HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 11 05 Status Report 1980
[(ECEIVEI
Status Report
NO\! 5 1980
crrv OF J.V!AlTLANO
I have attached the minutes of the meeting of October 31 for your mformatIon
and history.
The primary purpose of this status report is to make you aware that there
has been no change in the N overnber 7 deadline for FPC to file te stimony and
therefore it is essential that we file our intervenor brief with the FPSC on or
before that tirne. This does rnake it necessary to proceed on the schedule
originally suggested, i. e. :
Novelnber 6, 1980
Filing date for intervenor petition.
November 10, 1980
Return to John Peddy of street lighting statistics.
November 12, 1980
Draft of testimony sent out to the task force for
review.
November 17, 1980
Meeting to discuss testimony, hear from Bob Morrow
on suggested expert testirnony, plan final approach,
Iile an an1endnxmt to the inte rvenor petition to add
intervenor s not on original petition, etc.
December 19, 1980
Final filing date for testimony and anlending inter-
venor petition.
My office will be contacting each of you on Novem.ber 4, 1980 to be certain
you are aware of the necessity to revert to the original schedule.
For your information, the following distribution of costs would occur assmning
all parties cur rently expre s sing an intent where to become a party to the
intervention:
Total
.$20,000 Cost
$ 6,931.51
232.31
220.43
412.69
4,087.29
812.20
51.62
1,789.26
---';7 545.33
4,917.36
$ 20,000.00
$40, 000 Cost
$ 13,863.02
464.62
440.86
825.38
8,174.58
1,624.40
103.24
3,578.52
1, 090. 66 .~
9,834.72
$ 40,000.00
Local Covlt.
St. Peter sbur g
Culfport
Seminole
St. Petersburg Beach
Clearwater
Dunedin
Indian Rocks Beach
Largo
Maitland
Pinellas County
I have attached a copy of the FPC journal entry from which were derived the
percentages used to distribute the two cost figures above. As you can see,
- 1 -
-,--....-~>-,......,-<~,.,...~----'-------
~__,_"'~......._,""~"...__-""......,~" ,', ,~._._~'"",.H
the cost for most local governrnents to become a part of the intervenor
petition is a relatively modest portion of the total cost and is in direct
relationship with their expenditures.
I urge each of you to encourage other local governments to consider becoming
a party to the intervention. Although we would like to have all local govern-
ments who wish to be a party to the intervention do so by Novernber 17, we will
be abl.e to amend the petition on or prior to the December 19 deadline.
The next Dleeting of the Local Government's lnte rvenor Ta sk Force is sched-
uled for November 17 at 9:30 A. M. in the Clearwater City Commis sion
chambers in City Hall.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call me at 462-6777.
- 2 -
...-______liI
IiIlI!lr_l...-.-Jl,g!lill.IFI........""'""__"~~tr,r,~""'''''''''''''J!I.1''''I''1lI'n..M,'I<:'''''~:~,.,,~,;...';:-,,;..;_,:;t.".:'::~~J"7.:~,''',!~[-Nm~~_:,:",::',:.Mwr.f~~~;,,~i,"";;liwlec~i!Ir:ji,;,;)")lllmWhnr~;,':':'",:",:;;;,..~;;J,\'(~~BI~:ir,'i5!ii(.;L-~;;~,J~";':~~~I~',,<:,:.:;,;~'~lk.X~f~-;,i;i~~w...
Local Governrnent Intervenor Task Force
Date: October 31, 1980
Place: Clearwater City Hall
Attendee s:
Ellis Shapiro
Paul Piller
John Hubbard
Dan Waller
Lawrence McCarthy
Henry Schubert
T om Bustin
Doug Mullis
Carl R. Linn
Jean H. Kwall
Bob I-,aSala
Max Royle
Joe Arenas
Paul Yingst
EvereU Allen
City Manager
City Manager
City Attorney
Building Insp.
General Supt.
Adm. Asst. to C. M.
City Attorney
Traffic Eng.
City Attorney
Asst. County AUy.
Chief Asst. Adm.
City Manager
Adm. As st.
Dir. Gen. Services
Councilman
Gulfport
Indian Rocks B ch.
Dunedin
Indian R"ocks Bch.
Gulfport
Largo
Clearwater
Pinellas County
St. Petersburg
Pinella s County
Pinellas County
St. Pete Beach
St. Petersburg
St. Petersburg
Seminole
While waiting for the Attorney and Mr. John Peddy to arrive, those present
introduced themselves. Mr. Carter explained for the benefit of the new
attendees where we stood in the Intervenor suit and asked for questions from
the audience.
Carter: Explained the term "fixture'! and the costs related to the term
"fixture costsll.
Peddy: Explained the details of the requested lighting inventory form. He
reque sted that the completed forms be returned to him for
summation.
Carter: Described the process by which we will make the decision on the
need of an expert witness and the possible cost for this service.
Hubbard: Suggested that we petition the PSC to mandate to the municipalities,
at their choice, the purchase of their lighting facilities at a
depreciated cost. He mentioned that the FPC, for tax purposes,
depreciates their facilities in five years. He also suggested that
the municipalities could form a coalition for maintenance
purposes.
Morrow: Mentioned that it would be possible to include the Hubbard sugges-
tion in the Intervenor process.
Morrow: Gave a brief description of the case procedure, described the need
for an expert witness, described the need for City and County
- 1 -
<.
Mor row:
(contd. )
representative testin10ny. Passed out draft copIes of the
petition to all present.
Morrow: Discussion on the inclusion to the petition of Cities represented
on the fir st is suance or to a later addendum. A few of the
municipalities will have Comn1ission meetings next week and
Inay not have a decision to participate available by the filing
of the petition. The more municipalities named on the first
is suance would tend to car ry more weight with the PSC.
Carter: Discussion of the schedule - Filing date 11/6/80; preparation of
all data and testimony by 11/10/80; submittal of all pertinent
information to the municipalitie s repre sented on 11 / 12 / 80;
another meeting of all municipalitie s on 11/17/80.
Linn: Mentioned the possibility of the filing date being delayed for a week
or so.
P.S. 11/3/80 - Bob Morrow called Floyd Carter and mentioned that our
filing date was 11/7/80. Morrow will be sending petition from Washington,
D. C. on the 6th, so we nlUst have as many definite municipalities repre-
sented_ on the petition as possible.
- 2 -