cgallant@medicinehatnews.com@CollinGallant
A local advocate for retaining public ownership of the city’s power generating company says a “strategic review of alternatives” is beginning to form even though council members say they have heard relatively little feedback on the subject.
Alison Van Dyke says that might be compared to the recent debate about public mask use, when councillors say up to a thousand emails were received, but the potential sale of a public asset demands local government solicit substantial public consultation.
“We own it, and there’s been a lack of consultation or a public education component,” she told the News on Wednesday. “They need to make a strong case, and that hasn’t happened.”
Van Dyke started a petition on the site change.org on Tuesday, she said, to help link those with questions about a sale as traditional meetings are difficult during the pandemic.
About 250 signatures had been collected as of 8 p.m. Wednesday. The site also provides links to resources, including News coverage and the city’s own documents on the process.
“Councillors have said they’re not hearing much feedback on this, but when I talk to people in the community I’m hearing lots,” she said.
One city councillor told the News she understands the issue is of great interest in the community, but said a review of options is ongoing.
Coun. Julie Friesen said it is easier to debate an issue which has set terms of reference, such as a report with recommendations.
Right now, officials are examining the issue, she said, though no formal public input process exists at this stage.
“Don’t assume there won’t be,” she told the News. “Right now (a sale is) a possibility, not a firm commitment.
“I’ve had some input, certainly many emails, not as many as I would have expected. I”m still seriously considering, and open to people’s concerns or feelings of opportunities, whatever they may be.”
Van Dyke said she’s concerned the process and potential sale will advance quickly, or residents may view the issue as settled, once a report is given.
“Until someone gets their first bill, it won’t be a concern to them,” she said.
In terms of public feedback, the city carried out extensive engagement on an oft cited 2009 report by Ernst and Young into management changes of the city’s gas production company. It suggested a separate legal entity be created to oversee the operation, but did not recommend a sale, as is generally thought.
Eventually, no action was taken by council after residents debated at two mass public meetings held that summer and a mail-out survey was sent to all residences in Medicine Hat.
On the power plant issue, several councillors have told the News they would have the authority to approve an offer this spring if the terms of a sale were favourable.
Mayor Ted Clugston only made brief mention of it in his State of the City address Tuesday, and has previously deferred questions to utility committee chair, Coun. Phil Turnbull.
The city utility posted a response to “frequently asked questions” on the city’s website on Monday. There has been no timeline outlined.
This month city utility officials announced they were considering “strategic alternatives” to continuing to operate the 110-year-old power company that has provided $290 million in dividends over the past 10 years.
Council members have said they want to judge the value of the enterprise and consider that against the potential of reduced profits due to green energy production, essentially deciding how and when to get the highest price from a potential sale.
Statements from the utility department suggest it believes a sale to the private sector could be linked to a long-term power purchase agreement with the distribution wing of the utility, which the city would retain. The proceeds of a sale could be hived off in an interest-bearing fund to pay for municipal capital projects.
That’s raised questions about rates going forward, and local benefits of maintaining the power franchise that shields power customers in Medicine Hat, Redcliff and parts of Cypress County from transmission fees paid by other Albertans.
