Document Actions
Tues.: Sloganeering
posted at 2009-04-14 21:38 | Last modified 2009-04-15 14:28
“Alcoa can’t wait!”
…for FERC’s ruling on the disposition of its Yadkin River license – especially after today’s unanimous Senate J2 vote to set up a trust to take over the aluminum company’s hydroelectric dams.
No, S967 does not give Alcoa’s dams back to NC. It just sets up an independent trust to manage hydropower generation if FERC decides to let NC “recapture” the Yadkin River license.
I can’t really do justice to the whole story here, but here’s a “Cliff’s Notes” version:
- Back in 1958, the state supported Alcoa’s request for an exclusive license to generate power on the Yadkin. The deal was intended to support the 900 or so smelting jobs the aluminum company provided to the region.
- 50 years later, the license has expired, and the smelting jobs are gone. Alcoa now uses its operation only to generate and sell hydropower. The revenues support the company’s operations elsewhere. In light of that, the state says Alcoa’s deal is no longer in the public interest, and it wants its license back. The Trust set up by S967 would have the authority to issue bonds to buy back the dams and property from Alcoa.
- Many locals think the state should take back the license. They have a long list of grievances with Alcoa, including sudden water level changes that kill fish and beach boats, and pollution and other environmental issues (like dissolved oxygen) they say the company has been slow to remediate. They also accuse the company of failing to maintain the dams, exacerbating the problems. Others are opposed, citing concerns about steep drops in county tax revenue if the state takes over the properties.
- Alcoa’s NC manager Gene Ellis says his company’s been a good corporate citizen. He says they haven’t invested in new equipment because they aren’t sure how FERC will rule, but he says the company is committed to maintaining the plants if they win the license again. He says NC’s “unprecedented” move to recapture the license sends a bad message about the state’s business climate, comparing it to Hugo Chavez’s nationalization of an Alcoa plant in Venezuela.
Alcoa says the dams don’t generate much profit – just $8M/yr, according to lobbyist (and former lawmaker) Chuck Neely. If you believe that number, then putting any money into the project would be a poor investment. But when I asked Ellis why he doesn’t want to take the state’s offer, he only said Alcoa’s “not a willing seller.” Sponsor Sen. Fletcher Hartsell (R-Cabarrus) thinks the profits are closer to $40M than $8M. And as he put it in J2, “Why are they fighting so hard to keep it if it’s expensive and losing money?”
Ellis says the only thing holding up FERC’s deicison is a state water quality test that has to be submitted by May 7th. A ruling is likely by mid-May. In the meantime, S967 is headed for more fun in Senate Finance. I’ll keep you posted.
"Get ‘loughed"
Can't you just see the ad campaign now? H1172, approved today by House State Government/State Personnel, would allow state agencies, universities, et al to offer employees voluntary furloughs as a cost-saving measure. “Essential” employees could take 10 days, while “non-essential” workers could take up to 30 days. (If the state can live without a "non-essential" employee for six extra weeks a year on top of vacation and holidays, what are the odds we could do without him/her entirely? Just sayin'.)
Committee members waxed enthusiastic about the bill, some predicting a veritable stampede of workers seeking unpaid time off. (Forgive my skepticism, but that seems unlikely in the current economic environment.) There’s also the question of how “voluntary” these furloughs may be. Still, lawmakers seem ready to grasp at any cost-cutting straw these days: it got a unanimous sendoff to House Approps.
Comments? Drop me a line.
