My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-15-2009 ERMU MIN SPECIAL
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
06-15-2009 ERMU MIN SPECIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2021 2:09:29 PM
Creation date
10/22/2021 2:09:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUMIN
date
6/15/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Special City Council and ERMU Commission Page 2 <br /> June 15,2009 <br /> o Costs&Financing <br /> Mr.Davis,with R.W.Beck,provided an evaluation of projected power supply costs for <br /> various power supply alternatives under multiple market condition scenarios. He reviewed <br /> current power supply arrangements and resources.Four power supply alternatives were <br /> discussed. <br /> Mr.Davis was asked to outline some of the risks for the city to become a co-owner. <br /> Those risks included: <br /> ■ Possible Co2 charge <br /> • Loss of Load <br /> • Modelings (scenarios)were very conservative <br /> • Project becomes a"no-go"vote on September 11 by current co-owners <br /> • Possible$3 million loss if there is no closing <br /> ■ Interest rates and capital cost runs. <br /> • Fuel costs <br /> • Performance at the plant <br /> • Project incompletion or delay <br /> • Financing <br /> Ms.Johnson asked for an explanation of the financing for this project. <br /> Mr. Schulte outlined the following costs to the city for the Big Stone II project with 30 <br /> megawatt(MW) of a 500 MW plant and a 2015 in-service date. <br /> • Total capital cost: $96 million <br /> • Estimated one-time catch-up payment:$2.6 million <br /> • Estimated ongoing monthly payments: $51,000 <br /> Mr.Schulte stated by fall 2010 all co-owners must have their financing for the project in <br /> place at the financial close.Elk River would need to finance$90-110 million if they want 30 <br /> megawatts. <br /> Two options were outlined: <br /> • Elk River could bring its own money to the table by marketing its own bonds. <br /> • CMMPA could raise the money for the city for its share based on a contract the city <br /> would need to sign as collateral. CMMPA sells bonds in the marketplace to raise the <br /> money. <br /> Mr.Beck noted the city would most likely have to use CMMPA and the bonds would be <br /> revenue bonds.The interest rate would only be valid until 2010 then ERMU would be <br /> responsible for the$90-110 million debt. <br /> Mr.Zerhinger stated this would equate to 2.7 cents per kilowatt hours. <br /> It was noted that there would be no payments between the financial close date and the in- <br /> service date. Users of the facility would end up paying the interest and costs.The benefit <br /> goes to the user who is paying for it. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.