[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: Community members think the City and City Staff are supporting 2B and 2C

[kohls at bouldercolorado.gov]

Sender: Carr, Thomas

Ken,

Thanks for your email.  I appreciate your bringing this to my attention.  Generally, the rule is that government staff cannot use city resources to support or oppose a ballot measure.  While there is caselaw limiting violations to statements actually urging a vote for or against, we have asked staff to meet a higher standard.  Once the ballot measure was finalized on August 18, we asked staff to cease all community outreach and only respond to direct questions with factual information.  With the city's emphasis on transparency, we also have an obligation to maintain public access to the information obtained about energy with taxpayer dollars.  We are trying very hard to balance our duty to tell the people of Boulder how we spent their money with our obligation not to campaign for or against a ballot measure.  As I am sure that you can appreciate better than most, in a campaign environment every word that you say can become political fodder.  For a while there was even a quote from me on the Smart Energy Coalition's website.

I would like to address each of your concerns.  We are getting frequent phone calls from reporters, including some "fact checking."  Jonathan responded to one yesterday.  Here is Jonathan's report about what he said immediately before the quote: "Laura asked if we would know our fuel costs prior to the issuance of bonds.  My response was that the wholesale purchase of power would be done each year, and may consist of bulk purchase, spot marketing of certain sources and longer term power purchase agreements.  These details would not be known prior to the issuance of bonds, as it is not a cost that would be included in the debt service . . . ."  That seems to me to be an accurate and neutral quote.  I am not criticizing Laura.  Reporters only use what they need for a story.  The rest of what Jonathan said was not relevant to the story and therefore it wasn't included.

With respect to forums, our policy is not to participate in any debate regarding 2B and 2C.  We have even asked employees not to do this on their own time.  We have allowed employees to appear and present a neutral fact-based explanation and answer factual questions only.  Again, this reflects our attempt to balance our duty to be transparent with our obligation not to campaign.  My understanding is that we have generally been successful at this.  David Driskell tells me that after one recent appearance he received a call from an Xcel representative thanking him for his balanced presentation.

I also want to address the "Know your Power" booklet.  We tried very hard to make that booklet as neutral as possible.  It includes statements for and against, as well as many plain facts, such as how much power Boulder uses.  We understood, however, that in a campaign environment, these booklets could be viewed as advocacy pieces.  All of these booklets were produced and paid for before August 18, when the ballot measures were finalized.  The City has made them available in city buildings (primarily in the lobbies of the municipal building and rec centers because these are established public forums).  Staff plans to continue to put these resources in these locations while supplies last, but no additional outreach involving these guides is planned.  In addition, some community groups requested copies. These were provided in limited quantities (with a maximum of 500 set for any one group). Groups on both sides of the issue were invited to take the guide to use as they deemed appropriate.   I understand that the League of Women Voters obtained copies and made them available at their forum.  I do not believe that city staff handed them out.

I hope that this helps.  I agree wholeheartedly that we do not want even the appearance of using public funds in a campaign.  We have many safeguards in place and will remain vigilant.

Tom


From: Wilson, Ken
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 9:05 AM
To: HOTLINE
Subject: Community members think the City and City Staff are supporting 2B and 2C

I have received comments from several community members who think that the City and City Staff are supporting Ballot Issues 2B and 2C in ways that are not appropriate.  The article in this morning's paper is an example.  The last paragraph says: "But the city could also have some long-term agreements with electricity providers in place before bonds are sold, according to Jonathan Koehn, Boulder's regional sustainability coordinator."  This statement is clearly speculative and definitely seems to have been made as an argument about why people should vote in favor of the ballot issues.  For one thing, the municipal utility would not be formed for years - probably many years.  Natural Gas prices are highly variable and to speculate on how generation might be purchased in future years, and on agreements that might be signed before a utility is even formed (or ever formed based on future bond conditions) is unrealistic. There are also operational costs that will not be known until operations are actually started.  Yes, a utility could contract out all the operations to an outside company (where would all the green jobs go?) but such contracts would no doubt have many provisions for additional charges for unforseen problems.  My experience with big projects like this is that there would be many unforseen problems that could raise costs significantly.  So for staff to defend a position about future costs and the resulting viability of the proposed municipal utility is a big stretch.

I also understand that staff members are still participating in forums, defending the City's optimistic and improbable business case as if it was a plan that was sure to happen and sure to succeed.   The City is also apparently providing "Know Your Power" booklets that support municipilization to organizations that are adamently in favor of 2B and 2C.  Renewables Yes is using the city produced video on their website as though it were a campaign commercial.  I have been told that the City's actions have had a chilling effect on some people who would like to speak out against 2B and 2C because they do business in the city and with the city and don't want to oppose something the City is actively supporting.

In summary, I think the City is on thin ice here with respect to legal issues of supporting ballot measures.  I would ask the City Manager and City Attorney to review these issue so that we stay within the law and also do not have the appearance of supporting ballot measures.  These issues are very polarizing and the City should not be adding to this problem.

Ken Wilson
Deputy Mayor and Council Member