TOO LATE? Group wants to get members' opposing ballots; utility says those won't count.
PALMER -- Matanuska Electric Association is asking its members to help select the sites for two new power plants, one coal-fired, the other gas-fired, but anti-coal groups say MEA should be asking whether, not where, that plant should be built.
"They're sort of asking for window dressing after the main event has passed," Utility Watch president Jim Sykes said Tuesday.
Sykes is asking MEA members who oppose the cooperative's plans to send their ballots to a Utility Watch post office box rather than to MEA. So far, he said, nearly 200 ballots have come in.
Opposition so far focuses on plans for a coal-fired plant, with little said about the proposed natural-gas-burning facility. Those against coal say it constitutes a step backward and would create a health hazard by releasing mercury and other emissions.
It's too late to toss aside plans to build a coal plant, MEA board member David Dahms said Thursday.
The utility generates no power of its own, instead contracting for it with Chugach Electric Association. The board of directors agreed MEA should generate its own power after the Chugach contract expires in 2014. The board unanimously last fall adopted an Integrated Resource Plan that recommends a 100-megawatt, fluidized-bed coal plant and a 100-megawatt natural-gas plant as the best power options. MEA officials plan to have the coal plant online by 2015.
"We have to move forward," Dahms said. "Now is the time. It takes seven years to get these plants on line and our contract is running out. We're going to listen politely to all our members but, as a board member, my responsibility is to make sure that ... we have a switch to throw, and that it provides all the power we project we're going to need."
MEA mailed 41,720 ballots last month, asking members to rank by June 6 five potential spots for the generation plants.
Two sites are in gravel pits south of Palmer, one is at a gravel pit near Mile 48 Parks Highway, one on land north of Blodgett Lake near Mile 50 Parks Highway and one on Miller's Reach Road in Houston.
More than 4,600 ballots had been returned by Tuesday, said MEA spokesman Tuckerman Babcock. He estimated the tally might exceed 6,000 by the Wednesday deadline.
Sykes said his group would count the ballots it receives and read the messages sent with them while a video camera is rolling. Utility Watch plans a presentation to the MEA board about the anti-coal vote.
Those ballots won't count for much at MEA. MEA spokeswoman Lorali Carter said the ballots are null if they aren't treated with the same scrutiny as ballots received by MEA.
MEA checks the signature on each ballot envelope against a signature on file for that member, she said.
Utility Watch can't do that and therefore can't guard against a few people stuffing the ballot box. A few minutes of digging through trash at the post office could net a few hundred ballots, she said.
"People who are sending their ballots in to Utility Watch are certainly wasting their vote," Carter said.
So are people who send in improperly marked ballots, she said, such as selecting no sites or indicating all sites unacceptable. People who scrawl "No coal" or other comments on their ballots needn't bother, she said.
"We're not going to section out each ballot that may have writing on it," Carter said.
Sykes said he knows those ballots won't be counted at MEA. People who don't want a coal plant aren't being heard there anyway, he said.
"People are free, of course, to do whatever they think is best," he said. "What we promised we will do is give people a voice, whatever they have to say, through the Web site and through their ballots."
Babcock said the best plan for folks who want to comment on the plan is to include a letter with their ballot or send MEA a separate letter or e-mail.
"We give every individual opinion weight," Babcock said.
Many MEA members have strong feelings about the coal plant, he said. Even so, changing course on future generation plans is unlikely. MEA hired contractor CH2M Hill to review future generating possibilities and chose a combination of coal and natural gas, he said
"Even if the decision was 60/40 (40 percent of MEA members against building a coal plant), do we then cancel the coal plant, which we technologically know is the best in terms of cost and reliability, because a solid minority doesn't like it?" Babcock asked. "We are cataloging every opinion our members have. We have not yet heard anything that would allow us to change our mind."
Daily News reporter Rindi White can be reached at rwhite@adn.com or 352-6709.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Know more: Review Matanuska Electric Association's generation plans or send an e-mail through the Web site, www.matanuska.com.
Find out more about Utility Watch and how to mail an advisory vote ballot to them at www.utilitywatch.org.
