MAMA Annual Meeting October 4, 2011 CONTACT INFORMATION RODERICK - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
MAMA Annual Meeting October 4, 2011 CONTACT INFORMATION RODERICK - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
MAMA Annual Meeting October 4, 2011 CONTACT INFORMATION RODERICK S. Rick COY CLARK HILL PLC 212 EAST GRAND RIVER AVE LANSING, MI 48906 PHONE: (517) 318-3028 FAX: (517) 318-3099 Email: rcoy@clarkhill.com Electricity Rates Charged
CONTACT INFORMATION
RODERICK S. “Rick” COY CLARK HILL PLC 212 EAST GRAND RIVER AVE LANSING, MI 48906 PHONE: (517) 318-3028 FAX: (517) 318-3099 Email: rcoy@clarkhill.com
Electricity Rates Charged to Municipals
Unreasonable and getting worse!
Lack of Competition Raises Costs
We had competition from 2000 – 2008 It reduced rates for those who chose alternative
suppliers
It kept rates down for those who stayed with the
incumbent utility companies
But, then the legislature re-monopolized the
electric utility industry in Michgan in 2008
Competition works
Airlines Trucking Telecommunications Natural gas
5
It worked in Michigan from 2000-2008
Michigan electric markets opened in 2000
Our electric rates were way higher than regional
averages
Gov. John Engler identified it as a key business
disincentive in the 1990’s
North Star Steel Plant located in Ohio, not Michigan Last major auto plant in Michigan in Lansing, where
muni rates lower
6
Closing the gap, 2000-2008
7
0.53 0.46 0.41 0.22 0.19 0.16 0.24 0.19 0.36 0.49 0.29
- 0.32
- 0.11
- 0.58
- 0.67
- 0.91
- 0.76
- 0.60
- 0.80
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Michigan rates compared to national average
Michigan rates were above national average – until competition started in 2000
New generation under 2000 law
From 2000-2008, independent power producers
built 4,000 megawatts of new power
Plants in Dearborn, Zeeland, Covert, Carson City
and Jackson built at shareholder expense and risk
Increased reliability in Michigan Proof that new generation can be built under
competition – without mandates that customers pay for utility mistakes
8
New Laws 2008
New Laws
- Act 286 of 2008
- Act 295 of 2008
New Laws Effective October 2008
Utilities hailed passage
Said cleared way for new plants Said would lower rates for factories Said would provide greater “predictability”
Reality
No new plants – none needed! Industrial rates increase despite demand reduction Twice a year, predictably, they raise their rates.
10
Act 286 - Subjects
Future, not actual costs Automatic Rate Increases Choice restricted to 10%
MPSC approval of mergers Cert. of Need (CON)
Cost based rates?!?
What’s happened since 2008?
12
What’s happened to Consumers Energy rates since 2008
CE electric case Date of increase Amount U-15245 6/10/2008 $27,468,600 U-15645 11/2/2009 $139,411,000 U-16191 11/4/2010 $145,749,000 U-16794 12/11/2011* $165,475,000 Total higher electric cost $478,103,600
19
CE gas case Date of Increase Amount U-15506 12/23/2008 $22,400,000 settlement U-15986 5/12/2010 $65,893,000 U-16418 5/2011 $31,364,000 settlement Total higher gas cost $119,657,000
*Date of automatic increase per 2008 PA 286
What’s happened to Consumers Energy rates since 2008
20
Increase in mills % increase
- ver 10/081
1.
Rate cases
- a. U-15645 general rate case
i.
Interim 5/09: $179 million
ii.
Final 11/09: $134.3 million 4 mills
- b. U-16191 general rate case
- i. Final 11/10: $146 million
4.4 mills Total new rate increases 8.4 mills 8.9 %
- 2. PSCR
- a. U-15415 (2008) PSCR av. 47.46 mills
- b. U-16045 (2010) PSCR av 53.33 mills
- c. U-16432 (2011) PSCR
4.9 mills 2.6 mills Total PSCR increases 7.5 mills 7.9 %
- 3. Other increases, 10/08-1/11
Nuclear decommission credits expire; stranded cost, electric restructuring, securitization bond and tax, UETM, E-1 discount, RPS, energy optimization, electric choice incentive 7.9 mills 8.3%
Total rate case, PSCR, new charges 23.8 mills 25%
Results since implementation in October 2008
21
All sector increases, comparing cents per kWh Source: US Energy Information Agency
5.67%
- 4.18%
10.58% 15.47% 3.29% 10.33% 3.13%
East North Central Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin U.S.
Michigan overall electric rate increases, Dec. 2008 to May 2011 (understates DTE/Consumers increases)
Results since implementation in October 2008
22
In cents/kWh Source: US Energy Information Agency
6.46 6.1 6.23 7.73 5.87 7.22 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 East North Central Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin
Midwest industrial rates, May 2011
23
0.53 0.46 0.41 0.22 0.19 0.16 0.24 0.19 0.36 0.49 0.29
- 0.32
- 0.11
- 0.58
- 0.67
- 0.91
- 0.76
- 0.60
- 0.80
- 0.42
0.15 0.37 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Michigan rates compared to national average
Once competition killed, Michigan electric rates increase above national rates
Gap between Michigan and other states grows
Especially Illinois and Ohio, who have used
competition to lower rates
Michigan rates now above national average Utilities decide they don’t need additional
power, drop plans for new plants
24
Results since October 2008
One year from passage of new law, 10 percent
competition cap hit
Those able to escape utilities get lower rates Now 5,000 companies on waiting list to get out Government is picking winners – those who
were lucky enough to leave utilities – and losers – those forced to stay
25
Results since October 2008
RELEVANT BACKGROUND
2008 Rate Case U-15245 CE Proposed
Rate Shock to Munis: 25% - 35% Elimination of “Muni” class of service
Grouping with commercial and industrials
Munis intervened and
Staff proposed permanent pumping credit Learned Munis paying 125% of COS
OVERALL GOALS of Muni Coalition
Save Munis money now on power costs Lower your future costs Retain pumping credit as long as possible Get solid cost of service information so not
subsidizing other classes
Re-establish municipal “class of service”
3 Prior CE Cases
2007 Case U-15245
5%-40% proposed increase Saved Munis approximately $1,400,000 annually Savings about 18 times investment
2008 Case U-15645
10% - 25% proposed increase Saved Munis approximately $1,000,000 annually Savings about 7 times investment
3 Prior CE Cases
2010 Case U-16191
5%-8% proposed increase Saved Munis approximately $900,000 annually Savings about 6 times investment
NEW 2011 Case U-16794
2% - 6% proposed increase Savings TBD
What to do to reduce rates?
Supplemental Advocacy
Legislative
Insist that Munis be their own class of service like
schools
Ask to have the 10% cap on competitive choice be
lifted
Legal & Public Relations
Consider creating/expanding your own electric
utility
Consider leaving CE
It’s time to lower electric bills!
We need electric competition more today than
ever
Business leaders for Michigan benchmark:
Michigan’s electric rates higher than competitor states
MMA survey: Electric rates third in importance in
business costs in Michigan, behind only health care and labor costs
Electric rates only one of those three set by government!
32
It’s time to lower electric bills!
August statewide phone poll 800 likely voters: Would you favor a change in state law that would allow all customers to purchase their electric service from any supplier that is able to provide reliable electric service to their area and compete for customers by offering electric service at a lower price? 74% TOTAL FAVOR 18% TOTAL OPPOSE 8% Undecided/Refused Do you think that having competition among companies that provide electric service, like it has been done in the natural gas and telecommunications industries, is a good way or a bad way to control energy costs? 75% TOTAL GOOD 13% TOTAL BAD 12% Undecided/Refused
33
Conclusions & Recommendations
Even though regulators have not been helping much
recently, stay the course and put some heat on the New Commission in this case and beyond
Complain to legislators and seek legislative changes Secure own customer class of service Consider every option to leave CE Refuse to just be the passive customer of a near
monopoly.