The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2462 Providing Electric Power Pursuant to ORS 221.420(A) ORD. 2462 8/16/88 Authorizing City to provide resi- dents with electric power & auth- orizing City to acquire/own elec,-. tric poker facilities to serve C ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE EXCLUDING AND EJECTING ALL UNFRANCHISED PUBLIC UTILITIES PROVIDING ELECTRIC POWER PURSUANT TO ORS 221.420(A) WHEREAS the Charter of the City of Ashland authorizes the City to provide the residents of the City with electric power, and further authorizes the City to acquire and own electric power facilities to provide such service to the residents of the City; and WHEREAS the City of Ashland has provided electric power to its residents continuously since 1909, and is one of but ten cities in Oregon which so provide; and WHEREAS the City has long financed its municipal services primarily by sales of electric power to its residents; and WHEREAS the City is able to provide electric power to its residents at rates lower than those of Pacific Power & Light (PP&L); and WHEREAS in 1962, upon the application of PP&L, the Public Utility Commissioner issued PUC Order No. 38498 that allocated to PP&L as PP&L's "exclusive" service territory all of Jackson County except the territory within the 1962 Ashland city limits; and WHEREAS as growth permitted, the City has since 1962 and to the date of this ordinance annexed territory lying within PP&L's allocated territory, and has continued such annexations (as growth requires) of additional territory lying within PP&L's allocated territory, said annexations identified in ordinance numbers 1203, 1204, 1220, 1227, 1240, 1246, 1246, 1260, 1268, 1295, 1302, 1306, 1321, 1337, 1340, 1350, 1355, 1356, 1359, 1367, 1368, 1383, 1395, 1400, 1413, 1422, 1424, 1512, 1575, 1696, 1770, 1784, 1827, 1911, 1930, 1936, 1989, 1992, 2040, 2078, 2109, 2157, 2166, 2190, 2243, 2247, 2283, 2286, 2293, 2343 and 2367; and WHEREAS in 1965 PP&L sought (and received in PUC Order No. 41484) PUC approval of the sale to the City of PP&L's distribution facilities in territory annexed to that date, and PP&L further sought (and received in PUC Order No. 41710) PUC approval of a corresponding reduction in PP&L's allocation; and WHEREAS the City has historically served and continues to serve all of the above annexed territory except the portions of territory included in annexations described in ordinance numbers 1422, 1512, 1930, 1992, 2157, 2190, and 2367, and the City has built, purchased from PP&L, or otherwise provided electric power distribution systems and has exclusively served all of the territory in the remaining annexations; and WHEREAS PP&L continues to serve portions of the territory included in annexations identified by ordinance number in the above paragraph; and w JWHEREAS in 1985 the City adopted Ordinance number 2379 authorizing the acquisition by condemnation of PP&L distribution systems in annexed territory; and WHEREAS PP&L commenced litigation in 1985 in the Jackson County Circuit Court with respect to the City's continued provision of electric power to residents within annexed territory that is also territory lying within PP&L's PUC allocation; and WHEREAS the City prevailed in the litigation in the trial court and PP&L appealed, and the Court of Appeals concluded that if the City chooses to provide electric power to its residents and if it further chooses to "exclude or eject" an existing public utility from within the city limits pursuant to ORS 221.420(2)(a), the utility allocation statutes do not prevent the city from providing such service in a territory previously allocated to PP&L; and WHEREAS the Court of Appeals concluded that all the City need do further in order to exclude and eject PP&L from within existing city limits is to enact municipal legislation in conformity with ORS 221.420(2)(a); and WHEREAS Statewide Planning Goal 14 adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission mandates that the establishment and change of municipal urban growth boundaries achieved by annexation shall be based upon the "[o]rderly and economic provision for public facilities and services," among other things; and WHEREAS the 1982 Ashland/Jackson County Urban Growth Boundary Agreement setting forth the mutually adopted urbanization program between the City and County provides that "[t]he main provider for urban facilities and services in the urban growth boundary shall be the City of Ashland * * *11; and WHEREAS the City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan, approved by the Land Conservation and Development Commission in December, 1983, provides, as a goal, that the City shall "provide public utilities * * * in sufficient quantity to meet City needs now and in the future" and further provides, as policies, that the City shall "[p]rovide urban areas with the level of services appropriate to the density of settlement and resultant service demand" and further shall "[p]rovide services in a timely, coordinated and orderly manner that minimizes costs * * *11; and WHEREAS the City deems it desirable to set forth its longstanding policy, in existence for a number of decades, concerning the scope of municipal involvement in the provision of electric power service in existing annexed territory, consistent with the terms of the City's acknowledged comprehensive plan and the Ashland/Jackson county urban growth boundary agreement, and further consistent with the Court of Appeals' decision in the above PP&L litigation; i NOW, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to ORS 221.420(2)(a), the City of Ashland hereby excludes and ejects from within the municipal boundaries of the City all unfranchised public utilities as defined in ORS 757.005 currently providing electric power services within the City of Ashland, including, but not limited to, all businesses and residences therein. The foregoing Ordinance was first read at a regular meeting of the Common Council held on the.lwle-l day of 1988, and passed to its second reading, and duly passed on the OC day of 1988. Dated this--~-/"day of 1988. APPROVED: MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER a A r 1♦ RONALD L. SALTER ATTORNEY AT LAW 94 THIRD STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 (503) 482-4215 tlUUI Er IV ED!, JUL 2 6 1988 July 25, 1988 - 1 Mr. Steve Hall City of Ashland City Hall Ashland, Oregon 97520 Re: Ashland vs. PP&L Appeal Our File A-206-D Dear Steve: Enclosed is a memo and an ordinance which should be put on the Council's next agenda. Very truly yours, i RONALD L. SALTER City Attorney RLS/rw Enclosures µ ` h RONALD L. SALTER ATTORNEY AT LAW 94 THIRD STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 (503) 482-4215 July 25, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Member of the Common Council FROM: Ronald L. Salter, City Attorney RE: Electrical Service within the Expanded Boundaries of the City of Ashland The Final Judgment in the Pacific Power and Light case requires that the City, formally, adopt an Ordinance excluding and ejecting PP&L from the providing of electrical service within the boundaries of Ashland. Delivered herewith is such an Ordinance, which we ask that the Council adopt. Respectfully submitted, RONALD L. SALTER City Attorney RLS/rw • v M r ~ RONALD L. SALTER ATTORNEY AT LAW 94 THIRD STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 (503) 482-4215 June 13, 1988 Brian Almguist City Administrator City Hall Ashland, Oregon 97520 Re: Ashland vs. P.P. & L. Proposed ordinance to Eject P.P. & L. Dear Brian: We have each received a letter from Barry Adamson dated June 9, 1988 on the above subject. With respect to Page 2, second whereas clause, we suggest that the last three lines be made even a bit stronger to read as follows: "Utility Allocation Statutes do not prevent the City from providing such service in territory previously allocated to P.P. & L and the City does fully and clearly have such right; and" As for Section 1 on the same page the word "electric" might well be inserted before the word "power". I know this is what it meant but it wouldn't hurt to make it clear that we were not excluding any other type of power provider which perhaps arguably, the Gas Company is among. With those changes to be considered, it is my sug- gestion that we present the Ordinance to the Council as soon as possible so as to move this matter forward. Vle ly 7s RL. SALTER City Attorney RLS/as