Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2013.10.21 - 36760CHRISTINE LONG Chairperson KATHY CRAWFORD Vice Chairperson MARCIA GERSHENSON Minority Vice Chairperson October 21, 2013 Chairperson Long called the meeting of the General Government Committee to order at 9:33 a.m. in the Commissioners’ Committee Room A, County Service Center in Pontiac, Michigan. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Christine Long, Kathy Crawford, Marcia Gershenson, Bob Gosselin, Jeff Matis, Bob Hoffman, Mattie Hatchett, Nancy Quarles. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT WITH NOTICE: Michael Spisz. OTHERS PRESENT: HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES George Miller, Director MICHIGAN STOP SMART METERS David Sheldon OTHERS Lillian Cusumano Dominic Cusumano John Holton Pauline Holton David Lonier Richard Meltzer Jennifer Conan BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Jim Runestad, District #6 Jim Ver Ploeg, Administrative Director Sheryl Mitchell, Sr. Analyst Helen Hanger, Sr. Committee Coordinator PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairperson Long led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF THE PREVIOUS MINUTES Gosselin moved approval of the minutes of October 7, 2013 as printed. Supported by Quarles. Motion carried on a voice vote. OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1200 N. TELEGRAPH ROAD, BLDG 12E, PONTIAC, MI 48341-0475 Telephone (248) 858-0100 FAX (248) 858-1572 GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Bob Gosselin Jeff Matis Bob Hoffman Michael Spisz Mattie Hatchett Nancy Quarles GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Page 2 October 21, 2013 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Gosselin moved approval of the agenda as printed. Supported by Hoffman. Motion carried on a voice vote. PUBLIC COMMENT The following individuals spoke regarding their concerns regarding the SMART Meters affecting public health, the cost of opting out of the program and privacy issues: David Lonier, David Sheldon, Pauline Holton, Richard Meltzer, John Holton Jennifer Conan and David Cus umano. REGULAR AGENDA 1. MR #13229 – BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS – OPPOSITION TO FEES APPROVED BY THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION FOR CUSTOMERS WHO WISH TO OPT-OUT OF THE SMART METER OR ADVANCED METERING INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS The resolution was introduced by Commissioner s Quarles and Runestad to express opposition to the opt-out fees approved for DTE’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure in Michigan as unfair and excessive. In reference to proposed amendments that were mailed to committee members as part of the agenda packet, Commissioner Matis explained that he felt the resolution contained factual inaccuracies and if the commission was going to move forward with the resolution he did not want it to contain errors that could be used in Lansing as a reason for it to be attacked. The commission should pass something it feels c omfortable with in relation to the opt-out fees. The amendments would also tie in MR #12134, passed by the Commission in 2012 and relating to the same topic. Several of the inaccuracies include timing of the program, education efforts and fee costs. Quarles moved to report to recommend approval of the attached suggested resolution. Supported by Matis. Matis moved to report to amend the resolution as follows. MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #13229 BY: Commissioners Nancy Quarles, District #17; Jim Runestad, District #6 RE: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS – OPPOSITION TO FEES APPROVED BY THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSION FOR CUSTOMERS WHO WISH TO OPT-OUT OF THE SMART METER OR ADVANCED METERING INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS To theThe Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS the Oakland County Board of Commissioners unanimously adopted Miscellaneous Resolution #12134 on June 21, 2012 calling for fair treatment and no economic penalty for electricity customers who choose not to participate in t he smart meter program; and WHEREAS numerous other local unitssince the adoption of government in MR12134, Oakland County residents have passed resolutions expressing voiced their concerns relative to smart meters or AMI devices being installed without pri or notification; and caution in the WHEREAS since the adoption of MR12134, Oakland County residents have voiced their concerns relative to their perception regarding the level of information being provided by the installers regarding the process to opt-out of the installation of smart meters; and WHEREAS since the Michigan Attorney General has provided extensive evidence that questions adoption of MR12134, Oakland County residents have voiced their concerns relative to the economic soundness of one- Formatted: Tab stops: Not at 0.38" Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Widow/Orphan control Formatted: Font: Bold GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Page 3 October 21, 2013 time fees being assessed for opting-out of the smart meter program and excessive level ofinstallation as well as the opt out feeson-going fee for opting-out; and WHEREAS the Michigan Public Service Commission ignored these concerns that have been expressed throughout the state and has approved the implementation of smart meters or AMI devices in Michigan and the associated fees penalizingfor customers who choose not to haveopt-out of the installation of a smart meter installed on their property for in the form of a one- time fee of $123.91 after smart meter that is either pre-installation or $69.39 before post-installation and, in conjunction with a monthly charge of $9.72for outing- out in perpetuity; and WHEREAS complaints are already being heard about the smart meters or AMI devices being installed without notification or information to the customer of their rights to opt out; and WHEREAS adding to the unfairness of the approved fee structure are the increased electricity rates that customers who choose to opt ou t will be paying that will be used to pay for the installation and operation of meters they will not be using; and WHEREASthe Michigan Public Service Commission, when establishing the opt -out fees, provided no provision has been made for low income customers who want to opt out of the smart meter installation but who cannot afford thesethe additional fees ; and. WHEREAS the report issued by the staff of the MPSC does not meet the standard of a significant investigation into the health and privacy concerns of residents; and WHEREAS during the comment period while MPSC was studying the smart meter issue 84% of comments received indicated customers would opt out or deny the installation of smart meters on their property; and WHEREAS electricity providers in Oakland County have not undertaken any major effort to explain the safety or necessity of these meters; and WHEREAS electricity providers are beginning the process of notifying residents of their intent to begin the smart meter program in this region without u ndertaking an effort at public education or giving customers adequate information about their rights not to participate; and WHEREAS the MPSC report cites the importance of public education in the success of this type of program, quoting the Maryland Public Services Commission “The negative experiences in other states illustrate vividly that poor customer education will magnify small -scale problems and create disproportionate customer skepticism and unhappiness.”; and WHEREAS Article VII, Section 15 of the Michigan Constitution states “Any county, when authorized by its Board of Supervisors, shall have the authority to enter or to intervene in any action or certificate proceeding involving the services, charges or rates of any privately owned public utility furnishing services or commodities to rate payers within the county”. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners hereby expresses its oppositionconcern relative to the current opt-out fees approved by the Michigan Public Services Commission for Advanced Metering Infrastructure in Michigan as unfair and excessive. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners requests electric utility providers to cease current efforts to install smart meters in Oaklan d County until such time as a thorough public education/awareness campaign is undertaken in the County to advise residents of their rights and protections for their health and safety. that the Michigan Public Services Commission reassess its current position relative to smart meter opt -out provisions, the fees associated with opting - out and the ability for consumers to keep their current analog meters. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners encourage Michigan’s Attorney General to continue his appeals on behalf of consumers for a sensible and fair approach to the introduction of this new technology. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Clerk/Register of Deeds is requested to forward copies of this adopted resolution to Governor Rick Snyder, the Oakland County delegation to the Michigan Legislature, the Michigan Association of Counties; Attorney General Bill Schuette; the Michigan Public Services Commission; Consumers Power; Detroit Edison and the Oakland County legis lative lobbyists. Chairperson, I move the adoption of the foregoing Resolution. Supported by Crawford. Gershenson moved to report a s a secondary amendment to strike the 7th WHEREAS as follows. WHEREAS no provision has been made for low income custom ers who cannot afford these Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Left Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Body Text, Left, Indent: Left: 0.5", Tab stops: -0.04", Left GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Page 4 October 21, 2013 additional fees; and Supported by Quarles. Motion on the secondary amendment carried on a voice vote. Motion to amend carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Spisz absent. Main motion on the resolution as amended car ried unanimously on a roll call vote with Spisz absent. 2. MR #13252 – BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS – AMENDMENT TO THE BOARD RULES PERTAINING TO BRING MATTERS BEFORE THE BOARD The resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gingell to amend the 2013/2014 Board R ules to insert into Section XII – Procedure to Bring Matters Before the Board a subsection G – Non-Binding Resolutions. Subsection G would require that all resolutions introduced and addressed by the Board must pertain directly to Oakland County governmen tal expenditures and/or policies over which the Commission has oversight, including those which indicate support or opposition to specific state or federal legislation. Upon its introduction any resolution may be challenged to be found outside these guide lines by any member of the commission through an objection. The resolution’s sponsor shall than have the right to explain how the resolution complies with the rules . A majority vote of the Board would be required to sustain the objection to the resolution’s introduction. The Board Chairperson may grant an exception to the rule for resolutions recognizing a time period or activity not political in nature and supported by both the majority and minority caucuses. Commissioner Matis explained that the res olution was introduced as a matter of fiscal responsibility relative to the job of the county commission, to not spend tax payer dollars on time and effort on issues that do not impact county government. Discussion ensued regarding fiscal responsibility, a commissioner’s individual rights to sponsor a resolution that may be important to or affect their specific district and its residents and keeping the lines of communication open with constituents by assisting or intervening on their behalf and encouraging them to participate in the government process. Commissioner Gershenson suggested creating a study group to further consider the proposed resolution. Commissioner Matis noted that members of the public present at today’s meeting did not have a copy of the resolution so he reviewed the proposed language. He stated that MR #12134 on Smart Meters was adopted in June 2012 and was sent to Lansing but had no effect on legislation that was introduced on the topic and never came out of committee. He noted tha t there appeared to be interest in exploring the matter of non -binding resolutions further and coming up with a way to try and reduce the amount of time and money spent on these resolutions. Chairperson Long indicated that non-binding resolutions have been an issue for at least as long as she has been a commissioner . Many in the Republican Caucus asked for this resolution to be introduced to address the matter and she recognized Board Chairperson Gingell for doing so . She noted that there currently exists in the Board Rules an avenue to object to the Board Chair’s referral of a newly introduced resolution to a committee. She stated that she would like to at least see a requirement that non-binding resolutions of a political nature not be allowed to be int roduced 3 to 4 months prior to an election. GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE Page 5 October 21, 2013 Commissioner Hatchett indicated that she would like to see more resolutions sent to the Michigan Association of Counties (MAC) because MAC lobbies on behalf of the county. Non-binding resolutions on domestic violence, mental health issues are needed. She and several other commissioners were looking at introducing a resolution on human trafficking and she believes that the commission should take a stand on that issue. She stated that she would like to see a study group consisting of both caucuses established to come up with a better way to deal with the issue. Commission Hoffman supported further discussion on the matter and stated that he believed the commission should use every avenue available to influence the legislature. Commissioners Quarles and Gosselin stated that when serving as state legislators they wanted input from their local and county governments and other groups on their position relative to proposed legislation. The County Commission is a sounding board for the state and federal levels and when addressing this proposal it should be considered how many other counties use resolutions for these purposes. Matis moved to report to recommend that the Board Chair , in consultation with both caucuses, appoint a Study Group representative of both parties to review this proposal and report its recommendations to the General Government Committee. Supported by Crawford. Motion carried on a voice vote. COMMUNICATIONS None. OTHER BUSINESS/ADJOURNMENT The committee was advised that applications for the Building Authority were being accepted through October 24, 2013. The Committee directed that interviews be scheduled on November 4 for all applicants. There being no other business to come before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:47 a.m. ______________________________ ________________________________ Helen A. Hanger Jim Ver Ploeg Sr. Committee Coordinator Administrative Director NOTE: The foregoing minutes are subject to Committee approval.