend your vote.
Why not wait for; Meet the Candidate Night? I am sure Richard Tibbits would love to debate the AMP Ohio deal with you.
Mr Hach it was you who sat on council and voted for the open ended 40 year deal with AMP OHIO.
Mr Hach it was you who gambled with tax payer money.
Stand up and take some responsiblity. Where were you when so many of us were attending meetings on AMP Ohio?
Where were you when when we listened to plight of the residents of Meigs county? Oh and then there is that pesky Mountain Top Removal issue.
We drove to Cleveland many nights to hear both sides of the controversy and the more I listened and the more I researched the more light was shed on are
very dark deal for Painesville residents. And now you want us to believe you were you a visionary and you voted for the best interest of Painesville?
Yes, Mr Hach, even Hal Werner attended one of those meetings.
When Obama was running and we watched his campaign slowly gaining ground, he stood on the platform of green energy. Obama used the podium to tell
everyone how he felt about coal burning power plants, not too good. Even me a mere gardener and potter knew the future of coal plants in this country, even clean coal.
And Mr Hach, please do your homework as there is no such thing as clean coal and then let's move onto CO2 sequestration a by product for "clean coal".
Mr Hach how about we put that coal burning plant on you pile of dirt in your backyard; how would have voted then?
I thought this blog was for information and not a political platform for councilman to cover their butts.
Who will hear from next, Council President Hada, who proudly voted for the first Amp deal?
This is not your bully pulpit Mr. Hach.
Madpotter, Councilman Hach sent the letter to me, I inturn asked if I could publish it on the blog. It was my idea not his.
I want this to be a public forum, if any one else on council or a candidate wants to leave a response they are welcome to.
I for one will go to the next council meeting and also ask about this $10,000,000.00 dollar set-a-side he brought up in the electric department, along with any other set-a-sides we have at city hall? Again I applaud Mr. Hach's frankness, I didn't agree with him then and I don't agree now either.
Mr. Hach your answer could have been in 5 words.
"Joe Hada told me too."
"How dare you come to this forum"
Little harsh don't you think. 1st amendment??? You have a right to post here, so as Term said, he received it and asked to post it.
My question is, what makes either one of you the ultimate expert? The taller the soap box the higher someone can pile it around the base.
I read Councilman Hach's explanation for his vote, I don't necessarily agree with all that he stated, but I give him credit for his attempt.
I have no idea what the madpotter is suggesting. Does the potter want to close down all coal plants? Even the tree hugger Obama isn't suggesting that we close down all coal plants.
I'd like to hear what the other candidates think about the future of coal, our coal plant, and how best to spend/invest the 10 million dollars.
I also would like to see more candidates use this blog. I can't always get to a meet the candidates night and with at least 8 candidates no one should expect a detailed answer on any issue at that kind of meeting.
Thank you Term and Paul Hach for publishing this info. I'm surprised by the shots taken at the Councilman. No one had a problem when John, Katie and Richard posted. Kind of nice reading about something other than the Rally Team.
Again. on this "I AM-I
SAID" no comments will be posted about illegal immigration. Go to answer is blowing in the wind I will not post them here. ou you like a little cheese with your wine?
6:14 Maybe the fact that John,Katie and Richard haven't cost us over 2 million dollars?
Mr. Hach knows it comes with the turf.
Again. on this "I AM-I
SAID" no comments will be posted about illegal immigration. Go to answer is blowing in the wind I will not post them here. ou you like a little cheese with your wine?
6:14 Maybe the fact that John,Katie and Richard haven't cost us over 2 million dollars?
Mr. Hach knows it comes with the turf.
I for one have Hada'nuff!
What do you think the chances are of council-president Hada giving his reason for voting on this contract?
About 1 to 2,700,000 on getting an answer. He will ignore this like it never happened.
Remember in the comment of 9:41 I said it was a Sheriff sale? I was wrong, and that's where all the trouble starts. Will Painesville ask Washington for an extention? or have they already? I have a feeling this is going to turn into a mess.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home