Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.

"I was told there are going to be hecklers," said one man to the other. "That's okay," replied the other. "I can handle it."

This exchange, overheard just prior to the start of this morning's Portland Business Alliance forum on the potential effects of forming a People's Utility District in Multnomah County, essentially (if somewhat over-simply) illustrates just how confident are opponents of the ballot measures facing voters this November 4.

Save for criticizing the lack of up-front disclosure on the part of the anti-PUD so-called "citizens" group that they are funded mainly by Portland General Electric and Pacific Power (about which I'll have more in another item), I've written precious little here about the PUD debate.

The issues involved can be (or at least can appear to be) somewhat arcane and complex, and so I've shied away from taking a stab at them. Therein lies part of the problem.

While it would be fair to say that I tend to lean, philosophically, toward public power, I'm not convinced that we have had the level, or the depth, of public discussion required by the possibility of forming a PUD in Mulnomah County -- nor do I think it likely that we can have such in the three weeks remaining until the election.

That said, and as mentioned in today's Oregonian, there were three PUD-related events scheduled today, and I hit two of them in preparation for trying to take a stab at the issue.

One of the densest difficulties of the PUD debate is that the arguments of the opposing sides are so at odds with each others, based on so much contradictory information, that it's not easy to separate fact from fiction. I'm not going to pretend that problem will be solved with this post, but some of the disputes should at least be clearer, and perhaps a question or two at least a little further down the road toward being answered.

Speaking at this morning's Portland Business Alliance event were Brian Gard, of Gard & Gerber (the PR firm which has counted PGE among its major clients, and which is the force behind the fake "citizens" front group); Don Frisbee, former CEO and Chairman of PacifiCorp (which does business in Oregon as Pacific Power); and Lee Beyer, Chairman of the Oregon Public Utility Commission.

For the most part, neither Gard nor Frisbee pitched anything that isn't covered in the literature that's been generated by the "citizens" front group. What was most intriguing were the comments by Beyer.

"In the election," said Beyer in his opening, "the Public Utility Commission and the State of Oregon does not have a position -- and should not have a position." That statement, however, should not be taken to mean that what he had to say would give much comfort to supporters of a People's Utility District.

As was repeatedly pointed out by Beyer, the Oregon Public Utility Commission "works for the customers" -- the customers, that is, of privately-owned (otherwise known in the business as "independently operated") utilities. And, despite the PUC's technical neutrality on the PUD issue, that has (or clearly would have, under Beyer's leadership) potentially damaging consequences for a People's Utility District.

If formed, Beyer said, a PUD would have two basic tasks it would need to accomplish at the outset: Obtain the poles, wires, and structures necessary to deliver electricity; and obtain or generate electricity to deliver. And the role of the Public Utility Commission would depend upon just how the proposed PUD went about these tasks.

Here, Beyer reiterated and deepened an earlier point: "If voters choose to create a People's Utiltiy District, at that point the Public Utility Commission no longer would represent Mutnomah County residents." At that point, the PUC "will protect the remaining private ratepayers."

How, in theory at least, does this play out in terms of real-world impact upon the People's Utility District? If, for example, the PUD attempted to use condemnation proceedings to acquire the poles, wires, and structures needed to deliver electricity, the PUC would intervene in those proceedings on the side of the private utility in possession of those assets, under the charge that the PUC has a responsibility to obtain, on behalf of that private utility's ratepayers, a "market rate" for those assets.

So the PUD would be facing not only the private utility or utilities themselves, but the Oregon Public Utility Commission as well.

On the energy production side, Beyer said it was even more complex, asserting that a PUD "can't condemn thermal assets under current State law." When you hear "thermal assets" think of the means of generating electricty, which the PUD would require in order to avoid having to purchase all of its electricity from elsewhere.

And here is one of the first points of contention I encountered today. Later in the morning, the Oregon Public Power Coalition, which has been spearheading the PUD campaign, held a news conference and a series of informational sessions in Pioneer Courthouse Square.

At this event, I asked William D. Michtom, one of the chief petitioners for the PUD measures on the ballot, about Beyer's assertion that the proposed PUD would not be able to use condemnation proceedings to acquire the so-called thermal assets.

According to Michtom, Beyer was referring to ORS 261, the part of State law which governs People's Utility Districts. But, said Michtom, under Article XI, Section 12 of the Oregon Constitution, PUDs have the right to exercise the power of eminent domain.

A clear conflict of opinion on the legal authority and power of People's Utility Districts here. Perhaps one of the lawyers out there can weigh in on this one.

A less obscure conflict arises on the matter of propery taxes. PUD opponents argue consistently that formation of a PUD in Multnomah County would lead to new property taxes. "This new layer of government is already asking for new property taxes," states opponents' literature (pdf). "According to Multnomah County, a yes vote may cause property taxes to increase more than 3 percent."

Now, someone with a better understanding of mathematics will have to tell me whether or not that 3 percent figure makes any sense. But here's how the measure authorizing a special levy would work: If passed, the PUD would institute a one-time fee of "$.003 per $1000 assessed value" -- that's thirty cents for property assessed at $100,000. Expressed in this fashion, it's difficult to see the use of the "3 percent" figure to be little other than anti-PUD scare tactics.

In truth, a PUD does also have the authority to ask for further taxes. But any such request must be approved by the voters themselves -- the PUD cannot by law simply impose any taxes on its own.

PUD opponents also argue that a People's Utility District would result in higher rates. Now, it's certainly true that if private utilities, aided by the Public Utility Commission, block the use by the PUD of condemnation or eminent domain, or intervene to demand "market rate" for assets, the PUD would be stuck in a bind of having to build infrastructre and buy energy, which could indeed affect rates.

But for the sake of a greater context, examine this chart of electricity rates of People's Utility Districts versus independently-operated, privately-owned utilities -- PUD rates tend to range anywhere from less than half to just slightly under those of IOUs (independently-operated utilities).

And this is just a sampling of the myriad points of contention between the opposing camps, who are firmly locked into a very financially-lopsided fight over the PUD debate.

In a more perfect world, we'd have been debating all of this at a high and public level for at least a good six months. As it is, the real debate is only just now kicking in, and we have barely three weeks to go before the actual vote.

We've all got a lot of catching up to do. But I hope that Multnomah County voters at least make the effort to look closely at the opposing arguments, and not just take the bait from either side. Certainly, given how deeply those connected to the private utilities have dug into their pockets to out-spend PUD supporters (and as I said, I'll have more on this in another item), at this point it's all up to the people themselves -- with any luck given some assistance from the local media -- to give themselves a crash course on the issues involved.

This entry was posted by The One True b!X on October 15th, 2003, at 11:00 PM and is filed under Design & Development, Metro-Area Politics. There are and .