Council puts power plant on ballot

Springfield City Council approved placing the $615 million bond issue on the June 6 ballot at its meeting Monday night by a vote of 7–1. Voters rejected a $515 million bond issue for a second plant in August 2004.

Debate about the proposed Southwest 2 plant has been ongoing and heated for some time. When council heard first reading on the bill March 6, community members spoke for and against the issue.

Some argue that CU should further explore alternative energy options and conservation methods, but CU officials say the area’s energy demand is best met with a second plant. Council member Mary Collette was responsible for the lone opposing vote last night, noting that the decision should have been made after a CU conservation study is completed in April. Collette also expressed regret that the proposal didn’t include a stronger conservation program.

“While this isn’t the time to express concern about coal or concerns about the environment, it is the time to speak about the timing of the request to the voters,” she said at the meeting. “While I support the voters’ being able to speak to this issue, I really felt like they should have been given the opportunity to have a larger conservation program in conjunction with this.”

Mayor Tom Carlson said during the discussion he felt it was council’s responsibility to give voters a chance to decide what they think is best for the community.

“Whatever we do, if the voters approve this, that's fine; if not, the utility needs to do something,” he said. “It would be the height of irresponsibility to just cross our fingers and hope that something drops out of the sky that will keep this community moving forward and fulfills the power needs of our community in the future."

CU officials have said the utility’s service area is growing at a rate of 20 to 25 megawatts per year. Southwest 2 would add 300 megawatts of energy to the 821 megawatts the company currently generates and the 161 megawatts it purchases from other utilities.

If approved, the cost of the new plant would cause electricity rates to increase by $9.63 for the typical CU residential customer beginning in October 2010. If the plant is rejected, CU would consider purchasing power from external sources. [[In-content Ad]]