MEA facing power play

May 13, 2007

By Russell Stigall

Frontiersman

MAT-SU - Local activist groups want Matanuska Electric Association member-owners' opinions to count. All opinions.

On a ballot to decide the location of MEA's proposed electric generators, Jim Sykes, of public advocacy group Utility Watch, says ratepayers are not being allowed to choose from all options, since &#8220none of the above” or space for write-in votes are not options.

&#8220Essentially, [MEA's] ballot is worthless, and people are being forced to make a false choice,” Sykes said. &#8220MEA does not honor its member-owners.”

Mat-Su's wholesale power cooperative plans to build 200 megawatts of new electric generation in the Valley by 2015. Of this, half is to be produced by a simple-cycle natural gas turbine generator and half by a circulating fluidized bed coal-fired generator.

MEA consulted international engineering consulting firm CH2M HILL to come to this power production scheme, the details of which, MEA officials claim, are in an Integrated Resource Plan that has not been released to those who are expected to pay for it and live with its potential environmental fallout.

The coal generator has spurred opposition from Valley groups Utility Watch, MEA Ratepayers Alliance and others.

With the decision made that a coal-fired generator is what it will build, MEA now plans to let its member-owners give the co-op advice as to where.

The co-op has selected five sites for its ratepayers to choose from. MEA will mail an advisory ballot to each member-owner beginning May 14.

Sykes is working with Pete Houston, president of MEA Ratepayers Alliance, to give MEA ratepayers an option other than the five given on MEA's ballot.

The vote should not be about where a coal plant should be built, but whether it should be built at all, Sykes said.

&#8220It doesn't make a lot of difference if the coal plant is at Blodgett Lake or Millers Reach, the effects of the plant will be felt by the entire Valley, Anchorage and the waters of the upper Cook Inlet,” Sykes said.

The effects Sykes mentioned come from the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, the acid-rain producing sulfur dioxide, and the mercury that is a byproduct of coal-fired generators.

&#8220You may not want a coal plant in your back yard, but the emissions will be felt by everyone,” Sykes said.

The Valley needs to agree on what it will do about its future energy needs, Sykes said.

&#8220That is not happening now,” Sykes said. &#8220MEA has pre-empted that.”

Utility Watch works for openness, fairness and consumer responsibility from utilities, Sykes said.

&#8220We shouldn't have to force MEA to have an open and fair process,” Sykes said. &#8220People should be able to express their opinions and be heard.”

To give MEA member-owners another option to voting for the coal plant's location, Sykes and Houston will accept and count sealed MEA ballots that have &#8220nowhere” or other anti-coal-plant statements written in.

The co-op's current ballot does not allow for write-in votes, Sykes said, and he is concerned that write-in ballots will be rejected.

&#8220If you don't choose a site and you write something else, none of your comments will be registered and your ballot would be wasted,” Sykes said.

Tuckerman Babcock, MEA spokesperson, said the information for the vote is on the MEA Web site and a mailer sent to co-op members. He refused further comment. MEA spokesperson Lorali Carter did not return several phone calls.

MEA board of directors president Lee Jordan also did not return phone calls requesting comment.

There is no mention on the Web site as to whether co-op members can write in alternate sites or &#8220no coal plant,” or if such ballots would be rejected by MEA.

Sykes said Utility Watch will mail or hand-deliver the sealed ballots to MEA with the stipulation that they are counted and read.

MEA's advisory ballots will arrive in Valley homes and businesses beginning this week, according to the co-op Web site. The co-op asks its member-owners to rank the five sites in priority order. Ballots are due back at MEA by June 6. MEA staff will present member advice to its board of directors on June 11.

The five sites MEA has proposed for the location of its new power plant were selected within a triangle of area designated in advance that covers Sutton to Houston to Eklutna approximately.

One site, the 800-acre Millers Reach site, is south of the city of Houston. A few miles southeast of the Millers Reach site are the 595-acre plots northwest of Blodgett Lake and a 645-acre Pittman gravel pits sites, both in the Meadow Lakes area. These three sites are west of Wasilla and northeast of Big Lake.

The other two sites are split by the Glenn Highway south of Palmer - the 450-acre and 850-acre gravel pits at approximately Mile 37 and Mile 38 on the Glenn Highway, a National Scenic Byway-designated thoroughfare. The smaller site is the same proposed by the borough for building the Mat-Su medium-security prison, which ended up being sited at Point MacKenzie.

Houston, of MEA Ratepayers Alliance, said he wants to make sure people get their votes to MEA.

&#8220If you send it to us, we'll log it, then we'll send it on to MEA. We will not invalidate your voice with MEA,” Houston said.

Houston said his big concern is that people need to exercise their voice.

&#8220Joe Public has power if we express our opinion,” Houston said.

However, Houston said he is not going to &#8220play the game” where he votes to put the plant in someone else's back yard.

&#8220I'm going to write ‘nowhere' on my ballot, and I'm not going to vote for one place over another,” Houston said. &#8220I can't see myself participating in that, in where to build a coal plant.”

Houston said sealed MEA ballots can be sent inside a second envelope addressed to Utility Watch, P.O. Box 696, Palmer, AK 99645.

For more information visit www.utilitywatch.org.

Contact Russell Stigall at 352-2267 or russell.stigall@frontiersman.com.