GVEA officer misspoke?

In a filing notice I received from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) Dec. 29, the RCA dismissed GVEA's G&T application without prejudice. This is appropriate and means that GVEA can re-submit it. The RCA had until Jan. 2, 2007 to approve, in accordance with expeditious regs they have to rule on items. I don't see where they had much of a choice in doing what they did.

This ruling noted that GVEA informed the RCA Dec. 12 by phone that the G&T vote failed with the membership, but that the RCA staff also subsequently received a phone call from an (unnamed) officer of GVEA asking that the RCA continue to keep the docket on U06-069 open, as GVEA may wish to transfer assets to the G&T with the value under the 15% amount that requires the membership vote.

This is in contrast to what CEO Steve Haagenson told me - that if the G&T vote went down, this would be the end of it.

The Fairbanks Daily News Miner filed a report on Dec. 30 with a little more information. (link fixed) I can imagine the consternation amongst GVEA officers and attorneys trying to put out the fire.

Anybody with GVEA want to weigh in? Please do comment.

A few more ideas

I've been sick the last month, and am finally recovering, but I forgot all about the GVEA meeting.

I still have a remaining question regarding the G&T: How could the staff legitimately claim a $30 million savings based on a 1.75 margin when GVEA doesn't collect that margin? I haven't yet managed to talk to Dan Osborne, who may be able to explain this to me, but from where I'm sitting, this estimate was flatly fraudulent, especially since it appeared in advertisments/official information (the Ruralite & the website) AND on the ballot. Perhaps I'm wrong--I hope I'm just confused, because if I'm NOT wrong, then we have a serious problem within GVEA, and the deception should not be allowed to just go by the by. It may even be felonious.

Now, to a few suggestions: I have had a few ideas and heard a few from various people during all this brouhaha. Among them:

1. An indigent/emergency electric bill fund that members could voluntarily donate to and which could be used by other members in need of help on their bill. This could be started with unclaimed capital credits to get a base pool going.

2. I second Gary's suggestions below. District meetings and communications such as district rep blogs. I'm not sure a newsletter would be useful, unless it replaced Ruralite, which often seems to have nothing to do with GVEA.

3. Tom DeLong made an excellent suggestion regarding incentives for people who conserve energy: if a member/household uses under X amounts of kilowatts each month over a year, then they would qualify for a reduced electricity rate so long as they kept under that usage during the next year. The threshold amount of wattage would have to be determined after a bit of thought, but the idea is to keep down sudden peak loads among your average users and to encourage conservation. Thus, wasteful users would pay more.

Post G&T vote observations & recommendations

I attended the GVEA meeting last night. I had prepared some observations and recommendations following the G&T vote and got partway through before Rick Schikora asked the chair about cutting me off at 3 minutes. I guess he didn't want to hear anything more that I could offer. Rick's efforts to stifle me may get me to run for the board, which will be an experience I don't think he would enjoy. Another demonstration of the GVEA board valuing their members. By contrast, they allowed a Chugach area individual to go on for 15 minutes the meeting before. I will note that the chair offered that he disagreed with me on some of those observations, but didn't say what or how. I'd be interested in hearing more from him. I'd hope we can respectfully disagree but keep an open mind.

For the record, here were those observations and recommendations.

December 18, 2006

GVEA Board of Directors

Here are some of my observations and recommendations following the membership vote on the GVEA G&T asset transfer proposal.

On the vote:

1. The GVEA President was quoted as saying that those not voting must have been happy with the proposal. However, of 20% voting, 60% were opposed. This is statistically a very reliable sampling of what the membership opinion was. This does NOT translate to 40% of those voting plus the 80% not voting as being in favor and only 60% of those voting opposed. Perhaps there is a tendency to spin the results to make one feel better, but we shouldn’t give into that tendency. Let’s be honest. The members said no because they didn’t think it was a good deal.

2. Those quoted in the News-Miner expressed their view that the proposal wasn’t sold well. I would both agree and disagree.

I would agree that GVEA didn’t present both sides to the membership in publicity. It was so one sided, I view it as intentionally deceptive or incredibly naive. I begged your public relations staff back in late July/early August to present both pros and cons. Rick Schikora indicated his desire that both and cons be presented at one of the bylaw markup meetings. The cons were only mentioned by GVEA staff in meetings I observed where members could ask questions. The difference between the media presentation in media (Ruralite, News-Miner, TV, radio) vs. public meetings with a give-take was striking. I think the membership caught on to that. Selling it well enough – does that mean trying even harder to show only the benefits? If so, I disagree.

I do think that there were those that adequately presented the cons and I am proud to be included in that group. I don’t think that bringing this back before the membership with more extended discussion is in GVEA’s best interest. I estimate, with the cost of media, legal costs, board and staff time (all compensated), GVEA spent about $100,000 on this campaign. I spent about $200 in uncompensated funds for gas to meetings and also for repairs to my camera when I dropped it on the concrete outside the Ops Bldg. taking a picture of the GVEA G&T meeting announcement. It thus cost GVEA $38 for every YES vote and me only a nickel for each NO vote. I would note though that it cost each residential member about a month’s worth of G&T savings just to have this vote.

There must have been some fatal flaws in the G&T, as the membership turned it down. If you say the members didn’t know what they were doing – that’s rather insulting. Accept the membership’s ruling and move on to other things. Don’t try end runs or beat it any further. The only thing that could justify such resurrection would be a way for GVEA members to remain owners of the assets that were to be transferred in the proposal and your attorney already told you THAT would be a fatal flaw.

On engaging the membership:

Now that GVEA has the members’ attention, I strongly urge the board to take separate and collective action to engage the membership. GVEA has a loyal group of members who believe in the co-op principles. GVEA’s presentation on the G&T proposal upset a lot of members. Members want to trust their board members, but it isn’t a given. GVEA may not have lost their total trust, but does need to demonstrate a willingness to engage in meaningful TWO-way communication with members.

1. District meetings – staff attendance isn’t really required. Board members are highly trained as board members and spend enough time on issues to be able to discuss GVEA issues with their members.

2. Quarterly newsletters to each district’s members – express your perspective on what you’ve been doing as a board member for the last quarter and what issues you’d like to both express and hear from your constituents about. This should be in your words, not that of staff. Board members could also have their own blog. You don’t even need GVEA to host it, but a link from your bio on the GVEA webpage would be helpful.

3. An on-line forum for members to ask questions – this is one that staff can readily support – the software is free and widespread. Board members could have their own areas in the forum if they desire. A staff or board member does need to monitor the forum in order to respond to concerns or point out where a board member needs to respond. Such a forum can also serve as an early warning for issues.

4. Scale back the dog and pony show – slick presentations of the annual meeting. The time prior to the meeting itself where board members can mix is good, but limited. Agreed most folks are there for the freebies, but while you have them there, take opportunity for some meaningful education from the various board members’ perspective. Let the board members participate instead of sitting off to the side silently.

5. A lot of folks who come to GVEA annual meetings are elderly and hard of hearing. A hockey rink is not a good place to be heard – the acoustics are terrible, no matter how many thousands of dollars are put into the P.A. Hering Auditorium might have been crowded, but at least we could hear. Hering holds 1100-1200 people. This might be something to ask the members’ preference in an on-line poll.

In conclusion, don’t mistake my critique as being hostile toward GVEA. To the contrary, I am very faithful to my co-op and do what I think members ought to do when they are concerned about a direction taken. I try to be constructive in my suggestions and be informed in my opinions. Yet when I come and talk to you under member comments, you all sit just like you do at the annual meeting – silent. The board representative in my district doesn’t keep me informed, even though he knows of my interest. And I’ve even voted for him, not that this should make a difference.

This is just to demonstrate there is no functional two way communication between the board and those they represent, except maybe one-on-one. There needs to be. It will make your job a bit more demanding, but also more fulfilling.

GVEA member vote results

It seems like a long effort on my part, but it is time to re-evaluate and move forward.

Here are the vote results for the two ballot issues submitted to members:

* * * * * * * *

For transferring assets to the GVEA G&T
Yes 2653 41%
No 3878 59%

Vote fails. GVEA G&T assets remain with GVEA.

* * * * * * * *

For allowing all but board member and spouses to participate in GVEA alternative energy programs (e.g. SNAP)

Yes 4304 66.4%
No 2180 33.6%

Vote passes. All but board members and spouses may now participate.

* * * * * * * *

Check out the more detailed vote tally

6545 ballots

Membership Advisory Committee members spent 5 hours opening the double envelopes sorting and counting the ballots at least twice.

Final tallying made and cross-checked by Corinne Bradish, GVEA staff and external counsel John Burns.

Delta District 6 rep to be appointed Dec. 18, 2006

Since it was already announced to GVEA staff, the board of GVEA, after interviewing the 3 candidates to replace Dwight Nissen on the GVEA board, at their regular board meeting Dec, 18, 2006, the GVEA board is planning to appoint and seat Karen Cedzo, formerly with University Relations at UAF and Cooperative Extension Service. You can read more about her here, another fine result from Google.

I hope, with Karen's experience in public relations, some of her energies on the board can go toward advocating successfully for two-way communication between members and board.

GVEA issues

With the G&T issue hot for GVEA members in the latter half of 2006, I've been overwhelming my regular blog at comity.blogspot.com with GVEA stuff. I thought I'd try a separate blog and encourage GVEA members, board and MAC members, staff, and others with interest to provide comments about GVEA issues.