The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPACKET Light and Power Committee 2002-11-14v V /O,1,2 , P TOWN OF ESTES PARK Light and Power Committee AGENDA November 14, 2002 8:00 a.m., Board Room 1. 2003 Electric Rate Increase Â° Schedule for Implementation, Outline ofProposed Changes 2. Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Upgrade Â°Approve Change Order Request 3. Decorative Streetlight Replacement Program Â° Replacement Fixture Recommendation 4. Light and Power Department Policy and Procedure Manual Â° New Charge for Special Meter Reads 5. Electric Thermal Storage Heater Program Â° Consider Recommendation to Eliminate Rebate 6. Reports A. Platte River Power Authority B. Financial Report C. Project Updates D. Discuss Changing Starting Time for December 12, 2002 Meeting to 7:30 a.m. NOTE: The Light and Power Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. REM Prepared 11/11/2002 r TOWN OF ESTES PARK Office Memorandum To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Richard E. Matzke 7/71 I)ate: November 12,2002 Re: 2003 Electric Rate Increase BACKGROUND: The Town of Estes Park hired M.E. Kiburz and Associates in 1999 to perform an electric rate study for an estimated cost of $12,500. The focus ofthis study was to determine our need for additional revenue to support our capital improvement program, "fine- tune" our existing rate structure and develop a means of itemizing the wholesale power cost from Platte River on our customers' bills. This study was commissioned in anticipation of electric competition. Some preliminary work was perfonned on this study but was discontinued as the competition picture changed. The 2001/2002 budget was prepared with a rate increase of $350,000 planned for year 2001 to recover the debt service on the 1999 Revenue Bonds. The study was again delayed as the Light and Power Fund was outperforming the budget even without the rate increase. (The 2001 budget planned a reduction in fund balance of $2,290,554 and the actual reduction was $308,078. The 2002 budget planned a reduction in fund balance of $1,745,446 and the new year-end projection is $2,853,691. This is a two-year budget fund reduction of $4,036,00 compared with an actual reduction of $3,161,769.) Work was resumed on the study earlier this year with a rate hearing anticipated by year-end. The first draft ofthe 2003/2004 budget again included the $350,000 rate increase, but the budget process revealed that a larger rate increase would be required. The current proposed budget includes a $425,000 rate increase in 2003 (5.6%) followed by a $425,000 rate increase in 2004 (5.1%). The proposed budget reduces rate of fund balance erosion but does not reverse the trend. BUDGET/COST: The Town of Estes Park has been billed $2,128.80 for preliminary work done toward the 1999 rate study. M.E. Kiburz and Associates have provided a revised estimate of $13,000 to complete the study and conduct the public hearing. The 2002 budget includes a $7,500 line item for electric rate study. RECOMMENDATION: A memorandum from Town Clerk O'Connor is attached outlining the schedule required to follow in order to conduct the rate hearing at the January 14, 2003 Town Board Meeting. Also attached is the scope of service for this rate study and abroad outline of proposed rate changes. The Light and Power Department recommends that M.E. Kiburz and Associates complete the electric rate study at an estimated cost of $13,000 and that the Town Board set a rate hearing at the January 14, 2003 Town Board Meeting. REM 1-1 2002 Electric Rate Study Scope of Service Outline of Proposed Rate Changes Residential Rate: Increase customer charge from $3 per month to $4 per month. Increase energy charge by revenue requirement. Raise annual maximum for electric heat customers to 25,000 kWh. Residential Demand Rate: Increase customer charge from $3 per month to $5 per month. Same demand charge winter and summer. Increase energy charge by revenue requirement. Residential Energy Time of Day Rate: Increase customer charge from $3 per month to $5 per month. Raise off-peak energy charge to $0.03 per kWh. Increase on-peak energy charge by revenue requirement. Eliminate cap on on-peak consumption. Residential Time of Day Rate: Eliminate Small Commercial Rate: Increase energy charge by revenue requirement. Small Commercial Time of Day Rate: Increase customer charge from $7.25 per month to $8.25 per month. Raise off-peak energy charge to $0.03 per kWh. Increase on-peak energy charge by revenue requirement. Large Commercial Rate: New customer charge of $10 per month. Increase energy and demand charge by revenue requirement. Eliminate combined billing option. Large Commercial Time of Day Rate: New customer charge of$12 per month. Increase energy and demand charge by revenue requirement. Eliminate combined billing option Outdoor Area Lighting: Increase monthly charge from $5.25 to $6.75 Rocky Mountain National Park Administrative Housing Rate: Increase customer charge from $3 per month to $4 per month. Increase energy charge by revenue requirement. Eliminate combined billing option Rocky Mountain National Park Small Administrative Rate: Increase energy charge by revenue requirement. Rocky Mountain National Park Large Administrative Rate: New customer charge of $10 per month. Increase energy and demand charge by revenue requirement. Eliminate combined billing option. New Rates New Default Residential Time of Day Rate: Rate for electric heat customers with no thermal storage. Higher on- and off-peak energy charge. Shorter on-peak time. New Wind Energy Rate: New rate for customers who with to purchase 100% wind energy. 1-2 Town Clerk's Office Memo TO: File From:Vickie Date: November 6,2002 Re: Electric Rate Increase Procedure 1. Light and Power Committee authorizes an Electric Rate Study. 2. Light and Power Committee reviews Rate Study and makes recommendation. 3. Public Notice: Statute #40-3.5-104 - Change in rates - notice and public hearing: â€¢ Minimum 30-day notice required (at least 30 days and no more than 60 days) â€¢ At a Town Board meeting, set public hearing â€¢ A written notice to all rural customers is required 4. For the 2002/2003 rate increase, the following scheduled was observed: November 26, 2002 Town Board meeting, schedule public hearing on January 14, 2003 (the Town Board can set a public hearing at any time). December 12, 2002 Light and Power Committee meeting - review study and make a recommendation on proposed electric rates. December 13, 2002 - Written notice to rural customers (33 days) (includes proposed rates, effective date, public hearing date, and specify that each customer has the right to appear, personally or through counsel, for the purpose of providing testimony regarding the new schedule). December 13, 2002 - Legal Notice in Trail Gazette (33 days). January 14, 2003 - Town Board public hearing. 1 1-3 PUBAA.Â«~ 12&6,>96*y :Ap0L7-_1_- 44 :trz,v, -Mez Northern Colorado power costs surge higher By Robert Baun POWER, from lA > Ike Business Report 46They (Tri-State WINDSOR - The cost .of living in the supplier for municipal utilities in Estes Generation) think Northern Colorado is about to get - Park, Fort Collins, Longmont and I.oveland. upward pressure from an unlikely . PRPA, which operates the Rawhide they won't need source. power plant 20 miles north of Fort The Poudre Valley Rural Electric - Collins, is experiencing rising costs of another increase Association, which still charges at 1986 coal, as well as higher delivery costs. "We went through a period where levels, plans to increase rates for cus- toniers next year about 5 percent or - those prices reduced a bit, and now the probably for roughly 030 a year for a residential bill- _ market ts back up," said John Blehm, a payer spokesman for PRPA. another three years i Â· The Windsor-based cooperative, - The utility is also spending 090 mil- which serves about 31,000 customers 3 lion on new natural-gas generating units at a minimum." in parts of Larimer, Weld and Boulder to absorb rising peak demands. counties, is passing on the rate hike I As a result, officials for PRPA are from its main supplier.. The Tri-States 1 considering a 6.5 percent hike in whole- Generation and Transmission - which ' sale rates, part of whichÂ· must be - Ron Carey, supplies nearly thred-fourths of Poudre absorbed by retail customers. Valley REA's electricity - plans to raise . A 6.5 percent increase would mean a Poudre Valley REA its wholesale prices by 7 percent. 4.5 percent hike, on average, for Fort Tri-State's charging more tomakeup Collins customers, said Mike Smith, Fort Collins No. 47 at 043.64. Estes for the cost of nep:.electricity genera- director of the city's utility. Park, at 047.51, was No. 43. "The cost of power is about two- By comparison, Xcel Energy, the state's tion units, as well as fuel costs, said.Ron Carey, general manager for Poudre,Val- thirds of our total costs," Smith said, largest power retailer, ranked No. 35 with ley REA. Â· explaining the pass-through Costs.. average residential bjlling of 052.13 in July. Still, there's good news for REA cus- ~ Hgwever, the city utility's own costs Low costs are rooted in PRPA's open- tomers. of distributing power are rising. ing of Rawhide in 1984. At that time, j "They (Tri-State) think they won't 'We're looking possibly ata rate increase the wholesaler struck a deal to sell sun need another increase probably for in 2004 for our costs," Smith said. "We think plus power to the Public Service Co., another thre@ years at a minimum," the maximuni will be about 2 percent" now Xcel Energy. The deal provided Carey said. Still, rate hikes have also been spar- revenue to help pay off PRPA's debt, Prices could also su* by 2004 for cus- ing for PRPA's member cities, which shrinking the Â·burden on the four cities. tomers oftlie Platte River Power Authority,' jointly own the wholesaler. ' But revenue from surplus sales is See POWER, 23A Based on a survey of 51 Colorado utili- diminishing. ties in July, the four PRPA cities provided "There's less surplus to sell as the some ofthe cheapest electricity in the state. cities grow," Blehm said. "And market Loveland charged 040.63 per house- * prices (for the surplus) have come down hold, or 49th lowest in the ranking.Â· quite a bit from where they were a cou- Longmont came in No. 48, a 041.44,and ple of years ago." OveT ' Â© 2000 Priority Management Systems inc. Item # PS01 !3 1-4 . TOWN OF ESTES PARK Office Memorandum To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Richard E. Matzket'â‚¬.2372'~ I)ate: November 13, 2002 Re: Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Upgrade Change Order Request BACKGROUND: The Town contracted with Hamlim Electric Company in February 2002 to construct the Big Thompson Three Phase and Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Projects at a cost of $758,935.65. The contract was bid on aper unit basis as designed. During the course of construction of the Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Upgrade, several field changes were made at Light and Power staff's direction. These changes affected the quantity of various units constructed under the contact. (Taller poles, stouter design, etc.) The Light and Power Department has received a final adjustment invoice in the amount of $20,385.00 from Hamlin Electric for the changes described on the Baldpate to Big Owl project. BUDGET/COST: The 2002 budget includes $1,040,000 for the Big Thompson Three Phase and Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Projects. The estimate for materials furnished by the Light and Power Department to construct these projects is $235,425. Inclusion ofthe final adjustment invoice for $20,385 will still allow these projects to be completed within budget. RECOMMENDATION: The changes were requested by Light and Power Department staff and were necessary to comply with National Electrical Safety Code clearances and good design practice. The changes were billed according to the contract unit costs. The Light and Power Department recommends that the final adjustment invoice for the Baldpate to Big Owl Three Phase Upgrade project in the amount of $20,385 be approved for payment. REM 2-1 TOWN of ESTES PARK Inter-Office Memorandum November 13, 2002 TO: Richard Matzke FROM: Laurie Button *P SUBJECT: Streetlight voting In October the Light and Power Department began soliciting votes and opinions from the public regarding the new Bond Park Streetlight Display. The deadline for submitting votes was Friday, November 8th, In this second phase of the project the department offered the public several variations of the three most popular streetlight styles from last spring's initial demonstration. In addition, other options such as pole height and type of light source were offered for consideration. Technical information regarding the lamp color, lamp types, photometric style, pole height and composition was presented to the public in a Municipal Memo published in the Estes Park News. A copy of that text is attached. Along with their ballots, voters were also given a color spectrum to use as they looked at the lights in Bond Park. In that way, they could actually see how the different light sources affect colors. A total of 113 votes regarding the fixture style were received during this second phase of the lighting project Eighty-one individuals responded with their preference for the type of light source. A breakdown of the votes is also attached to this memo. /lb Attachments . CO LL 1 0 0 0 < I C 1 0 1 0 11 0 "ralm 4-LO Â©INCO r-N('091-LOCONOO 8 -c JO) EIJ Streetlight Demonstration - Phase 11 Rev. 11/12/02 Town Commons - S lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-1 (56) HADCO - F HUKU (7) Cooper - S lilli-lilli-I (11 ) Promenade - S lilli-11 (7) Promenade - M Illil-ilill (10) Town Commons - M lilli-lilli-I (11) lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lilli-lili (39) GranVille - M I (1) Pressure Sodium mil-Hill-IlllI-illl-ili~-Illl (29) ( L) 1 S - epeuel.UOid (L) 1 W - epgueUJOid (E) 111 S - SUol.Ull.IO0 U/V\01 (L) 1 IN - SUOLUU.loo UAAol (8) 111-lilli ep!leH ima (L) 1 Promenade - F IN - emALIEJE) 3 - epeueluoid S - Jadooo . Streetlight Demonstration - Phase 11 Rev. 11/12/02 Fluorescent 11 (2) High Pressure Sodium 111 (3) Metal Halide 11 /12/02 Additional ballot comments: I like the lights we have now. I like the ones we have best & wish they could be updated to accommodate present needs. * I like fluorescent lighting, but prefer a yellow cast. * Prefer 10' height and fluted steel pole. (Same comment - 2 people.) Yellow color. Clean-looking light and charm (HPS) No information was given on initial costs and maintenance costs. * On Town Commons S - good light output around the base of post. .. On Town Commons S - clean looking light and charm. Â·â€¢ On Town Commons S - Fixture is most attractive and fits Estes Park ddcor and is very practical as well; allows our visitors and residents to see our gorgeous night skies and stars. â€¢Â· On Town Commons S - minimizes light pollution. .. On Town Commons S - looks the best; more home town. 0. Likes Fluorescent but not in yellow. * As a frequent visitor, I am encouraged by this study to maintain and/or enhance the quality of our night-time sky. + Preserve our night skies and wildlife by using a minimal number of lights. *** The Bond Park Lighting Demonstration: Phase II Area residents and visitors may have noticed that there is a new assortment of streetlights featured in Bond Park. Each of these fixtures is a variation of the most popular designs from last spring's first display. Those styles were the Cooper, Town Commons and the Gaslight. In addition to a difficulty in obtaining replacement parts for the existing lights and poles, increasing awareness of stray light and inefficient lighting were also reasons for the initial study. To maximize our options in this subsequent study, different kinds of light sources, lenses, wattage levels and pole heights are included in the new demonstration. All of the lights displayed include optics built into the fixtures, minimizing stray light and enhancing illumination on the ground below. LAMP COLOR The original Bond Park display included seven metal halide lamps (three - 70 watts, four - 150 watts) and one high pressure sodium lamp (150 watts). Many people who responded during the study felt the lights were too bright and harsh. Color temperature is a measure of the light source's color and a higher temperature indicates a whiter light. An additional factor to be considered is the Color Rendition Index (CRI). The CRI is a ratio of the light source's spectrum compared with that ofan incandescent light bulb. A higher CRI number indicates a truer rendition of color provided by that light source. Another term frequently used when discussing lighting is "lumens." Lumens per watt is an indicator of the lamp's efficiency. A higher number is more efficient. LAMP TYPES These are the types of lamps featured in the current Bond Park display: â€¢ Metal Halide - average lamp life 10,000 hours; 70 lumens per watt; good CRI, whiter color â€¢ High Pressure Sodium - average lamp life 15,000 hours; 69 lumens per watt; lower CRI, yellow color â€¢ QL Fluorescent Induction Lamp - average lamp life 100,000 hours; 53 lumens per watt; good CRI; available in white or yellow color PHOTOMETRIC STYLE The Town's current decorative streetlights have no photometric quality in their design. Light is randomly scattered from a bulb within a translucent enclosure. Most of the fixtures in the new demonstration fall into two categories: horizontal cut off or vertical mount with an external refractor. The horizontal cut off design is best at limiting uplight from the fixture. This design works best when combined with a clear lens. These fixtures have little side glare, but the sourde of light is very strong to pedestrians passing underneath the fixture. This style also has a pronounced shadow at the base ofthe pole. The vertical mount fixture with external refractor does a better job of providing uniform light distribution in the horizontal plane, but does allow more stray uplight. Also, this fixture is more prone to side glare, but that is not as noticeable at lower lamp wattages (less than 150 watts). There is a vertical cut off fixture featured in the demonstration that combines the qualities of the two previous styles. Streetlight Committee Recommendations â€¢ Town Commons-style fixture with clear lens â€¢ 10-ft. fluted, tapered, steel pole â€¢ Smooth, gloss finish â€¢ Color-corrected metal halide â€¢ 3000Â° K â€¢ 80+ CRI â€¢ Horizontal cut-off TOWN OF ESTES PARK Office Memorandum To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Richard E. Matzke 7227- I)ate: November 12,2002 Re: Light and Power Department Policy and Procedure Manual New Charge For Special Meter Reads BACKGROUND: The Light and Power Department performs approximately 1300 meter reads per year for customer turnover in existing services. These reads are performed at the customer's request so there is little opportunity for scheduling. These are generally more expensive than normal reads that follow a planned route and can be read at a much faster pace. We spend approximately 65 personnel hours per month performing these special reads. Charging for these reads would allow the department to recover our cost from the customers who are receiving the service. We discovered that our neighboring utilities charge the following for special reads: Move-in Move-out Fort Collins $15.65 No charge Longmont 12.00 No Charge Loveland 12.00 $6.00 BUDGET/COST: Implementing a charge of $12 per move-in read and no charge for move-out reads would allow us to recover approximately $15,600 per year toward the cost ofproviding these reads. RECOMMENDATION: This proposal was suggested by Senior Meter Specialist, Gary O'Connor. The Light and Power Department recommends that the charge of $12 per move-in read be established and that the Light and Power Department Policy and Procedure Manual be updated to include this charge as shown on the followingpage. REM 4-1 Charge for Special Meter Readings Customers moving into a location with existing service whose move-in date will require a special meter reading (other than the regularly scheduled reading date for that month) will be assessed a charge of $12.00. This charge will be added to the customer's first bill. 4-2 TOWN OF ESTES PARK Office Memorandum To: The Honorable Mayor Baudek and Board of Trustees From: Richard E. Matzke-5;tz>Â» I)ate: November 13,2002 Re: Electric Thermal Heat Storage Program Consider Elimination of Rebate BACKGROUND: The Light and Power Department introduced the Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) rebate program in September of 1994 to promote the use of ETS heaters in conjunction with the Town's new Time of Day rates. The program provides a rebate of $15 per kW of installed ETS heat. The initial one-year program was extended for an additional year and was ultimately established as an ongoing program. Today, the Town of Estes Park has 188 Time of Day customers with roughly 2,050 kW of installed ETS heat. This is a potentially significant reduction in our winter peak load.(approximately 8.9%) Time of Day customers benefit from this program through lower heating costs. Most customers have experienced a three-year payback on their original investment in thermal storage heaters, even without the rebate. BUDGET/COST: The Light and Power Department paid rebates totaling $2,007 in 2001. We have paid $1,836 to date in 2002 with $570 pending. RECOMMENDATION: The electric thermal storage heater program and Time of Day electric rates have been very successful on our system and the Light and Power Department has no plan to eliminate either. However, this program has proved itself and can stand on its own merits. We continue to have interest in the program even though we have cautioned customers that the rebate program may be discontinued. The Light and Power Department recommends that we discontinue the Electric Thermal Storage Rebate Program once the pending rebates have been paid and that no new rebates be offered. REM 5-1 t. h vy .1 Â£ 2?% I I : - 4 â‚¬*t, f I % 04/9 I ' - < 111 0- 0 0 92 41 , , 2, 3 '13 EW * r 4 - f LL 0- O LU . A f# S I 4> 111 400 4 41 1- m k 3â‚¬ ik . I. D 0- 3 +W . Il '2 -kir *15 1 , Rf Â·'14 z I. 0 0 2 0 t . 1 4 N Â¥ N Â¢ AAM IAI31SAS Â¢ Loadh99.xls 11/11/2002 AON 100 des 6nv Inr unr . Xevy Jdv Jel/\1 qe:1 Uep 0002 -<Â» LOOE-0- 1002."i== E-â‚¬19 39Â¥d 19000 - 17000 . 0008L 0009 1 0009L 000* L 20000 + 0 .r- C\,1 000 Â·Â·...... N N CU 1 1 0 0mo 1 1.. I .1 %..... I % ... I .1 1 1 1 1 1 .~ . %%......4%%%%%%t%t%~6."%%'.%%%4%%%6~'. . ... 4.EN-, 1 ... tia 1,144.1 . .... 1 4-19 1 Â· A.:NASSâ‚¬*BRVA'*b...2.<...-2Â·k<*Â·94<.:.AH.-'--,.---'. --'..H.-'-.--.-~---v iÂ·! 1 1 $ r ..3 1. 9-' . 1 1 2%,5... 0.244$444*8:4~*fs**AAr...2*#4*,J#BAN. :33...1 .~ ,,1,,.. 1 lir-it. ': 1 1 t 1 -1 1/leN#21 - El:*44$44444#i.:'.....:.'.b..: C.:$*ss: 48:44*:t: ..,~.Â©.AL~.. %-%~...., f %- -%<\..,.~13: 19â€ž . #F Â·'. ,. 1 1 . . 1 ~ ~Â·~~ Â·..'~, ~'~Â·'}19~'~ L Loadh99.xls 11/11/2002 1/,9 - --.-- .1 + ---- I ,- .., .- 1., 8-99 39Â¥d 94.4 -' U..1-2 4~// f. 1 - 1 '7 0 4 C - b % KE***#14:<4.2**42*Valt.&:6344440:*443:$6*93*48%69*::s:f~$:2:18:-:14:24:8$:ii:$:i:4~%:i:: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. pee<Â»N">R:Â·2Â·kÂ·NRÂ·*xÂ·Â·***:4:Â·R<Â»3:Â·:tÂ·N:Â·tÂ·Â·NkÂ·2*4Â·2:Â·NCRÂ·NÂ·:<:â‚¬tÂ·ktÂ·k<:SRÂ·kÂ·*:~Â·1 JÂ«k'- .,~4~.. .. J~~~- ,. . ~, , ~.44':2 0%,Â· I Â·Â· -iii ,rnia,Â·rl ,9 i,i I. 1 f L 1 1 1 1 1,11 -11.1,11 '1 1, ....1 -4.2&- N 4 ,4 1 4 + U I 1 21 a -69/0='.1 Kt*4661:.E~:r.:U:$68~:.#f"..4.:3*..:ab . ,":. 1 ':-1 ./.Â·....rmrmÂ·r,rÂ·rrmÂ·rr...yrh...././.r,1-,1 â€ž i . .1 'r. '#2 1.*J'*3214*96.#MZZ~2532.AM*':01 . 1 11!107'*~ ilk.,1 4. a 5 1 A. It I 9, # *IxÂ»/I:Â»620//I /: I:*Ii: I ./026Nke< 3%1 ~469 Wil I K Â» 19 0 2 1 4 mms-/rn,-râ€¢ 1 Pr- IED'Cnau.C,3/ZI,Tn Â· -rÂ·Zâ€¢r e L 4,~*05{~281*%Â·to!,>*re<*M<+4%,M ,- Â· - 5 11.--- r:- J: -' %6:-31-:':..,:.'. ': t . 44 4 Â¢ 1 1 494. , =#râ‚¬er Â¥ *: 9, 1 * ->292*65635555 /1 . pase4O/nd HAAIA! alA A.4 .g r * Loadh99.xls 11/11/2002 02000 L00213 -- - 00009 2002 0 YEAR TO D TE AoN ,-PO des 6nv o inf unr Xen Jdv JUl/~| qe=1 uer 2002 YT VS 2001 ~ t-89 39Vd ~ ENERGY PURCHASES 120000 100000 80000 0000* 00002 A 9 43 4 -4 4 bÂ¢ 9 I 5,4. 4 7 1 1 +WK 1, 4. 4 063 i 1 2 * j 1 * 1 1 . 1%36*29--&Â·*424*3*K-43*494-:~24*:3 T :Roy: 4.N. t* IÂ»iÂ»-7*Â»3-6 6'3'*:9:*##A:.k,~6=*2%322&.*: 2.: EiÂ»2*2***EÂ»Â»IÂ« . IX I fo g , 2 Â» 0 1 4 ~51.-: *P->~aL~ ~.*.2* 3,--NF:Â·*:~Â¥k-:A-*Bâ‚¬4, E- -t-~*Â·<t ->t w '!42 A .2 0* 9*lf . Al 1 , ~U Â¢ 11.,I.:-I.,-1-:r:k.:...&.i::di~ji:6'.Iiâ‚¬f:I..:IÂ¢*%8:C+I+: I. 1 P Â»972* iÂ»M=E.aÂ»0.4~38>'Â»EÂ·Â·Â·22Â»:'22â‚¬120Â»Â» kle *7 1 1,; . A 1 1 LU :Nt:ME:;628:ie?21"3?06**b:%2?t.~ .It:'~+.f".t.,1.t. .1 , ~ . Â·I'K(~):.1 1 i v , i i 1 Â·c ~1{OffÂ·91Â·9~:4Â·A3yE~914/ijaul<Rhy#I >Â¢3~ 24~9:~fi~( ~I-, 1 - . i I I 4;: 1 7-T- .... .. ....11 1 -=. Â¥.Y . .1 'iii -Â·C .....=.1 <.. ./r--, i ; i. 1712â‚¬*:'.1..+.+11., . - 1.1:1 . ...14-r .;. I I 1 A 1 I I ./ 0 . S 0 Â¢ 344Â· /y ($) S31VS A-IH.LNOIN SALEHIST.XLS 11/11/2002 - - 02000 L002O -- v --- 000'009 googm 000 AON - 100 des Bnv $ inr unr 4181 Jdv Jel/\I 6. qed Uer - 060'009 ESTES PARK LIG AN POWER DEPARTMENT SALES BY M NT 3 + 000'00* 9-89 39Vd 900,000 800,000 ---- 700,000 ---- + , 1 1-1 2 1 1 1 - 000'008 *t . ' ~7 vii yÂ¥ mi N 10: " 9 1 l 1 * 1 . 1 - 1. 0 Vi l 7 . re >: 0 9 1 9- 3 I Â£; 1 1 - 01 0 1 Ul 4 1 1 1.1- 1 r. 9Â· ~* 1 I. 1 1, I I 2 1 *A 1 I. It - 2 I + ...,r u f . 7'....9'..2-r Â¥49. O ' * I J 1- R - .1 1 1 4 4 - E- 1 ..â‚¬27 a 0 1 . /.~.P.1.: 1 . r.1 1 - 1 1.0 E g . . 4 424 0 4 6* 1%.2 + 1 0 . LO 1 Of) . 1 I - I *j.â‚¬ R - 19 ~2 *%1 1 Sf *%,4 8 0 .8 8 880 0 CL 0- 0 0 0 5 0 0 8 8 8 0 2 .-2 0 88 0 < CD cir) 9 3 ,- ($) S31Â¥S 3.1.Va 01 8Â¥3* SALEHIST.XLS 11/11/2002 00081__-1 - -1 000'000't LOOELL_1 186png, + peSIAe'=1 leopng '' oaa AoN . PO des 6nv + Inf unr Ae IN idÂ¥ mIN 983 uer ESTES *AR IGHT AND POWER DEPARTMENT f DATE ELECTRIC S 7,886,243 5,000,000 - 9-89 39Vd 2002 L~11 -- * 000'000' . 1':Â·-7 + A.v.9'-Â·lr.â‚¬Â·?E'198?3.-Â·Â·Â·yÂ·,-:773 ~ 1 . 1 -1 j t 1 Kai;7.. ...EN.r. 1 E â‚¬) 11 J m i 3 a 2; Lm- CO 0 1 Pr- f. 1 1 8 m Elt/% E r 2 M -'. Income.xls 11/11/2002 Oea AoN 100 des 6nv Inr unr le'Al uer (000'009) 2002 Year to Date-Income Vs Capital CEZZEIOperating Income 1,500,000 - - Operating Income Budget 2-99 86ed 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,000.000 000'009 - (000'000' 0 ~ 4-1 O N "-* ~ 00 ~ C M M + N Â·Kf O ~ w~ || '3< 19 18 1 O 1 0 0-Â· E----*N 1 11 01 r- 0 0 N 00 00 $ 69 14 26 :a : .1- - N 00 40 41 Vt. i 11 -r~ A 24 12- 905 im , hoN#Ov) 1 1 1 1 1 11 0 1 !10 .--4 -4 9 CPh | 45 0% 00 (fl h 1 -1 1 11 i ViI e : tr 1 1 11 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 1 Ce; 0 h â€ž-4 : -1 O N N 1 0 Q U 11 1 M 00 1% 000\00\ '1 1 li -918 4-41 0510 11 .- .-Vr-' 8 E-7 1 *i 1/3 â€ž-4 1 N 0\ Cr; crl 00 t 1 0000 *U i i 11 N212 1 ' 1 63 11 11 1 11 1 1 1 11 ! PÂ·- u (20 00 ! ON ! 00 tr-; ,-4 Ch N rf; N ! 11 O CON 00 00 9 5, v e Vl ON O 00 el ~ 11 01 0 0 G ! 0\ 1 00 00 hOO]=1-01 1 1 , 1 1 e @ 1 =cOm~06~ i c4 i 11 0-00Â» IL#IM. 1 Â£0 1 =f -00 1 M , h O 01 09 0 1/1 11 8 + 1 0 Nle-1 4-1 v C]\ 1 00 11 11 N >4 1 10- iMi 4 1 1 n i H 5 li ~ O 0 04 O lei Orot-*00-41 ;t- E 101 1 hu !05 Molt--0001 ! 40 I 01 0 th, --1-GO :mi imi i EN 2 0 E- clj? i -4 M. 1 00 1 N N N. 040<' i 2 0<Zk 1â€ž-1 woornw 'E: lEi ooll <SD Bti rn S ~ 1 1 1 4 [LI N*i 1 1 1 1 11 6 M E 11 11 Ega 11 ELI '14 CO 0 *j U.1 01000 01 Nt-tr;Oce, 000 m 0 0 m 0 00 71 E- 0 -3- 0 E-1 1- 00 1% M h + 1 * Irt M r-- t~ 00 CD OÂ«Â«NÂ«JEC h 0 N O [3 + 43 01 -t - 8-1 -1 8% R - 01 mr crit-"-'Nt-N - 0Q S 00 xi- r--1 --1 01Â¤ 64 A E 2 5 O 84 8 2 63 g < > 50 4. --4 4 8.9 0 3 32. w COMPE E. 0 -O 0 Â¤ 2 . I U A d 8@ E d < 5 La EES'96't, (t'LS'*81) 0517'8917 SEL'I9 (Ezo'g) TV.LIdVO ERIO33Â£[ SERIALIGNE[dXE[ NE[AO 620'99Â£ It'L'9Â·17 ZEâ‚¬'800'I 986'969'Z SomNpugdxE[ ImIdeD lug,I.Inl tÂ«I 08'Â§ 9 1 I 'tls It;'8'â‚¬L#'9 80T'00L 01*'IZI'II SE[PIALIGNEIdXE[ 7[ViO.L *09'0â‚¬I$ (FIE'TEE (28'6â‚¬9$) (800'IOL'Z$) SERIA.LIGNE[dXE[ PIHAO ZF'Â§Â£17 9LE LZE 6IC< + 6 95*'56*'8 TOTAL REVENUE 642,80 FOR THE MONTHS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2002 & 2001 Charges for Services $572,27 SHANHAHN :IO (ADNHIDIEIFIG) SSHOXy Transfers Out SHANHAH}I :10 (ADNHIDLECD SSHDX3 Intergovernmental Miscellaneous ENDITURES In.IOUOD/UOBE.IlsTUIUI 10/15/2002 REVENUES Current