At Council Member Alison Alter’s urging, city commission may have input on natural gas matters

Members of the city’s Resource Management Commission have been trying for months to find out how they can weigh in on the current rate case for Texas Gas Service. They have passed a number of resolutions seeking to have input – not only on the cost of natural gas to consumers, but also on prioritizing fixing methane leaks, which are hazardous to the environment. Members also wish to comment on the gas company’s energy conservation programs, which they find insufficient and not actually aimed at conservation.

The commission recently approved a resolution asking that City Council authorize changing the ordinance governing the commission’s operations so that it’s specifically tasked with commenting on rates as well as environmental questions related to Texas Gas Service’s operations. However, they have been working on the question for more than a year. Those ordinance changes must first go through the Council Audit & Finance Committee, which heard arguments about the changes on Tuesday. City staff has resisted involvement of the RMC in the rate setting process.

Council Member Alison Alter, who chairs the committee, made it clear Tuesday that she was not satisfied with city staff’s explanations about why they seemed to be refusing input from members of the RMC on Texas Gas Service.

“I want to take issue with the idea that the only concern we have here is lower rates,” she said at the end of that discussion. “We have a fundamental problem if our lawyers are going in there and only looking at rates.”

She asked staff to come up with a process by which members of the RMC can express their concerns, asking that they advise the RMC on what they can do to provide input at the next RMC meeting in August. Chief Financial Officer Ed Van Eenoo said staff would come up with some kind of process by that time, if not earlier.

Paul Robbins, an environmentalist and consumer advocate who serves as vice chair of the RMC, was a strong advocate for changing the ordinance so that citizens can weigh in on the gas company’s proposal. According to discussion at the committee meeting, the city has hired Thomas Brocato, an attorney who specializes in energy regulatory law.

Members of the committee heard arguments about who may comment and how those comments will be relayed to the parties. Regardless of who weighs in and what they say, Texas Gas Service spokesman Larry Graham reminded those present that if they fail to reach an agreement, the matter will be decided by the Texas Railroad Commission, which oversees the state’s oil and gas industry. Austin is one of a number of cities bundled together for purposes of the rate case. Graham noted that Austin is the biggest of those cities and has the most customers.

Graham told members of the committee the first settlement meeting is next week. He said he didn’t expect it to be done before October and the matter will probably end up at the Railroad Commission.

“My hope is that we will find a constructive way for members of the Resource Management Commission, and other Austin stakeholders, to weigh in on the current rate case and the future franchise decision for Texas Gas,” Alter told the Austin Monitor later on Tuesday. “Such an approach should comply with state law and encourage strong sustainability and safety standards.”

Diana Thomas, the city’s deputy chief financial officer, sent a memo to the committee on July 18, discouraging members from approving the RMC’s proposed amendments “due to their significant departure from the Commission’s established responsibilities and the regulatory framework governing such issues.”  She said at Tuesday’s meeting that she was especially concerned that meetings that included city lawyers and citizen advocates might jeopardize attorney-client privilege.

Robbins told the committee on Tuesday that he was blindsided by the memo, which the city did not send to him. He said he received it Monday night from a colleague. After receiving it, Robbins told the Monitor he spent hours writing a rebuttal. Part of his letter to Van Eenoo says, “If the City had problems with the proposal, it had ample time to advise against it prior to this late date. I specifically asked City Legal to review the proposal as early as April 26. There were numerous exchanges between the Legal Department’s staff and myself via e-mail. I also recall several phone conversations with them or the City Clerk’s office as well. Our Commission voted on these bylaw changes twice, at both our May and June meetings.

“Members of our Commission are keenly aware that we only have an advisory role and had no intention of taking over the City Council’s role of regulating the gas utilities in Austin. We only seek to advise Council. There is nothing in the proposed wording that states otherwise, and it is inaccurate for you to imply otherwise.”

The commission wants to advise City Council on natural gas utility matters, “including: fair and equitable rates and bills that minimize consumer costs, cost-effective energy efficiency programs; cost-effective renewable energy programs; research and development of new technologies for energy efficiency and renewable energy; programs that reduce the burden on low-income households; gas utility progress on the City of Austin’s Climate Equity Plan; and renewal of franchises with natural gas utilities that improve the City’s financial position and align with the City’s community values.”

Photo made available through a Creative Commons license.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.