It's just the reverse of the slamming arrangement that 150 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 Councilman Rizzo spoke about.
I would like to know and I hope the gentleman from the PUC will be able to tell us. I'm very concerned that there may have been many deliberate efforts by PECO, you know, to prevent transfers away. I agree with you, Mr. Small, that not many people would have the persistence that you displayed, and you're to be commended for it. And we think that's very important information to have on the ordinary. And we thank you for it.
And the last thing I'd like to say again is, I know with my work with low-income is that they -- in other words, my clients, for instance, if they disagree with a decision that the State makes, they know to appeal, okay? But they don't always know that if they apply to PECO and they don't get the transfer, they'll just say, Oh, okay, well, maybe we can't do it then, okay? So I think that's -- and I'm not sure how, but I think some kind of special outreach 151 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 needs to be made that tells people, Okay, if it's three months or six months later and you haven't gotten the transfer, then you need to go to Public Utility Commission, and this is how you do that anyway. Anyway, thanks for letting me testify here today.
Well, I think that's a problem we have to deal with. And I thank you very much for bringing it to our attention. (Unidentified from audience comes forward).
Yes? The final witness, identify yourself for the record. The final new witness.
My name is Tim Carney. And I work with the Energy Cooperative. I just want the record to show that Alec Meltzer, who is home sick, provided written testimony for the committee, and it has been passed out Alec works 152 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 for the Pennsylvania Consumer Action Network, and they've submitted written testimony for today's hearing.
And we will ask that that testimony be made a part of the record. Thank you. The gentleman in the rear. (Gentleman in the comes forward.)
My name's Roy David. I live in Queen Village. I have a couple of questions as a consumer, and then I would like to make what I hope will be a contribution.
We don't know that answer. I would say it's approximately half a million, maybe more. (Tim Carney answers inaudible, off-mike.)
Well, you have to come up forward for the answer to get into the record.
This is Mr. Carney. 153 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 Yes?
In the PECO service territory, there is roughly 1.5 million residential, commercial, and industrial customers.
But we don't know what -- of what number, what is the number that is applicable to Philadelphia. And then the last number I will want will be the Philadelphia residential users, and we may get some of that information from the gentleman when he returns, the gentleman who was with Commissioner Brownell.
So my guess is there's probably a little bit higher than that in Philadelphia.
So my guess is, the electric customers in Philadelphia is a little bit higher than that.
As a consumer, I would like 154 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 to -- I've heard many -- much talk about simplification of the presentation of information.
As a consumer, I would like to be presented with this: Here is how much the average consumer pays. If I switch, I will save approximately how much. Just that. That's one suggestion. It would simplify it for me. The other is this: I just learned about this meeting, and I can't speak at length, but you probably won't want to hear anybody speak at length at this point. I have been working on a marketing plan for alternative energy companies. I've been working on it for sometime. And I would -- it's not quite complete. I hope it will be complete in the next couple of weeks. And if possible, I'd like to be able to contact you or any of the representatives from the energy companies to discuss this.
Well, I gave my address earlier. It's just City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Councilman David Cohen, Chairman of Law and Government Committee. My telephone number is 686-3446. 155 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 And if I'm not there, my staff will be there and will be able to take the message. And we'll do everything we can. I think if you talk to some of the folks here, you can get that information, but we'd like to facilitate any contact you'd like to have with any of the folks that have appeared here.
And we appreciate your coming and telling us that, and we may have a comment as to whether your suggestion for a simple explanation of the price, you know, of the savings, we'll see if the gentleman from Commissioner Brownell's office can answer that. You're not from Commissioner Brownell's, you're from the Commission, right?
And I think I suggested to Mr. Popowski that he might remain 156 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 also? Why don't you come forward, and we could have your final comments, the both of you. (Sonny Popowski comes forward.)
I'd like to ask you to start with the very last question. Is it possible to put the information together so it can answer that customer's simple question of how much will I likely save based on upon what I've been billed? I've always told people they could save roughly 10 percent. I've said that because I think it's accurate and also it's easy to estimate. If your bill is $45, then 10 percent of that would be $5.50 a month.
And if you have a graduate degree in mathematics, you multiply that by 12 and --
It is possible to do that. The question becomes, does the Public Utility Commission, as a regulatory body, get into 157 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 the pricing information business in a deregulated market? Historically, we have answered the question, no, we do not do that.
Well, since historically we're in a different mode of operation with respect to this phase, I would respectfully urge the Commission to reconsider because old -- you know, past decisions may not be applicable to this new situation. We've all agreed this is entirely different, we're not even sure where it's going to go. We hope it will benefit us. None of us apparently feel confident to be able to predict with certainty what new technologies will emerge. So let me just say that I think it would be good if the Commission, and I would ask if you'd be find kind enough to relay it to at least Commissioner Brownell and perhaps to other members of the Commission, I think they ought to review that question.
Respectfully, I just think it's a different situation. Mr. Popowski, I see you ready to get 158 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 into this. Go ahead.
Sure. I'm not a part of the Commission. We're independent of the Commission, and we can certainly advocate to the Commission those kind of ideas. Also, I'm a member of the Consumer Education Council. This is an issue that has come up where we've tried to figure out where to draw the line and what kind of information the Commission can put out as a public agency versus what kind of information comes out from the market itself. I lean to in favor of the kind of approach that you're taking; that is, the more information, the better. But as I said earlier, prices change and you do have to make sure that you get it right. And you don't want to be -- you don't want the Commission in the position of saying, Here's the price that you're going to pay and make a public statement to that effect, and then when a consumer goes --
Well, you can say "as of today," and that the price has changed.
Yeah. And that -- like I say, that's why I'm, you know attaching that 159 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 Inquirer article to my testimony. I think it's a great way to do it. But the way, the Inquirer article has the cents per kilowatt and it does talk about the average savings, as this gentleman requested. Again, average savings are different depending on whether you have an apartment or whether you have a big house, whether you have air-conditioning, whether you have electric heat. So that's not quite as simple. But the principle is something I think we have to discuss, which is, is there a several way to get information to all consumers where they can make a simple price comparison? I think it's worth pursuing.
Well, we think it's in good hands when we leave it in your hands to come up with an approach. And this committee would just like to be kept informed about that. The question about price changes can be used negatively. On the first occasion that I addressed the subject to the Council meeting, a fellow Councilmember got up immediately and said, "But don't be deceived by these stories of savings because the savings may be short-lived, 160 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 and prices may change very quickly." So it can be used in a negative way too, and I hope we can do it without creating that negative implication. It seemed to me the purpose of that statement was to support the notion of "stay where you are and don't change."
And the prices generally for residential customers are 12-month prices.
Right. What I was saying, when I said that prices changed, the price to that individual consumer will stay where it was set when they signed the contract.
And if it changes adversely, the consumer will be free to pick another company; isn't that right?
If that customer signs 161 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 up for months, they are guaranteed that rate for 12 months. And at the end of the 12 months, if the rate goes up, they can switch to somebody else. Again, I think that's one of the reasons I think there's very little risk involved, by the way, in switching because you can always switch back.
Any other 10 observations you have or any other matters that 11 either of you gentlemen would like to add before 12 we finish?
I would just say I think there are a lot of excellent ideas today. And I would like to work with you, and if the City wants to take this step, either through the Water Department, gas bills, tax bills, anywhere you want to put out information, I'd be happy to work with you to make sure that we get out the most accurate information possible. I think that's a great idea, and whatever we can do, I'd offer our services.
And, apparently, we 162 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 could, in our internal dealings with the Mayor's Office, we can say that the cost of the printed message will be borne by of PUC's Education Fund?
You can say that the Public Utility Commission's consultants will help you develop the material. I didn't say that we would pay for the cost of printing the documents for all the residents of Philadelphia. That's something I would have to take back to my commissioners.
And I'm not in a position to promise that, but I can certainly advocate that.
I understand that. Well, we'd like to advocate that. All right. Anything further? We want to thank everybody for their patience, everybody that's remained this time. And then I have one last question probably aim add you, sir, though. Mr. Popowski 163 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 may also be in a position to deal with it. At City Council today, we passed a resolution to investigate the proposals that we hear are being booted about to have the Philadelphia Gas Commission sort of dis-established and to have jurisdiction of the PGW transferred to the Public Utility Commission. We are very concerned in Philadelphia about that happening because we don't think that would be in the best interest of Philadelphia consumers. We had to note the partnership nature of the rumors. We don't know whether they're sound or not but we understand some groups met with the Majority Leader of the House, and they confirmed that there is serious thought being given to that proposal. Do either of you have any thoughts with respect to that? I raise it particularly since I've been advocating for some time now that PGW go back into the electric business because I think, first, that would help the environmental area; and, two, it might help PGW. And we never understood why after a first effort to get into the electric energy field, they withdrew. 164 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 Now, if either of you have any thought with respect to that matter, I would be very pleased to hear it.
I participated on behalf of the consumers of what are called the investor-owned utilities -- that's who our office represents -- during the process that led to the current draft of the legislation. The current draft of the legislation, as I understood it, would not include PGW. I have not taken a position on whether that should be amended, and I purposely haven't and I don't think I can because I don't represent the consumers of PGW. That's an issue that I think has to be decided by the General Assembly with input from the representatives of PGW. In other words, we were broken down basically into working groups. I was involved in the legislation that affected consumers of investor-owned utilities, that's who I represent. And I, therefore, have not taken and I don't think I can take a position.
I can understand that. 165 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 How about you, sir?
All I do is electric issues, Councilman, and haven't followed the gas legislation.
Yes, sir, in the back. Do you want to come forward? 'Cause the only response that can appear on the record is the response that comes through the microphone. If you just have this gentleman come forward and switch the microphone to him. (Steve Huntoon comes forward.)
Councilman, I'm Steve Huntoon. I previously testified. I'm with Connectiv Energy. We support the ability of PGW's 525,000 customers to be able to choose a competitive supplier in the same way in which we've supported the ability of the Commonwealth's 5.2 million electric customers' right to choose a supplier. 166 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 PGW's commercial rates are the third highest among the largest 50 gas utilities in the country. Their residential rates are the 13th out of the top 50 gas utilities in the country. And we support the ability to choose. We really do not -- are -- don't have an opinion about whether the Philadelphia Gas Commission should regulate PGW or whether the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission should regulate PGW, other than it's our understanding that so long as the Philadelphia Gas Commission is the regulatory body, it's unlikely that consumers would have the ability to cheese a competitive provider. And if that is the case, then it seems like the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's oversight would be the only way to give the 525,000 customers a choice.
All right, thank you. I'm just interested in the different points of view because we're beginning the discussions and debates. Actually, beginning at 3 o'clock this afternoon, there is a briefing going on by Councilwoman Tasco, who is one of the 167 5/27/99 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 990209 authors of the resolution that we adopted today on the question of PGW. We thank you all for attending. And the hearing will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. Thank you all very much. (Adjourned at 2:40 p.m.) - - - 168 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Thursday, May 27, 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON LAW & GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION NO. 990209 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter