Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-23 - AGENDA REPORTS - PUBLIC UTILITIES CMSM (2)O Agenda Item: 6 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT CONSENT CALENDAR CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: 41 DATE: January 23, 2018 SUBJECT: CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION RESOLUTION: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office PRESENTER: Masis Hagobian RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council oppose the proposed California Public Utilities Commission Resolution G-3536, related to imposing a moratorium on Southern California Gas Company, and transmit position statements to the California Public Utilities Commission and Santa Clarita's state legislative delegation. BACKGROUND On December 15, 2017, the Energy Division of the California Public Utilities Commission issued a recommendation for the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to order Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) to implement an emergency moratorium on new commercial and industrial natural gas service connections in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. At the regular meeting on January 9, 2018, Mayor Pro Tem Marsha McLean requested that the City of Santa Clarita (City) generate a letter addressing the concerns and effect of the proposed moratorium. Draft Resolution G-3536 originally orders the emergency moratorium to be implemented from January 11, 2018, until further Commission action or March 31, 2018, whichever is earlier. The CPUC was initially going to review the proposed moratorium on January 11, 2018; however, the item was postponed to February 8, 2018. The proposed resolution describes that the moratorium is designed to enhance natural gas reliability to existing customers during the winter heating season, in an effort to preserve public health and safety. The proposed resolution also references three recent outages of natural gas pipelines, which has raised significant concerns SoCalGas will be unable to meet natural gas demand during peak winter conditions in 2018. Page 1 Packet Pg. 36 O The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation examined the potential economic implications of the proposed moratorium. The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation estimates 5,160 fewer total jobs would be created in Los Angeles County. Additionally, the report estimates $879.5 million lost in future economic output, $323.9 million lost in future labor earnings, and $119.7 million lost in future federal, state and local tax revenues, of which $5.8 million will be lost in tax revenues to local cities. The proposed moratorium would not impact any City projects; however, the resolution would affect a new local health center in Newhall. The Northeast Valley Health Corporation, a primary health care provider to medically underserved residents, is scheduled to open its third health center in the Santa Clarita Valley in February 2018. However, if the proposed moratorium is approved by the CPUC prior to the opening of the health center, the Northeast Valley Health Corporation will not be able to access natural gas until the moratorium is lifted by CPUC or March 31, 2018. Should the moratorium be extended for the rest of the year, the new Patient Tower at Henry Mayo Hospital could be impacted. The proposed moratorium also applies to new industrial and commercial connections in existing buildings. Therefore, a new tenant in an existing facility would also be unable to access natural gas during the moratorium period. Senator Scott Wilk, Assembly Member Dante Acosta, and Supervisor Kathryn Barger have sent letters to the CPUC in opposition of the proposed moratorium. Additionally, the Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce and Santa Clarita Valley Economic Development Corporation have been actively working to oppose the proposed moratorium. ALTERNATIVE ACTION 1. Adopt a "neutral" position on the CPUC proposed moratorium 2. Adopt a "support" position on the CPUC proposed moratorium 3. Take no action on the CPUC proposed moratorium 4. Refer the CPUC proposed moratorium to the Legislative Committee 5. Other action, as determined by the City Council FISCAL IMPACT Approval of the recommended action requires no additional resources beyond those already contained within the adopted FY 17/18 budget. Page 2 Packet Pg. 37