November 2003 Special Election - Measure No. 26-51

Multnomah County PUD

Measure No. 26-51

Referred to The Voters of Multnomah County by Initiative Petition.

FORMS MULTNOMAH COUNTY PEOPLE'S UTILITY DISTRICT

QUESTION: Shall Multnomah County People's Utility District be formed?

SUMMARY: Creates Multnomah County People's Utility District (PUD) governed by a 5-member board elected from within the district. If approved, the PUD would include the entire geographic area of Multnomah County except:

Interlachen People's Utility District
Rockwood Water People's Utility District
Townships and portions of townships with fewer electors than required under ORS 261.110(6) for inclusion in a PUD
The area provided utility service by the City of Cascade Locks
The portion of the City of Milwaukie that extends into Multnomah County on the County's southern border.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Form Multnomah County People’s Utility District

On February 12, 2003, an electors' petition was filed with Multnomah County Elections Division for formation of the Multnomah County People's Utility District (PUD) to supply public utility service. On June 12, 2003, the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners found that the petition complies with Oregon law and determined the boundaries of the proposed petition to include all of the geographic area of Multnomah County except

Interlachen People's Utility District
Rockwood Water People's Utility District
Sections of townships with fewer electors than required under ORS 261.110(6) for inclusion in a PUD
The area provided utility service by the City of Cascade Locks
That portion of the City of Milwaukie that extends into Multnomah County on the County's southern border.
The Measure No. will create the Multnomah County People's Utility District comprised of the boundaries described above.

Submitted by:
Board of County Commissioners
Multnomah County

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

TOP 10 ADVANTAGES OF A P.U.D. OVER PGE/ENRON

PGE CHARGES US $77 MILLION PER YEAR FOR “FEDERAL INCOME TAXES” THAT IT DOES NOT PAY! THE MONEY IS DIVERTED TO ENRON, WHICH ALSO PAYS NO INCOME TAXES! ENRON HAS STOLEN OVER $450 MILLION OF OUR MONEY THIS WAY SINCE TAKING OVER PGE IN 1997.
PGE CHARGE US $16 MILLION PER YEAR FOR “OREGON INCOME TAXES” THAT IT DOES NOT PAY! PGE/ENRON HAS STOLEN $95 MILLION OF OUR MONEY THIS WAY SINCE 1997.
PGE HAS IMPOSED GIGANTIC RATE INCREASES, INCLUDING THE $400 MILLION PER YEAR INCREASE IN 2001, RAISING BUSINESS RATES BY ALMOST 50%.
ENRON IS CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF USING FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY LAW, WHICH ALLOWS IT TO SELL PGE’S GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSETS OUT FROM UNDER OREGON RATE REGULATION. THIS WILL CAUSE HUGE RATE INCREASES IN THE FUTURE.
ENRON’S STOCK FRAUD CAUSED MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO LOSE THEIR LIFE SAVINGS, INCLUDING OVER $100 MILLION LOSS FOR PGE EMPLOYEES AND AN $80 MILLION LOSS TO OREGON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.
29 OF THE LARGEST PUBLICLY-OWNED UTILITIES IN OREGON (SOME VERY SMALL) HAVE LOWER RATES THAN PGE. ALL P.U.D.S IN OREGON HAVE LOWER RATES THAN PGE.
PGE/ENRON BUYS POLITICIANS BY CONTRIBUTING MILLIONS TO THEIR CAMPAIGNS. A P.U.D. CANNOT MAKE POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
ENRON AND PGE MANIPULATED WEST COAST ENERGY MARKETS, RESULTING IN HUGE ELECTRIC RATE INCREASES, ROLLING BLACKOUTS IN CALIFORNIA, THE CLOSING OF INDUSTRIES AND, FOR OREGON, THE HIGHEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN THE NATION.
PGE EXECUTIVES GET MILLION DOLLAR SALARIES AND BONUSES; ENRON HAS HIRED 30 “RESTRUCTURING SPECIALISTS” TO HELP SELL PGE AND PAYS THEM $860,000 PER YEAR EACH!
P.U.D.S GET PRIORITY ACCESS TO BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION (BPA) POWER AND SERVICES. ALL BPA POWER WILL BE REALLOCATED AS OF OCTOBER 2006. ONLY A P.U.D. CAN GET US OUR FAIR SHARE OF BPA POWER.

WWW.OPPC.NET 503-970-2069 VOTE YES FOR THE P.U.D. OR WATCH YOUR ELECTRIC BILL SKYROCKET

(This information furnished by Dan Meek, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

COMPARE P.U.D. to ENRON: IT’S ALL in the NUMBERS

$5 million: amount of ratepayer money PGE used to defeat 1992 measure aimed at closing the Trojan plant at no cost to ratepayers.

1: number of weeks after the measure’s defeat that PGE close Trojan permanently at ratepayer expense.

29: number of large publicly owned utilities in Oregon with rates lower than PGE.

5: number of publicly owned utilities bordering PGE territory with lower rates than PGE.

0: number of P.U.D.’s in Oregon charging higher rates than PGE.

3.53: cents/kw-hour [2002 average] paid by residential customers of tiny Clatskanie P.U.D.

8.03: cents/kw-hour [2002 average] paid by residential customers of PGE.

569 million: amount PGE has collected from ratepayers for federal and state income tax payments since 1997.

$544.8 million: amount of these collections PGE and Enron kept for themselves.

$100 million: amount PGE employees lost due to Enron’s stock fraud.

$80 million: amount Oregon PERS lost due to Enron’s stock fraud.

5: number of pages in Enron reorganization plan needed to list all lawsuits, most for fraud, against PGE.

Undetermined: amount these suits may cost PGE ratepayers.

30: number of “restructuring specialists” Enron has hired to help it sell PGE.

$860,000: amount of each “specialist” is paid per year in salary alone.

3: number of electric utility bankruptcies since Congress rewrote regulations in 1978 revoking state veto of settlements.

2: number of electric utility bankruptcy reorganization plans, since 1978, which called for sale or transfer of assets out from under state rate regulation.

$1.9 billion: present PGE value as a regulated electric utility.

$5.0 billion: PGE value if transmission and generation assets are sold out from under state rate regulation.

$300 million: yearly increased cost to ratepayers if such a sale occurs.

0: number of reasons Enron and Wall Street banks have to not dismember PGE in the bankruptcy proceeding

VOTE YES for a PEOPLE’S UTILITY DISTRICT
www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by William D. Michtom, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

After the Portland Water Bureau billing fiasco why would anyone want to trust any government agency with running an electric utility in Multnomah County?

A bad computer program caused the Portland Water Bureau billing fiasco. Private industry is no more immune to problems like this than the government is.

PGE’s program that allowed people to average their bills turned out to be just as badly flawed as the Water Bureau’s. PGE overcharged some people for well over a year and undercharged others. When the computer program was finally corrected some customers received bills for hundreds of dollars because PGE was unable to do its end of the year corrections timely.

Why would a Peoples Utility District (PUD) be better than PGE?

A PUD serves the community while PGE focuses on where it can make the most money for its shareholders.

For PGE the incentive to earn high profits means that PGE doesn’t care if it is buying expensive power, manipulating the prices of electricity or investing in faulty power plants like the now defunct Trojan Nuclear Power Plant because the Public Utility Commission allows PGE to earn a guaranteed profit on whatever it has to spend to provide power.

A PUD doesn’t have this incentive because it is a non-profit without shareholders. Instead of trying to make a lot of money a PUD will instead be more concerned with keeping costs as low as possible for their customers.

Would a PUD help our local economy?

A PUD would lower electricity prices and make Multnomah County more attractive to businesses considering starting up or moving here. For existing businesses it lowers a bill that can be a major expense.

The bottom line

Government provides services that serve a common good such as education, fire and police protection, transportation and water. It only makes sense that the citizens of Multnomah County would want to add electricity to this list of essential services our government provides its citizens.

(This information furnished by Andrew V. Reid )

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

The Multnomah County Democratic Party urges you to Vote YES for the P.U.D.

As a privately-owned utility, PGE has been a plaything for the robber-barons of the corporate boardrooms. That’s not theory... that’s reality. Enron bought PGE as part of its pyramid schemes, and now our electric service stands at the mercy of bankruptcy courts, creditors, and various decision-makers who – many of them – couldn’t find Oregon if you handed them a map!

What they decide next could dramatically hurt you.

Our jobs, and our region’s economic vitality, absolutely depends on stable and reasonable electricity rates. Yet thanks to the PGE-Enron games, we are already paying some of the highest electricity prices in the Pacific Northwest... and if PGE’s creditors get their way, those rates could end up going a lot higher yet. In fact, they may dismantle PGE entirely and sell off the assets to the highest bidders.

Voting “YES” is a way for you to take control of our energy future.

And the best part? We can do it at almost NO COST! A tiny tax expenditure – $127,000 – must, by law, be made to pay for an engineering study to assess PGE’s true value. But the actual cost of acquiring PGE will be covered by bonds that will be paid off over future years with the normal income of the utility itself.

Public Utilities WORK!

The Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power – America’s largest publicly-owned utility – has, since 1902, established a sterling record of reliability and low rates. Last year, the agency paid over $200 million to the Los Angeles City general fund... even with rates far lower than the neighboring private utility, Southern California Edison.

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District, also renowned for reliable service, went 10 years – through most of the 1990s – without raising rates. Today, their customers pay about a third less than customers of investor-owned Pacific Gas & Electric.

These Stories Could be OUR Story!

http://www.multdems.org

(This information furnished by Jim Robison, Democratic Party of Multnomah County )

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

PGE Customers...
DO YOU REMEMBER HOW YOU FELT WHEN...

You opened that first electric bill after the 30-50% rate increase in 2001? (“Power Gets Pricier Today” - The Business Journal, October 1, 2001)
You found out that at the same time, PGE executives were getting massive bonuses? (“As ratepayers dug deep, PGE handed out bonuses” - The Tribune, April 5, 2002)
You read that PGE was under investigation for manipulating energy markets, even facing revocation of their trading license? (“Under fire by FERC, four firms deny Enron-style deals” - CBS Marketwatch, June 15, 2002)
You found out that after you paid a $15.6 million state tax bill through your inflated rates, PGE paid only $10 in taxes? (“PGE paid $10 in tax to Oregon for 2002” - the Oregonian, April 11, 2003)

PGE IS SPENDING MILLIONS OF YOUR RATE PAYER DOLLARS TO TRY TO MAKE YOU FORGET!! They have hired a swarm of lobbyists, PR firms and lawyers to pack public meetings and spread misinformation about PUDs. They claim that construction of new transmission facilities along service area boundaries would be required if a PUD is formed. This argument is meaningless-neighboring service providers have always used contracts to pass electricity through existing facilities, a practice known as “wheeling.”

PGE’s paid boosters also claim that the use of condemnation would send “the wrong message” to the business community-another meaningless argument, as only utilities are subject to this kind of condemnation, not businesses like Nike or Intel.

The People’s Utility District was created in response to corrupt market conditions not unlike what we face today.
Stop the greed, market manipulation, stellar executive bonuses, blackouts and outrageously high electricity bills by
voting for the PUD - a truly democratic alternative.

Joel C. Magnuson, PhD, Professor of Economics, has endorsed this measure to form a People’s Utility District.

(This information furnished by Commissioner Lisa Melyan, TVWD)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

“YES” ON MULTNOMAH COUNTY PUD MEASURES IS ENDORSED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, THE GREEN PARTY, ANY BUSINESS, LABOR, AND COMMUNITY GROUPS

Here are some of the endorsers of “Yes” on the P.U.D. measures:

Democratic Party of Multnomah County
Pacific Green Party of Oregon
Pacific Green Party, Portland Metro Chapter
Eastside Democratic Club

Labor Unions
Carpenters Local 247
Letter Carriers Local 82
Custodial Workers Union, SEIU Local 140

Public Interest Groups
Common Cause Oregon
Rainbow Coalition
Portland Gray Panthers
Alliance for Democracy, Portland Chapter
Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom, Portland
Oregon Peaceworks
United Consumers of Oregon (formerly Oregon Consumer Leauge)
Citizens for Safe Water
Citizens Interested in Bull Run
Utility Reform Project
Oregon Wildlife Federation
Friends of the Clackamas River
Don’t Waste Oregon
Lloyd K. Marbet

Local Businesses
Action Video Productions
Ancina Chiropractic Clinic
Brunish Properties
Cinemagic Theaters
Del Information Services
Environmental Paper & Print
Green Bee Arts - Creative Services
Hankins True Value Hardware
Looking Glass Bookstore
Peninsula Station Office Services
Jasmar Reddin, Doctor of Chiropractic
The TMJ Clinic

To see many more endorsers, BEFORE YOU VOTE, CALL THIS PRE-RECORDED MESSAGE: 503-ABC-1133
We can Trust Ourselves, or we can Trust Enron. We decide. Vote Yes on the PUD. www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by Elizabeth Trojan, Oregon Public Power Coalition )

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

So what is this “People’s Utility District” anyway?

What is a People’s Utility District?
A P.U.D. is a form of public ownership of a utility. It is a non-profit utility that provides a stable supply of energy at cost. Policy is set by a 5-member Board of Directors elected by voters. Board meetings are open to the public. The Board hires professional managers to operate the company. Plenty of experienced public power managers are interested in working for this P.U.D.

A P.U.D. is owned by the ratepayers & operates for our benefit.

What about PGE’s employees?
PGE’s current employees can work for the P.U.D. Oregon law protects their jobs when a P.U.D. is formed [ORS 261.345]. Experienced workers will staff the P.U.D.

How will the P.U.D. acquire PGE?
It buys PGE’s assets from Enron. The Board commissions an engineering study to determine which assets to buy & what to pay. They can borrow the money or conduct a revenue bond election. Funds to cover the proposed sale price are deposited with the court, and the assets transfer from PGE to the P.U.D.

The P.U.D. can buy all the assets needed immediately, including the dams that generate electricity, PGE’s contracts with other energy suppliers, the transmission & distribution lines, all the general assets needed to run the company. It does not have to lay new power lines or build new call centers as PGE/Enron claims.

Once the money is deposited, the P.U.D. begins operating the utility. Although it may take longer for the courts to determine the final sale price, the ratepayers benefit immediately when the P.U.D. starts operating!

The P.U.D. has eminent domain authority and can buy the assets for a low price. Eminent domain (a.k.a. “condemnation”) is a legal method to purchase the assets. See the argument “Take Back Your Power” for more information.

Customer-owned for Customer-benefit! Vote for the P.U.D. in November!
www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by Joan Harton, Oregon Public Power Coalition )

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Publicly owned utilities around the country fared better than private utilities during the West Coast energy crisis, and East Coast blackout. Every PUD in Oregon has lower rates than PGE.

“... PGE is going to give your dough to the propaganda whizzes at the ad firm... who will attempt to sweet-talk you into voting against the public takeover of PGE’s assets.”
Willamette Week, 3/12/03

Firm owns a Website called: “Citizens Against the Government Takeover.”

“... loyalists at PGE continue to play out the charade that a fresh, new beginning for PGE is in the works.”
Steve Duin, Oregonian, 6/19/03

“Sources close to the bankruptcy... warn that Enron creditors are likely to be... solely concerned with squeezing as much money from PGE as possible. If the OpCo spin-off becomes reality, either PGE or the entire bundle of assets could then be sold off...”
The Business Journal of Portland, 6/17/02

Estimated increased cost to ratepayers from loss of these assets could well exceed $300 million per year.

“Any rate increase with the rate of unemployment we have in Oregon is going to hurt. It’s going to hurt real people; it’s going to hurt the recovery.”
U.S. Representative Peter DeFazio, Oregonian 7/26/02

Continued control of PGE by Enron creditors (large banks and investment houses), who have no concern for our local economy, is not in our best interests!

PUBLIC POWER COSTS LESS - FOR MANY REASONS!

All eight outstanding Board Candidates recognized by the PUD Campaign, have backgrounds in Organized labor (4), small businesses & non-profits (3), energy & public policy (2), natural resources (2), coalition building and political campaigns (4).

Jim Robison, MCDCC Chair;
David Covington, PGE Lineman;
Nancy Newell, Environmentalist;
Xander Patterson, E. Mult. SWCD Director;
Dave Mazza, Editor, PDX Alliance;
Scott Forrester, Gresham Citizen;
Fillard Rhyne, Pacific Green Party;
Netta Mae Rymal, Republican.

BEFORE YOU VOTE, CALL THIS MESSAGE: 503-ABC-1133

Endorsed by Janice Sakofsky; Del & Lou Greenfield; and Cherie Holenstein.

(This information furnished by Robin Bee)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

PGE journeyman lineman welcomes the accountable local control of a P.U.D.

It is amazing to see Portland General Electric executives touting all their collective years of utility experience as though this company could not survive without them.

Now I’m just a journeyman lineman for this outfit (and IBEW Local 125 member), but in my 24 years experience working for PGE, I have never seen this company treat its employees so terribly. I’ve seen a lot of management come and go, but these last few years since Enron crashed have been the pits.

And what have all our utility experts done for PGE’s customers lately? They still haven’t invested in enough generation, even though Trojan was closed almost 10 years ago. They have slowly downsized their field workers while upsizing office and management personnel. They have spent millions changing out various computer systems. They have moved most of the Portland line crew to the suburbs, leaving only six crews to handle some of the oldest distribution wire systems in the company.

It’s hard to imagine that PGE’s ratepayers consider their local utility to be a good corporate citizen when it engages in tax avoidance schemes as reported on the front page of The Oregonian (“PGE pays $10 in tax to Oregon for 2002,” April 11). PGE executives like to blame Enron for all the bad stuff, like lost retirements, and then praise themselves for the good stuff, like volunteerism.

Believe me, whatever happens with PGE ownership, there will still be many great employees volunteering in their communities

PGE has some of the hardest-working, most-dedicated line workers in the utility business. But you wouldn’t know it with all the excess management tripping over each other tooting their own horns.

Morale could not get much worse at this outfit. I think it is high time for serious change at PGE. We need the real local control and accountability that a P.U.D. would bring.

www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by David D. Covington)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

"PGE’s RATES ARE HIGHEST IN REGION” -The Oregonian May 5, 2002

According to The Oregonian:

“A survey of regional utilities shows the Portland company’s electricity rates are the highest. Portland General Electric’s residential customers pay more for electricity that consumers of any other large utility in the Northwest.

PGE, an Enron subsidiary, Oregon’s largest utility and arguably the most experienced energy trader of the lot, has emerged from the crisis with the highest rates. A PGE customer who uses 1,000 kilowatt hours a month -- a benchmark for monthly household use -- reaps a bill of $82.16, the highest of the Northwest’s 10 biggest utilities.”

Compared with utilities owned by the public, PGE’s rates for businesses are even higher. For all of 2002 (the most recent available data), PGE’s overall charges for all customers were 7.4 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), but 29 publicly-owned utilities in Oregon had lower rates, including these utilities very close to PGE:

UTILITY Cents per kWh
PGE 7.4
Clatskanie PUD 3.3
City of McMinnville 3.8
City of Forest Grove 4.0
Central Lincoln PUD 4.5
Columbia River PUD 5.6
City of Canby 6.1
Salem Electric Coop. 6.1

Note: “PUD” means People’s Utility District

PGE will claim that some publicly-owned utility have higher rates. There are 5 very tiny or very rural such utilities in Oregon with rates slightly higher than PGE. But every such utility of any size or customer density has lower rates than PGE.

PGE will also make claims about its “residential” rates only. Those rates receive BPA subsidies that business customers do not receive. A PUD can access BPA power for all customers. All of BPA’s power is available as of October 1, 2006, when the current long-term contracts expire.

Vote Yes on the PUD
www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by Daniel Meek, Utility Reform Project)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Is this some kind of joke? Is there any county or city on the planet today that would CHOOSE to put Enron in charge of their lights?

The parent company of Portland General Electric corrupted the power markets, flim-flammed regulators, overcharged customers, wiped out employee pensions and collapsed into bankruptcy. And now, on the assumption there’s a sucker born ever minute, they want you to still love them.

Well, forget it, Enron. The only reason Portland’s rates haven’t gone through the roof so far is that state regulators have bridled, saddled and broken Enron -- and stalled, so far, its devious plan to sell off Portland’s low-cost hydroelectric resources.

But now, with Enron busted, bankrupt and at the mercy of its creditors, federal courts will determine your energy future no matter what Enron promises. So you’ve got a choice: power controlled by the public – you and your neighbors – or power controlled by Enron’s creditors.

Want to know what happens when the public takes over a private system? First, your bills go down. Every time. I’m writing this on Long Island where the public recently booted out a private power company bigger than PGE. The outcome? Every Long Island customer got a $100 refund check plus a 12% cut in rates... and a big boost in reliability.

That’s right: people-owned systems rarely black out. Remember the California power crisis? The city-owned Los Angeles system kept the lights on – and the prices way down. And the Great Northeast black-out this year? Public systems. From Niagra to Greenport stayed lit.

Why? UNLIKE PRIVATEERS, THE PUBLIC SYSTEMS DON’T PROFIT FROM CUTTING SERVICE.

And check out the Columbia River Public Utility District, right next door to Multnomah County. Good service real cheap.

And that, Portland, is no joke.

Before you vote, call this number: 503-ABC-1133

VOTE YES ON PUD

(This information furnished by Greg Palast)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

People’s Utility Districts are Great for Labor!

PGE employees do fine work. Let’s protect their jobs, their wages, their benefits & their pensions.

Stability for PGE’s current employees

The P.U.D. guarantees continued employment and benefits for PGE’s workers. Oregon law [ORS 261.345] requires a P.U.D. that acquires investor-owned utility property to:

retain the existing workforce relating to the acquired territory;
honor all existing collective bargaining agreements;
provide all benefits to all employees (union and non-union) for at least one year;
recognize the collective bargaining unit; and
pay BOLI prevailing wages to contractors and subcontractors at all times.

A P.U.D. cannot “outsource” operations to a private company. It cannot fire the employees in order to rehire them at decreased wages or benefits.

An outside company that buys PGE could do either of these. Bankruptcy is a common method for a company to shed itself of unions and associated liabilities, like pensions.

What about their pensions?

PGE employees lost over $100 million in their 401k accounts. IBEW members and retirees still have their traditional pension fund. That pension fund can be raided by Enron through a merger with other under-funded pensions.

Under a P.U.D., PGE employees could chose to be on Oregon’s Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), which, despite losing over $80 million of value from holding Enron stock, is still safer that most pension plans.

Formation of the P.U.D. will not interfere with IBEW’s ongoing efforts to protect members & restore lost value to their retirements funds.

P.U.D. is locally-controlled

A 5-member board elected by voters controls the P.U.D. Employees can help elect board members interested in their well-being. They can even run for the board.

Volunteer Opportunities

PGE employees will not lose their chance to help the community. P.U.D. employees volunteer in their communities all the time.

Secure Jobs - Good Wages - Solid Benefits
Vote for the P.U.D.!
www.oppc.net
503-ABC-1123

(This information furnished by Peter A. Savage)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Why Union Households Should Vote Yes on the People’s Utility District

As a member of IBEW Local 48, I know Enron’s bankruptcy effects much more than PGE and its employees. The breakup of PGE assets, almost certain to be demanded by Enron’s creditors, will drive our electric rates up 30%, when we already pay about the highest rates in the Northwest. PGE’s own legal liabilities may trigger more huge rate increases. The outcome of this may very well be a permanent economic recession in our area. This would mean:

huge job losses on top of our already high unemployment, as local businesses lose competitiveness
shrinking governmental revenues gutting essential services
higher prices at area businesses and overburdened family budgets
...unless we form a P.U.D. to prevent PGE asset breakup, protect us from PGE liabilities, and actually reduce power rates. Less than 900 of PGE’s 2757 employees are unionized. Under a publicly owned P.U.D., all nonmanagement workers will likely organize, increasing job security and bettering working conditions.

IBEW Local 125’s opposition to public ownership is based on the hope of recovering retirement funds lost in the Enron stock crash. Enron’s trickery and callous disregard for workers’ savings was despicable. IBEW Local 125 active and retired members are justly angered by their losses, but are unlikely to recover funds from bankrupt Enron. Bankruptcy law puts creditors (in this case, NY investment banks) first in line to recover losses. These creditors will get back less than half of what Enron owes them. There will be nothing left for shareholders or wronged workers.

The interests of all PGE employees are best protected if the P.U.D. buys PGE. Only the P.U.D. is required by law to hire all present PGE employees in its area and to honor union contracts. The other likely outcome for PGE, sale under bankruptcy, would leave PGE employees with no job security and no enforceable contracts.

The P.U.D. is best for all workers.
www.100000votes.com
503-ABC-1133

(This information furnished by Gregory W. Parson)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Imagine! A People’s Utility District is Great for Business!

Imagine you own a business.

Imagine you have a state-granted monopoly over a given territory. No competition.

Imagine your product is essential for daily living. Guaranteed customers.

Imagine the law allows you to be fully reimbursed by your customers for all your expenses. Guaranteed return of your investments. No risk.

Imagine the law allows you to be paid a specific rate of profit based on your expenses. Guaranteed rate of return on your investment.

Imagine the law allows you to be reimbursed for the income taxes on the profit.

Imagine you tally all these items & divide the total by the number of units for sale. Viola! That’s your sale price!

What a deal!

Full Reimbursement of expenses + guaranteed profit + reimbursement of income taxes

That’s how a utility rate is set.

Utilities: Not Your Regular Business

Regular businesses don’t operate this way. They charge what the market will bear. They work hard to keep costs below revenues to make profit.

Regular businesses don’t have an exclusive territory or customer-base. They strive to attract and retain customers, competing for their dollars. Dissatisfied customers can shop elsewhere. This is the free-market system.

Utilities don’t follow free-market rules. They don’t fold if their customers are unhappy with high prices. Their customers have no other option.

People’s Utility Districts: Great for Business!

Saving your business money
a P.U.D. does this every day!
Circulating money in the local economy
a P.U.D. does this every day!
Providing a stable energy supply at cost
a P.U.D. does this every day!
Protecting us from a permanent recession
a P.U.D. does this every day!
Keeping rates low while protecting our assets
a P.U.D. does this every day!
Leaving more money for your customers to spend with you a P.U.D. does this every day!

Do something great for your business! Vote YES on the People’s Utility District!
www.100000votes.com
503-ABC-1133

(This information furnished by Tom Civiletti, Clackamas Public Power)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

PORTLAND GRAY PANTHERS SUPPORT PUBLIC POWER

Portland Gray Panthers recommends a “YES” vote on forming a People’s Utility District (P.U.D.) in Multnomah County. We want to kick Texas-based ENRON and its manipulative ways out of Oregon. We can own and run our own electric company.

Multnomah County is surrounded by successful public power agencies: People’s Utility Districts, city municipals, and cooperatives.

There are 33 in Oregon and 61 in Washington. Among them are Seattle, Vancouver, Clatskanie, McMinnville, Monmouth, Eugene and Forest Grove. All them sell electric power at a lower cost than PGE. For my BA degree at Reed College I examined in detail four areas that had recently voted for public power: Clatskanie P.U.D., Central Lincoln P.U.D., Cascade Locks municipal power, and Monmouth municipal power.

In all four districts electricity rates decreased. Taxes for city services went down because of lower costs for lighting of public buildings, street lights, and traffic signals; schools and libraries saved overhead costs. Service extenions were more liberal, and employees were more courteous (perhaps because the customers were also the owners).

I know of no case where once the citizens voted for public power, they later voted to go back to a for-profit private power company.

Gray Panthers like the companionship and safety that electricity offers. But, since they are existing on flat incomes, the present high PGE rates are a burden. The likelihood of additional big rate increases due to Enron’s bankruptcy and PGE’s legal liabilities are a real threat to their ability to make ends meet.

Before you vote, call this number: 503-ABC-1133

Vote for Lower Rates, Excellent Customer Service, Lower Taxes
GREY PANTHERS SAY “YES” FOR A MULTNOMAH COUNTY P.U.D.!

(This information furnished by Phil Dreyer, Portland Gray Panthers)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Take Back Your Power!

We have the power to save ourselves. We have the power to lower our electric rates!

Problems:
PGE ratepayers are on the brink of losing our relatively low-cost electricity that we have enjoyed for decades. Enron is bankrupt. PGE is Enron’s most valuable asset. Enron’s bankruptcy reorganization plan indicates it intends to sell PGE’s assets. Under federal bankruptcy law, these assets can be sold out from under Oregon rate regulation. Our Public Utility Commission cannot prevent this sale! Rates could skyrocket!

Solution:
You & I have the power to solve this problem. We can form a People’s Utility District.

Because of a 1930 amendment to the Oregon Constitution, sponsored by the Oregon State Grange, we can create a P.U.D. that has the authority to purchase assets from a private owner for the good of the public; an authority called “eminent domain”.

Eminent Domain?
Eminent domain (“condemnation”) is a process used by various private & public entities to purchase assets such as land for parks & roads.

PGE used eminent domain to acquire the land that it needs.

Unlike buying assets in an open sale, eminent domain allows ratepayers to buy PGE for the lowest price. We ratepayers have already built up equity in PGE’s assets through our monthly bills. This equity equals roughly half the overall cost of PGE! Using eminent domain to buy the assets uses our equity.

Our purchase price is calculated by an engineering firm that the P.U.D. will hire.

An engineering study will cost the owner of a $150,000 home only 45 cents.

There are NO OTHER taxes.

Who can we trust?
We know NOT to trust Enron!
We know we can trust a P.U.D. to lower our rates and maintain stable energy supplies.
Can we trust ourselves to choose a good investment?
A People’s Utilities District will return power to the Public!
This is why I’m voting YES on the People’s Utility District.

(This information furnished by Joyce Follingstad, PhD, RN )

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Why Pacific Power Customers Should Vote For the P.U.D.

Pacific Power customers will see no change when the P.U.D. buys PGE

PGE & Pacific Power claim your rates will increase when the P.U.D. buys PGE.
Not true. It doesn’t even make sense.
Why would the purchase of an entirely separate company cost you money?

If Albertson’s bought Safeway, would prices at Fred Meyer increase?

They claim that your low-income, appliance rebate and weatherization programs are at risk.
Not true. P.U.D.s routinely conduct such programs, often more successfully than a private company.

Pacific Power customers are affected by PGE’s rates

Sure – your home rates are fine, but this isn’t just about where you live.
Do you shop at a store in PGE’s territory? Its rate has increased enormously since Enron’s takeover. That cost is passed on to you.

Did you work at a business that cut jobs citing high energy costs? Lost jobs damage our whole economy.

Are you a business owner? Many of your customers are also PGE customers. High PGE bills of them mean less money to spend with you!

Pacific Power customers are taxed to replace Enron’s unpaid taxes

PGE customers pay, via their rates, PGE’s federal and state income taxes. PGE is legally required to pay the money to Enron, although Enron has no income tax liabilities. For 2003, these taxes equal almost $2 million weekly.

Pacific Power customers living in Multnomah County are paying a personal income tax – a first in Oregon history. The tax replaces Enron’s unpaid taxes.

P.U.D. has already saved you money

July 2002, the Oregon Public Utilities Commission granted Pacific Power a $135 million rate hike – 100% of the amount requested. October 2002 this rate hike was reversed by the PUC.

Why?
The P.U.D.! In July, no P.U.D. petition existed. In October, we had collected signatures for 2 months.

Vote YES on the P.U.D. – What a great way to say Thanks!
www.oppc.net

(This information furnished by Liz Trojan, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

THE OREGONIAN FAVORS PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC (PGE)

On May 1, 2003, the lead editorial in The Oregonian stated:

ADDING INSULT TO INJURY AT PGE

We were mistaken last year in thinking there was no particular urgency to resolving the ownership of Portland General Electric. Tomorrow, PGE’s parent company, Enron, crosses the 17-month mark since it filed for bankruptcy on Dec. 2, 2001.

The catalog of outrages just keeps growing.

As reported by The Oregonian’s Gail Kinsey Hill, Enron paid the top five executives at PGE bonuses of $975,000 last year, the same amount they stand to collect this year. These are not bonuses as conventionally understood, for success in hitting an earnings goal or cost-cutting target; these are retention bonuses -- extra pay for just showing up.

We’ve been told that retention bonuses aren’t unusual. They are often used to keep a troubled organization from losing top management.

But it’s the wrong tactic for a company whose workers lost their 401(k) savings in worthless Enron stock. And it’s an insult to customers hit with 30 percent and 50 percent power rate increases.

The disclosure of bonuses for the top executives at American Airlines forced it to renegotiate union contracts to stave off bankruptcy. It also forced the airline’s chief executive to resign.

That apparently doesn’t mean much at Enron. In addition to signing bonus checks, it has reportedly run up almost $400 million in fees and legal costs.

The Oregonian’s preferred approach to public ownership is through the City of Portland. Enron has rejected the City’s attempts to buy PGE. This leaves the creation of People’s Utility Districts as the only path to public ownership.

PUDs can use eminent domain to acquire PGE’s assets, paying a fair price as determined by an Oregon court. We will protect the utility assets we have already paid for in our electric rates to the tune of over $1.6 billion.

Vote Yes on the PUD
www.oppc.net
CALL 503-ABC-1133 BEFORE YOU VOTE!

(This information furnished by Daniel Meek, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

QUOTES SUPPORT A YES VOTE!

2/4/02, KATU News: “In the 4 1/2 years Enron has owned PGE, it has received at least $608 million in profits and taxes from the Portland utility.” .

4/11/02 The Oregonian: PGE paid $10 in tax to Oregon. “You’ve got to have income to pay taxes”, said Jim Piro, PGE’S financial officer. (PGE 2002 reported earnings were $66 million.)

2/14/97 - Transcript of Oregon Public Utility Commission hearing: “I don’t think we could have had the success we’ve had and the growth we’ve had around the country and around the world without being a company with very high integrity.” said Ken Lay, Chairman of Enron Corp.

5/5/02 - The Oregonian: PGE’s Rates Are Highest in Region: “PGE, an Enron subsidiary, Oregon’s largest utility and arguably the most experienced energy trader of the lot, has emerged from the crisis with the highest rates. A PGE customer who uses 1000 kilowatt hours a month--a benchmark for monthly household use--reaps a bill of $82.16, the highest of the Northwest’s 10 biggest utilities.”

3/4/03 - Portland Tribune: PGE Executive Vice President Fred Miller said that the anti-PUD campaign will involve advertising and other public presentations. No public relations or advertising firm as yet been selected to run the campaign, nor has a budget been agreed on. “We’ll spend whatever it takes to win,” he said.

8/15/03 - Business Week Online: “Meek fears that Enron intends to use federal bankruptcy law to help Portland General escape state regulation...A deal with new buyer, he contends, could be structured so the assets fall only under federal regulation, resulting in some $2 billion worth of higher costs for Oregon ratepayers.” Dan Meek, is a Portland lawyer and utility consumer activist.

CALL 503-ABC-1133 BEFORE YOU VOTE!

Visit www.100000votes.com, www.oppc.net, & www.cheappower.net

(This information furnished by Liz Trojan, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Imagine this: Its 2010’ and Oregon HAS

the lowest unemployment rate in the country, helped by electric rates down over 50% from the high of 2003;

an economic boom based on new, sustainable businesses coming to enjoy the benefits of living and working in Oregon;
local governments who are better able to afford essential services like libraries, schools, fire fighters, police, social & health care services;
a democratically governed energy system, beholden to the public interest, working cooperatively and free of Enron;
counties in Eastern and Southern Oregon who have teamed up with local PUDs to support sustainable economic development by generating clean “green” energy from Wind, Wave, Solar, Biomass, Co-Generation, and Geothermal resources;
a local workforce of industry leaders proficient in the installation, production and transmission of renewable energy resources, having successfully reconfigured the way we deliver energy in this state;
once again been nationally recognized as a “model for how to do things right”!

This happened because Multnomah, Clackamas, Washington, Marion/Polk, and Yamhill counties formed five PUDs in 2003-04’ to take over PGE’s assets from Enron and became partners with the rest of the state in providing low-cost energy as a driving force in revitalizing our economy & lowering the unemployment rate. Our hard earned tax money stayed in the state & local economy where it belonged (unlike PGE/Enron who collected taxes from us but never paid them!), further stimulating Oregon’s economy.

There are 29 publicly owned utilities in Oregon with rates lower than PGE’s. There are five publicly owned utilities, whole service territory is completely surrounded by PGE, yet their rates are lower. If they can do it, so can we!

The real question is: do we trust our energy future with the creditors of PGE/ENRON, or with OURSELVES?

BEFORE YOU VOTE, CALL THIS PRE-RECORDED MESSAGE:
503-ABC-1133

Endorsed by Robin Bee; Judith Barnes; Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom; and Andy Reid.

(This information furnished by Lloyd Marbet, Don’t Waste Oregon Caucus)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

People’s Utility Districts are Great for Consumers!

Take a good look. Low rates, excellent service, conservation & low-income assistance programs are well-established achievements of public power.

Lower Rates

According to The Oregonian:

“PGE’S Rates are Highest in Region”

Summary: A survey of regional utilities shows the Portland company’s electricity rates are the highest. PGE’s residential customers pay more for electricity than consumers of any other large utility in the Northwest.” (May 5, 2002)

Compare PGE’s rates to those of Oregon’s 29 largest public power providers. PGE’s average 2002 rate for all users is 7.38 cents/kilowatt hour. Of Oregon’s publicly-owned utilities, Cascade Locks Municipal has the highest rate at 7.21 cents/KWH.
Clatskanie P.U.D. has the lowest at 3.27 cents/KWH.
16 of the 29 utilities have an average rate less than 6 cents/KWH.

“PUD Benefits” at www.100000votes.com

Excellent Customer Service

P.U.D.s have excellent customer service. From the Columbia River P.U.D. website:

"Fallen Tree Causes Outage in Goble"
January 6, 2003
A tree fell across a power line in Goble on Sunday, causing an outage for 140 customers of Columbia River PUD.
The outage occurred at 3:10 a.m. PUD line crews removed the tree from the power lines, replaced fuses and restored power at 5:10 a.m. The outage was attributed to the wet and windy weather. (www5.crpud.net/about/news.shtml)

Programs for Low-Income Households, Appliance Rebates & Home Weatherization

P.U.D.’s conduct these programs. Low-income programs include:

Central Lincoln P.U.D.: “SOS Program”
Emerald P.U.D.: “Helping Hands”
Columbia River P.U.D.: “Neighbor’s GLOW (Give Light, Offer Warmth)”

“The SOS program is supported entirely by voluntary contributions from our customers. ... The PUD doesn’t retain any of the donated money for administrative purposes.”
(www.clpud.org/sosprogram.html)

Community Involvement

P.U.D. employees volunteer in their community:

“E[merald] PUD is very involved in the communities we serve. ... When the communities hold their annual summer events, we are always there.” (www.epud.org/summerevents.htm)

United Consumers of Oregon says Vote YES on the P.U.D.!

(This information furnished by Walter F. (Walt) Brown, United Consumers Of Oregon)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

As a former elected member of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, I am offering this recommendation for establishing a Multnomah County P.U.D because I am convinced that public power is an effective way to provide reliable, reasonably-priced power while protecting the environment.

More than 2,000 communities across the United States have created public power systems serving about 40 million people. Unlike private power companies, a public utility district does not have to serve stockholders and maximize short-term profits. Instead, it can put the needs of their customers and communities first. Public power systems are able to keep money within their communities, creating more jobs and economic opportunities. I strongly encourage voters to visit the Sacramento Municipal Utility’s website to see the kind of programs a publicly-owned utility can offer to benefit the community. (www.smud.org)

An example of the kinds of programs a Multnomah County P.U.D. could offer include:

Discounted rates for low income customers and those who are dependent on life support equipment.
Energy efficiency programs such as offering energy audits and working with builders to make new homes more energy efficient.
The development of renewable energy resources such as wind and solar power.

Public power has a proven track record of providing customers with lower-cost electric rates than private power companies. As a not-for profit entity, a public utility district has a right to issue tax-exempt bonds for infrastructure needs. These bonds carry a lower interest rate than taxable bonds, which keeps down the cost of developing and maintaining the electric system.

Because of electric deregulation in California and the Northeast, many electric utilities and power plant developers have seen their credit rating decline raising the cost of maintaining electric infrastructure. Unfortunately, this has resulted in more power outages and reduced reliability in some areas of the country. The citizens of Multnomah County can protect themselves from these restructuring failures by establishing your own public power district.

(This information furnished by Ed Smeloff)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Taxes and Franchise Fees Paid by People’s Utility District

P.U.D. opponents are trying to sell you the idea that Oregon and its various cities & counties will lose tax revenue if you create the P.U.D.

Don’t buy it!

Franchise Fees & Property Taxes

P.U.D.’s pay franchise fees to cities for use of the public right of way based on the amount of revenue collected within city limits. P.U.D.’s are required by Oregon law to pay property taxes to the counties based on property value.

Unemployment taxes

Per the Oregon Employment Department, a P.U.D. does not pay the state unemployment insurance. Instead they directly reimburse the state for unemployment drawn by ex-employees. It’s dollar-for-dollar reimbursement, saving money for the P.U.D., which is reflected in the customers’ rates.

TriMet taxes

A P.U.D. pays TriMet tax at the same rate as other employers.

Income Taxes

All PGE ratepayers, whether individuals or businesses, are charged for PGE’s income taxes in their monthly bill. PGE pays these taxes to Enron, which is not actually paying the government.

We are paying PGE $16 million per year right now for “state income taxes” and $77 million per year for “federal income taxes.” NONE OF THIS MONEY IS ACTUALLY BEING PAID IN TAXES. This equals almost $2 million/week in “income taxes” that we ratepayers are paying to PGE but which never reaches the federal or state government.

Since Enron took over PGE in 1997, we ratepayers have paid over $570 million to PGE to pay PGE’s alleged state and federal income taxes. The actual amount paid to the State of Oregon has been $10 total. The federal government has received only $0.2 million.

Double –taxation

To compensate for these missing taxes, Multnomah County residents are being taxed 1.25% on their income. BUT they are still paying these income taxes to PGE. We are being double–taxed!

Stop Paying Taxes to Enron! Vote Yes on the P.U.D!
www.oppc.net
503-ABC-1133

(This information furnished by Joan Horton, Oregon Public Power Coalition)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR

Top 10 Reasons To Vote YES for a People’s Utility District

10. Reliable Delivery of Electricity

9. Open Accounting

8. No High-Dollar Executives

7. Citizen Participation

6. Open Board Meetings

5. Stable Jobs and Pensions for Utility Workers

4. No Stolen Tax Dollars

3. Lower Electric Bills

2. More Green Energy

And the Number 1 Reason To Vote for a People’s Utility District:

1. No Local Dollars In Enron’s Coffers!

TAKE CONTROL. VOTE YES

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

Individuals, organizations and small businesses have joined together for a single purpose – stop the costly, risky and unnecessary formation of a new government-owned electric utility in Multnomah County.

Costly: First, there is the property tax. Second, there are years of costly court battles. Third, the ratepayer debt for the electricity system in part of the county would be well over a billion dollars.

Risky: A startup government-owned utility has no service crews, equipment or electricity for its billion-dollar system. And a government takeover would risk the loss of millions of dollars each year paid by PGE and Pacific Power in taxes and fees that now support local services such as police, firemen, schools, low-income energy assistance, weatherization and affordable housing.

Unnecessary: Giving up reliable electric service for instability and uncertainty causes serious problems we cannot afford – especially now.

Even the Oregon Office of Energy will not estimate how much higher the new PUD’s rates would be or from where and how much its electricity will cost.

For more information about why we need to stop this complex and costly measure, visit our Web site at
www.CitizensAgainstTheGovernmentTakeover.com.

Please join us in voting NO on these risky Measures 26-51 & 26-52 to stop this property tax.

CITIZENS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER
Dennis Anderson
Betty Atteberry
Nik Blosser
Kandis Brewer Nunn
Debi Coleman
Gun Denhart
Don Frisbee
Brian Gard
Neil Goldschmidt
Curt Henninger
Chuck Jones
Philip A. Kalberer
Gregg Kantor
Phil Keisling
Tom Kelly
Ellen C. Lowe
George Passadore
Judy Peppler
John Rakowitz
John Russell
Tom Sjostrom
Virginia Willard

(This information furnished by Brian Gard, Citizens Against The Government Takeover)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

Findings from the Oregon Office of Energy Report on the Proposed Multnomah County People’s Utility District, April 18, 2003

“...many questions must be analyzed thoroughly. For example, whether a new PUD would have access to significant amounts of BPA power, how much BPA rates will increase, whether a PUD could condemn PGE’s or PacifiCorp’s generating resources and if so, at what price, what the cost of financing capital for a new PUD would be and to what extent tax-exempt bonds could be used are all factors which could impact the cost of electric service by a new PUD compared to the cost of service currently provided by PGE and PacifiCorp.”

“...the PUD would be required to acquire assets from PGE and PacifiCorp through condemnation.”

“...it is likely that BPA will have difficulty in acquiring additional low-cost resources to serve a new large load formed by a new PUD. Moreover, BPA’s wholesale rates have increased substantially in the last few years as a result of supply and price problems in the wholesale market. These factors make it difficult to determine whether any substantial rate benefit would occur if a new PUD had access to BPA power for a substantial part of its resource load.”

“Current federal limits on state and local tax-exempt financing make it difficult to determine to what extent a new PUD could use tax-exempt bonds for its financing.”

“ORS 261.385 provides that a PUD may also levy and collect property taxes prior to receipt of operating revenues. In any one year, the tax cannot exceed one-twentieth of one percent of the true cash value of all taxable property within the PUD.”

“Because these issues require extensive investigation and analysis to resolve, no definitive conclusion as to the impact on rates of forming a PUD can be made under the limited time provided by state law to issue this report.”

(See the full report at www.energy.state.or.us/pubs/MultnomahPUD.pdf)

(This information furnished by Valarie Edwards, Citizens Against the Government Takeover)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

Multnomah County Commissioners Oppose PUD Formation

This is not a referendum on public power or a referendum about Enron. It is a specific proposal to create a People’s Utility District. We believe this proposal makes no sense.

We are not opposed to public power. Our County has considered for over a year how a regionally owned public utility district might operate. Complex issues of governance, financing, operations and effect on ratepayers and industry were carefully considered. The same can not be said for this proposal.

In fact, the Oregon Office of Energy, required by statute to report on the availability and cost of power, potential tax consequences, etc., was unable to make a recommendation, pointing out the electricity market is volatile, the price of power uncertain, and detailed engineering and appraisals were required.

There is also no credible information from the petitioners regarding financial feasibility, only the naïve expectation that engineering firms and others will provide donated services.

Multnomah County has five cities within its borders. If voters approve the proposal, then each jurisdiction is separately examined for inclusion. For example, Portland might support the PUD; Troutdale might reject it, leaving its 14,240 residents in a “black hole.”

The scope of the PUD’s condemnation authority over PGE and PacifiCorp is uncertain, likely to lead us down the road of litigation for years.

This proposal only applies to Multnomah County, and could potentially lead to a break-up of PGE, risking the entire region’s utility service.

PacifiCorp, caught in the middle, would very likely move its headquarters out of town risking hundreds of local jobs.

All this creates serious questions about how service will be delivered at a time when we need stable, dependable power to attract jobs and promote our economy.

We will vote “no,” and urge you, the voters, to also reject this proposal.

Signed,
Diane Linn, Chair, Multnomah County
Lisa Naito, County Commissioner
Maria Rojo de Steffey, County Commissioner
Lonnie Roberts, County Commissioner

(This information furnished by Valarie Edwards, Citizens Against the Government Takeover)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

PGE Employees Oppose a Government Takeover

As PGE employees, we’re proud of the work we do. Every day, we run the power plants, climb the power poles and answer the phones -- so when you flip a switch, your lights go on. when we’re not on the job, you’ve probably seen us volunteering in our communities.

We like our jobs, and we like the company we work for. We’re optimistic about our future. We don’t want PGE to be taken over and turned into a government-operated utility. We don’t need to be “rescued” by a small group of activists who know nothing about running an electric utility.

We’re committed to safe and reliable service. At PGE, we’ve never taken reliability for granted. We know it’s important to our customers. We’ve built and maintained one of the nation’s most reliable electricity systems. We also work with other utilities to manage the electrical grid, and that takes experience you won’t find with a new government-operated utility.

A PUD in Multnomah County would break our system apart, creating a patchwork of poles and wires operated by different utilities. That’s not only expensive, but it will result in more power outages and reduced reliability.

For 114 years, we’ve been doing our job and have maintained strong relationships with the communities we serve. Why risk is all with a hostile government takeover?

Hundreds of PGE employees, like us, are standing up to fight a takeover of our company. Haven’t we been through enough? A PUD would be bad for our employees and bad for our customers.

Please join us in voting No on Measures 26-51 and 26-52.

Paid for by PGE employees:
Diane Rinard, Customer Service
Don O’Rear, GIS Specialist
Scott Gardner, Risk Manager
Gary Hackett, Hydro Operations
Robert Davis, Contract Specialist
Mark R. Starrett, Rates and Regulatory Affairs
Mark W. Potter, Customer Service
Janice L. Johnson, Service and Installation
Weimin Tung, Planning Engineer

And many more.

(This information furnished by Diane Rinard, Portland General Electric)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

A PUD TAKEOVER WILL HURT LOW-INCOME, ELDERLY AND DISABLED OREGONIANS

As a longtime advocate for low-income Oregonians, I am very concerned about the loss of millions of dollars for low-income housing, energy assistance and weatherization programs if a people’s utility district (PUD) is formed in Multnomah County.

Along with other social service advocates, I worked hard to pass legislation to support programs for low-income Oregonians during the debates over energy deregulation in 1999. The resulting legislation requires PGE and Pacific Power to collect a Public Purpose Charge (PPC) and meter charge for low-income housing, energy assistance and weatherization programs that serve many needy Oregonians.

But now, these funds may be lost – because PUDs are not required to collect PPCs, and meter charge funds. They can choose to participate voluntarily but, to date, no PUD in Oregon has elected to do so.

If a PUD is formed, Multnomah County stands to lose nearly $20 million a year from PGE and Pacific Power. Losing these funds will have a drastic negative impact on low-income, elderly and disabled individuals in Multnomah County.

In today’s economy, family budgets are tight and public funding for many services is being drastically cut.

This is not time to erase millions in guaranteed funding for energy efficiency and housing programs that are critical to many families.

Please help protect Multnomah County’s vulnerable low-income, elderly and disabled residents. Vote no on the PUD takeover.

Sincerely,

Ellen C. Lowe
Legislative Advocate for Low-Income Oregonians
Retired Director of Public Policy, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon
Former Chair, Oregon Hunger Relief Task Force
Former Co-Chair, Human Services Coalition of Oregon

(This information furnished by Ellen C. Lowe)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

We at Pacific Power hope you’ll join us in voting “no” on Measure 26-51.

Pacific Power customers will see higher rates and reduced reliability under a new government owned utility. For nearly 100 years, Pacific Power has supplied Multnomah County customers with reliable, low-cost electric service. In fact, our customers benefit from some of the lowest prices in Oregon.

A new government utility would saddle ratepayers with a huge debt – just for the poles and wires. A start-up government utility would go deeply into debt to condemn the electrical distribution system in Multnomah County. Expert testimony at an Oregon Office of Energy hearing estimated the cost at over $1 billion. This debt adds no value to the electric system and would be repaid through higher taxes or higher rates.

A new government-owned utility will pay more for electricity. Pacific Power owns significant low-cost generation. A new government utility would need to buy electricity on the volatile wholesale power market or from BPA, which has experienced significant rate increases.

A new government-owned utility will increase property taxes. The new PUD will have broad taxing powers. The property tax increase in Measure 26-52 is just the first tax the new utility will seek. Once in place, the new entity will need to ask for additional tax and borrowing authority.

Please consider the hidden costs and risks to you and our community. When you examine how poorly thought out this proposal is, we believe you will agree it is unnecessary and too costly. Please join us in voting “no.”

Judy Johansen, CEO, and Pacific Power employees:

Theresa Adams
Gail H. Armstrong
Nancy Arnett
Shelby Bell
Julie Blair
Bernard Bottomly
Marianne Brams
Peter Cogswell
Jon Coney
Grace Dusseau
Bill Edmonds
James Bradley Gooch
Jim Grossman
Lilisa Hall
Irene Heng
Julie Hensel
Donna Hester
Stacy Hoffacker
Sheila Holden
Nicole Kelly
Kevin A. Lynch
Jamie Myers
Michael Pittman
Jennifer Reid
Virinder Singh
Tonia Stratton
Pamela Treece
Rebekah J. Witt
Michelle Wright

(This information furnished by Bernard Bottomly, Pacific Power)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

PUD WILL HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

However well intentioned it may be, formation of a Multnomah County People’s Utility District (PUD) invites very troubling unintended consequences.

Legislation was passed in 1999 that created two important programs: the Energy Conservation Helping Oregonians program (ECHO) and the Oregon Energy Assistance Program (OEAP). ECHO weatherizes homes of low-income households and helps reduce energy waste. OEAP helps prevent disconnection of electric service for people with low and fixed incomes. Only PGE and Pacific Power are required to participate in these programs. If a PUD takes over Multnomah County’s electrical service, the County will lose these programs.

Since 1999, these programs have benefited thousands of Multnomah County households directly and contributed to conserving energy and reducing system-wide costs, which is a benefit to all of us. As employment in Multnomah County has flagged, the need for these programs has greatly increased. If a PUD takes over Multnomah County’s electrical service seniors, people with disabilities and working poor families risk losing programs that have helped them stay warm in the winter, reduce their energy costs, stay independent and maintain their health and safety. The consequences of ending these programs will almost certainly lead to higher rates of homelessness and exacerbate poverty in the county.

There are good intentions behind this measure, but there is nothing to compensate for the impact ending these programs will have on the County’s seniors, people with disabilities and working poor families. The promise of lower rates as a way to offset the loss of these vital programs is unsubstantiated and indirect. In fact the prospect of increased electric bills following a PUD takeover coupled with the elimination of these programs is a perfect storm for Multnomah County’s most vulnerable citizens.

Please vote no.

Sincerely
Jay Formick

(This information furnished by Jay D. Formick)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

GRESHAM RESIDENTS OPPOSE MEASURES 26-51 AND 26-52!

Those of us living and working in the Gresham area can avoid being included in the ill-conceived PUD formation by simply voting NO on Measure 26-51 and Measure 26-52.

The Multnomah County people’s utility district formation ballot measure and its related property tax increase offer no guarantee for cheaper electricity. We believe that when you look at this thing, you will agree we should not:

--Get stuck with over a billion dollars in debt so a new government-operated utility can carve up Pacific Power and PGE.

--Lose the reliability of service we now have and pay electricity rates that are not controlled by the Oregon Public Utility Commission.

--Be part of a start-up government-owned utility that would try to begin with no experienced employees, no customer service systems and no electricity of its own.

The only good thing about this mess is that we can stay out of it. If a majority of Gresham voters return ballots marked NO, then we will be excluded no matter what Portland voters do.

We can avoid an unnecessary property tax, years of legal fights, a huge debt and an unknown cost for electricity.

Please join in voting NO to these irresponsible takeover schemes, Measure 26-51 and Measure 26-52.

Dennis Anderson

Pat Fiedler
The Toy Bear

Michael McKeel
Dentist

Sue O’Halloran
Kohler, Myers, O’Halloran

Jane Pattersen
Attorney

Larry & Mary Zoe Petersen
Gresham Optical

Martin Stone
Real Estate Agent

(This information furnished by Sue O’Halloran)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

PGE has a bright future ahead.

For 114 years, PGE and our employees have been focused on serving our customers in Multnomah County. Through those years, we’ve been an important part of the communities where we live and work.

Our future is bright. Soon, we will take one of two paths – PGE will become an independent company, or we will be sold as an intact business. Either way, our employees will continue serving the communities where we live and work. We will remain locally managed, and our company will remain whole.

The biggest threat to our future – and to the future of safe, reliable, affordable electricity in Multnomah County – is a government takeover. Proponents of these measures will try to scare you into thinking that our company could be broken up. That is not going to happen – unless PGE is subjected to a hostile government takeover like it is facing in Multnomah County.

The ballot measures would break apart the electrical system in Multnomah County – considering by our industry to be one of the most reliable in the nation. Instead, we would have fragmented systems run by a fledging government entity with no experience operating an electrical utility. Not only would the reliability of your electrical service be in doubt, your costs are likely to go up.

PGE has been through a lot in the past two years. Through it all, our employees have never wavered in their commitment to our customers. You can count on us to be there for the next century and beyond.

We thank you for your ongoing support. We urge you to join us in keeping safe, reliable, affordable electricity in Multnomah County. Vote no on Measures 26-51 and 26-52.

(This information furnished by Peggy Y. Fowler, Portland General Electric)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

I believe we speak for most of the retired Pacific Power employees when we say:

No startup government-owned and operated utility can deliver low-cost, reliable electric service the way Pacific Power does. And you can quote us on that, for two very good reasons:

We’re proud of the job we did for electricity customers and we’re proud of the job today’s Pacific Power crews and customer service folks are doing. No new PUD will have the systems and the experienced people that Pacific Power has.
Pacific Power’s customer prices are among the lowest in Oregon. That’s because Pacific Power generates most of the electricity customers use and has a lot of good employees to make sure the lights stay on. A new PUD has no electricity to deliver, so its ratepayers would pay higher costs for electricity supplied from where ever the PUD can get it.

New PUDs were a bad idea 20 years ago; there are even a worse idea now...

Of course we’re saying NO to a Multnomah County PUD. We believe that when you look closely at Measure 26-51 you’ll join us saying NO to this irresponsible takeover.

Signed,

Pacific Power Retirees, and years of service:

Kenneth Worrall, 45
Kenneth Reed, 41
Gordon Linn, 40
Harold Wyler, 40
Clifford Cowley, 39
Donald Groth, 38
Joesph Schinder, 38
Donald Hennessey, 38
William Triplett, 37
Stanley de Sousa, 37
Clark Smith, 37
Joe McKay, 37
Claud Hicks, 37
Hazel Hanson, 37
George Huster, 36
William Wright, 36
Wayne Corcoran,36
Walter Hercher, 35
Charles Harder, 35
Jack Dailey, 34
Kent Lamb, 33
Theodore Corbett, 33
Michael Jensen, 32
Darwin Durr, 32
James Brigham, 32
Allen George, 32
George Hein, 32
Richard Jones, 31
Robert Peterson, 31
Norman Cowell, 31
Kennie Namba, 30
John Cheek, 30
Robert Miller, 30
Fred Searcey, 30
Ralph Miller, 29
Allen Greene, 28
Shirly Wentz Davis, 28
Milford Galer, 28

And many more.

(This information furnished by Jacqueline S. Bell, Pacific Power Retirees)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

MULTNOMAH COUNTY DEMOCRATIC LEADERS ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURES 26-51 AND 26-52

I am strongly opposed to a PUD overhauling our reliable electrical system. It makes no sense to pay more than a billion dollars to create an unnecessary government utility with no operating experience, no source of power and no idea of how high its rates will be.
-- Neil Goldschmidt, former Oregon Governor and Portland Mayor

This measure is loaded with unworkable boundary and voting complications. Multnomah County contains seven cities and six separate parcels of unincorporated area. Depending on how the voters in each municipality and separate parcel of territory vote on the Multnomah County PUD formation measure, there are dozens of ways in which the district could be configured. If the measure were to pass overall but fail in any of the jurisdictions, the result would make a huge jigsaw puzzle of electric service in Multnomah County. This system would be extremely expensive to establish and inefficient to maintain. It doesn’t make sense.
-- Phil Keisling, former Secretary of State

A PUD takeover would be bad for schools and community organizations. Essential services such as police, fire, and schools would lose millions annually in much-needed taxes and franchise fees paid by Pacific Power and PGE. This measure would also be one more blow against our struggling schools. Multnomah County schools alone would stand to lose over a million dollars annually in funds to make our schools more energy efficient.
-- Margaret Carter, State Senator from NE Portland

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

UNION ELECTRICAL WORKERS OPPOSE A PUD TAKEOVER
--A message from Bill Miller, Business Manager, IBEW Local 125--

IBEW Local 125 represents more than 3,700 skilled union electrical workers who provide safe and reliable power to Oregonians. We are opposed to condemnation and the break up of PGE and Pacific Power that will occur with the formation of a Multnomah County PUD.

This is NOT an issue about Enron. Believe me, we have suffered significant financial losses through the Enron bankruptcy. Yet, we have maintained a professional working relationship with PGE management. We see no advantage in ending that. We will likely lose whatever footing we have to protect our pensions, if the electrical system is taken over.

Our union electrical workers are proud of the systems that we have helped design, build and maintain. Overhauling these systems is very risky. You can’t simply unhook PGE and Pacific Power from the rest of the system. It will cost a fortune. It is very technical, and system reliability could be at risk for an extended time period.

This measure would likely increase everyone’s electricity bills. Just because PGE and Pacific Power currently have power available for their customers does not mean that this existing power will be made available for PUD customers, and the price remains to be seen.

Our Local Union is not opposed to public power nor are we opposed to public utility districts. But we believe that this ill-conceived measure in its current form benefits no one. Higher rates for a lower quality of service at a time when there are many more important things to be spending our time, attention and money on, does not make sense.

The Northwest Oregon Labor Council, AFL-CIO, unanimously voted to oppose a PUD takeover in Multnomah County.

We urge you to vote NO on Measures 26-51 and 26-52.

(This information furnished by Bill Miller, IBEW Local 125)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

Voting NO on both Measure 26-51 & 26-52:

Stops the breakup of Pacific Power and PGE by a government-owned utility.

Stops the creation of a new layer of government with over 300,000 taxpayers and ratepayers.

Stops the Multnomah County PUD from levying any new property taxes.

Stops years of expensive legal fights in a forced government takeover of part of two local utilities. A government takeover might be good for the legal business, but not for the community.

Stops a billion-dollar PUD debt for an electricity system with no guaranteed source of low-cost electricity.

We can stop all the risks and costs before they start by voting NO on both Measures 26-51 & 26-52.

Greg Mowe
Attorney Specializing in Utility Condemnation Law
Stoel Rives LLP

(This information furnished by Greg Mowe, Stoel Rives LLP)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Measure No. 26-51 | Multnomah County PUD

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION

PGE RETIREES URGE A “NO” VOTE ON MEASURES 26-51 AND 26-52

PGE’s retirees have hundreds of years of experience building and operating Oregon’s largest electric utility. The ill-considered idea of a forced government takeover of PGE service territory in Multnomah County will...

Increase prices and decrease service quality. The complicated scheme will break up PGE’s integrated system and isolate Multnomah County from PGE’s power plants. In it’s place you get a government-run utility with no operating experience. A new government utility will not own any generating plants and will need to buy power from the volatile power marketplace. This messy and confusing scheme is a prescription for higher rates – all without any expectation of improving PGE’s already class-leading reliablility record of 99.99%.

Injure employees and communities. PGE, it’s employees and retirees have a deeply embedded tradition of community service. We have suffered enough through recent stock losses – the government takeover would create more hardship and uncertainty than it would attempt to solve.

When you cast your vote, remember that hard-working employees who are carrying on a 114-year-old PGE tradition of reliable service have done nothing to deserve a government takeover. This measure puts good, family wage jobs in Multnomah County at risk.

SAY “NO” TO HIGHER RATES AND REDUCED RELIABILITY.

SAY “NO” TO MEASURES 26-51 AND 26-52

Paid for by PGE retirees

Richard Akerman
Ione Adolf
Verne E. Alford
Victor W. Bacon
Ellen Louise Brown
Lewis H. Coe
Doris Davids
Robert E. Davis
Amy Hannaford
Douglas Heider
Barbara Horvath
Robert Kallen
Thomas H. Kingston
Loy J. Kirksey
Norman E. Law
W.J. Lindblad

(This information furnished by Robert Kallen)

The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by Multnomah County, nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the argument.

Search form

Looking for:

I want to:

Departments, Divisions, and Offices

Elected Officials

Board Meetings

More links

November 2003 Special Election - Measure No. 26-51

View all

Multnomah County PUD