HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-2010-3266 suspending CenterPoint Energy’s utility rate increase for ninety (90) days
9
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Agenda Date Requested: July 26, 2010
Appropriation
Requested By: Ron Bottoms
Source of Funds:
Department: Adminstration
Acc't Number:
Rep0l1: _Resolution: _Ordinance: _X_
Amount Budgeted:
Exhibits:
Notice of CenterPoint rate increase
Amount Requested:
Exhibits:
Rate Suspension Ordinance
Bud!!eted Item:
YES
NO
Exhibits:
SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION
Attached is CenterPoint Energy's notice of intent to change electric rates effective August 6, 2010.
No action on the palt of Council will allow the rates to go into effect. However, if Council chooses
attached is an ordinance suspending the rate increase for ninety (90) days.
CenterPoint's rate adjustment would increase residential electric rates by approximately $5.50 per
month. CenterPoint seeks electric rate increases totaling $94 million per year. The proposed rate
change also calls for annual rate adjustments, which, for all intents and purposes, voids the City's
original jurisdiction oversight.
I met with representatives of the City of Houston, along with their legal counsel, who are
encouraging the City of La POIte to join them in challenging this rate increase. The City of Houston
has agreed to bear all the costs of the proceedings.
Action Required bv Council:
roving an ordinance suspending CenterPoint Energy's rate increase for ninety (90) days.
:zd?~
Hate
La Porte, Texas Ordinance No. 2010- 3:2l.P &
AN ORDINANCE RELA TIN(; TO THE RETAIL ELECTRIC RATES OF
CENTERPOINT ENERGY HOllSTON ELECTRIC, LLC WITHIN THE CITY OF LA
PORTE, TEXAS; SUSPENDING FOR NINETY DAYS THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
NEW RATES; CONTAINING FINDINGS AND OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO
THE FOREGOING SUBJECT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;AND DECLARING
AN EMERGENCY.
*
*
*
*
*
*
WHEREAS,
on June 30, 20 I 0, Centerpoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC
("CenterPoint Electric") tiled a Statement of Intent and Application for Authority to Change
Rates ("New Rates") within the City of La Porte ("City") seeking electric rate increases totaling
$94 million per year; and
WHEREAS, the New Rates would affect rates, operations or services of CenterPoint
Electric for retail customers within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City, as a local regulatory authority, exercises original jurisdiction over
the rates, operations and services of CenterPoint Electric for customers located within the City
under the provisions of the Public Utility Regulatory Act ("PURA "); and
WHEREAS, PURA Section 33.021 requires a local regulatory authority to make a
reasonable determination of rate base, expenses, investment and rate of return, and to retain the
necessary personnel to determine reasonable rates; and
WHEREAS, PURA. Section 36.102 provides that the New Rates take effect on the 35th
day after the local tiling, unless the local regulatory authority suspends the effective date of the
New Rates; and
WHEREAS, PURA further provides that a local regulatory authority may suspend the
operation of the New Rates for ninety days beyond August 6, 20 I 0, the date the New Rates
would otherwise be etfective (the "Suspension Period"); and
WHEREAS, PURA further provides that unless the local regulatory authority establishes
interim rates, the rates in etlect at the time the New Rates are tiled remain in etlect during the
Suspension Period; and
WHEREAS, in order to maX1l11lze the etticient use of resources and expertise 111
reviewing, analyzing and investigating CenterPoint Electric's $94 million annual rate increase
request, the City's efforts will be coordinated with similarly situated municipalities through the
Coalition of Cities ("Coalition"); and
WHEREAS, during the Suspension Period, the City, either independently or through
consultants retained through the Coalition, will perform an analysis of the New Rates, obtain
additional information from CenterPoint Electric, and prepare a rate ordinance recommendation
to City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City will provide an opportunity for public comment on the su~iect of
the New Rates as well as customer service concerns; and
WHEREAS, the rate ordinance recommendation to City Council will incorporate the
public comment and concerns received; and
WHEREAS, the rate analysis and public comment period will extend beyond August 6,
2010, the date the New Rates would otherwise be effective; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it IS 111 the best interests of the
CenterPoint Electric utility ratepayers within the City of La Porte, Texas to allow t()J" coordinated
2
rate analysis and public comment by suspending the New Rates for ninety days beyond August
6, 20 I 0, the date the New Rates would otherwise be effective; and
WHEREAS, the City has standing in each case before the Public Utility Commission of
Texas ("PUC") that relates to an electric utility providing service within the City pursuant to
PURA Section 33.025; NOW, THERERFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY
COlJNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS:
Section 1. That the facts contained in the preamble of this Ordinance are determined to
be true and correct and are hereby adopted as part of this Ordinance.
Section 2. To allow for coordinated rate analysis and public comment, the etTective date
of the New Rates filed with the City by CenterPoint Electric on August 6, 20 I 0, is hereby
suspended tor ninety days beyond August 6, 2010, the date the New Rates would otherwise be
eftective, to November 4, 20 I O.
Section 3. The rates in eftect as of June 30. 20 10, the tiling date, shall remain in effect
until the earlier of the expiration of the Suspension Period or the adoption of a replacement rate
ordinance by this Council.
Section 4. The City may participate with other Cities through the Coalition to intervene
and participate in all proceedings related to or aftecting CenterPoint Electric's rates within the
City at the PUC until the tinal resolution of the New Rates.
Section 5. The City Council ofticially tinds. determines. recites and declares that a
sutlicient written notice of the date. hour. place and subject of this meeting of the City Council
was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City of La Porte, Texas tor
the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Chapter
551, Texas Government Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by
3
law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed,
considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms
such written notice and the contents and posting thereof.
Section 6. There exists a public emergency requiring that the Ordinance be passed
finally on the date of its introduction as requested in writing by the Mayor; therefore, this
Ordinance shall be passed finally on such date and shall take effect immediately upon its passage
and approval by the Mayor.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 26th day of July, 2010
:12i~)~~"A~_J
Daryl L lard,
Mayor ro-Tem
ATTEST:
~~~<f
City Secretary
_7~A~
4
. CenterPointTM
Energy
P.O. Box 210
Baytown. TX 77522
June 30, 2010
Honorable Mayor and City Officials
City of La Porte
La Porte, Texas 77571
Subject: Notice of CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC Filing to Change Rates
CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC ("CenterPoint Houston"), in accordance with
the Public Utility Regulatory Act, hereby provides its statement of intent to change rates
effective August 6, 2010. Enclosed is a CD containing the entire rate case filing package. For
your convenience, a hard copy of the statement of intent and application has been provided as an
attachment.
CenterPoint Houston is required to file the rate adjustment application to comply with a
Public Utility Commission of Texas ("PUCT") Order issued in CenterPoint Houston's last rate
review proceeding. That Order requires CenterPoint Houston to file a rate request change by
June 30, 2010 unless the Staff of the PUCT, the City of Houston and the Gulf Coast Coalition of
Cities, after review of CenterPoint Houston's 2009 earnings report, release CenterPoint Houston
of the obligation to file. On March 30, 2010 the before mentioned parties informed CenterPoint
Houston that it would not be released of its obligation to submit the rate adjustment filing.
If you have questions concerning this intent to change rates please contact me or Steve
Greenley at 281-425-7300.
Sincerely,
~
David Baker
Division Vice President, Distribution Operations
Attachment
DELIVERED TO:
SnllrOLt t-k~JYl <;:
NAME (Printed)
The City of LQ f Qi to
See (e.-tfurt of
OFF I E (Mayor, City Se etary, etc.)
~
on this ~ day ofJune, 2010
~aJloYl~
SIG ATURE
DOCKET NO. 38339
APPLICATION OF CENTERPOINT
ENERGY HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC
FOR AUTHORITY TO CHANGE
RATES
~
~
~
~
BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
OF TEXAS
STATEMENT OF INTENT AND APPLICATION OF CENTERPOINT ENERGY
HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC FOR AUTHORITY TO CHANGE RATES
CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC ("CenterPoint Houston" or "Company") files
this Statement of Intent and Application for Authority to Change Rates pursuant to both
Subchapter C of Chapter 36 of the Public Utility Regulatory Act ("PURA") and the Order in
Docket No. 32093 ("Application").
I. INTRODUCTION
CenterPoint Houston is filing this Application at the directive of parties who have chosen
to exercise their right under the Order in Docket No. 32093 to initiate a general rate case.
CenterPoint Houston proposes in this Application new rate schedules that will allow the
Company to efTectively transition from the old, integrated utility rate case model to one that
works in today's dynamic, restructured electric utility market. Specifically, the Company
requests approval of Rider DCRF, a mechanism that streamlines the ratemaking process so that
rates are adjusted annually to reflect costs as they fluctuate up or down. This annual review
process will (1) ensure more timely regulatory oversight over the Company's expenditures, (2)
enhance the Company's ability to respond to regulatory initiatives, and (3) reduce the protracted
and expensive rate proceedings that would otherwise result.
Moreover, as required by the Order in Docket No. 35639 and Substantive Rule 25.130,
the Company is including in this Application a reconciliation of costs incurred related to its
Advanced Metering System ("AMS") deployment.
II. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES
The telephone number and address of CenterPoint Houston's authorized business
representative are as follows:
Stephen W. Bezecny
Director, Regulatory Relations
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
1111 Louisiana Street
Houston, Texas 77002
713.207.5141
713.207.9840 (fax)
stephen. bezecny@centerpointenergy.com
The telephone numbers and addresses of CenterPoint Houston's authorized legal
representatives are:
Jason M. Ryan
Assistant General Counsel
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
P.O. Box 61867
Houston, Texas 77208
713.207.7261
713.574.2261 (fax)
j ason.ryan@centerpointenergy.com
Ann Coffin
Parsley Coffin Renner LLP
P.O. Box 13366
Austin, TX 78711
512.879.0900
512.879.0912 (fax)
ann. coffin@pcrllp.com
CenterPoint Houston requests that all information and documents in this filing be served
on each of the persons above at their respective addresses or fax numbers.
III. JURISDICTION
The Commission has exclusive original jurisdiction over this proceeding for areas outside
municipalities pursuant to PURA 9 32.001 and for those municipalities shown on Exhibit A that
have ceded their original jurisdiction to the Commission pursuant to PURA 933.002(b).
IV. AFFECTED PERSONS AND TERRITORIES
The Application affects all retail electric providers ("REPs") serving end-use retail
electric customers in CenterPoint Houston's certificated service territory and will affect the retail
electric customers of those REPs to the extent that the REPs pass along to their customers the
charges under the Company's Tariff for Retail Delivery Service. The Application also affects all
customers taking service under the Company's Tariff for Wholesale Transmission Service.
V. OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION
This Application contains the testimony of 41 witnesses through 45 pieces of testimony,
including 15 pieces of testimony on the AMS reconciliation. The Direct Testimony of Scott
Prochazka presents an overview of the testimony and the Company's request for a base rate
increase of approximately $76 million for service to retail customers and an increase of
approximately $18 million for wholesale transmission customers. A list of witnesses, and a
summary of their testimony, is attached to Mr. Prochazka's overview testimony.
A. Test Year
As required by the Order in Docket No. 32093, the Application is based on a test year
consisting of the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2009.
B. Proposed Tariffs and Schedules
The Application contains the changes described below to the Tariff for Retail Delivery
Service and the Tariff for Wholesale Transmission Service.
Tariff for Retail Delivery Service
The Company's proposed Tariff for Retail Delivery Service sets forth the type of service,
the monthly rate, service riders that may apply to the rate schedule, and the six rate classes to
which the rate schedule will apply.
a. Retail Rate Schedules
1. Residential Service
CenterPoint Houston proposes to change the delivery charges to reflect the revenue
requirement by function as described in its proposed allocation study. Additionally, the
municipal account franchise credit has been changed to reflect the average franchise expense in
the rate.
2. Secondary Service Less Than Or Equal To 10 kVa
CenterPoint Houston proposes for this class the same changes as proposed for the
residential class.
3. Secondary Service Greater Than 10 kVa
CenterPoint Houston proposes to include different customer charges for customers with
interval data recorder meters, change the delivery charges to reflect the revenue requirement by
function as described in the proposed allocation study, change the billing determinant for the
municipal account franchise credit from kWh to Billing kVa, and remove the Subclass Exception
Charges.
4. Primary Service
CenterPoint Houston proposes for this class the same changes as proposed for the
Secondary Service Greater Than 10 kVa.
5. Transmission Service
CenterPoint Houston proposes to change the "Distribution System Charge" billing
determinant from 4CP kVa to Billing kVa, change the delivery charges to reflect the revenue
requirement by function as described in the proposed allocation study, and change the billing
determinant for the municipal account franchise credit to Billing k Va.
6. Lighting Services
For Street Lighting Service, CenterPoint Houston proposes to change the charges to
reflect the revenue requirement as described in the proposed allocation study, to add a charge for
light emitting diode lighting service, to reflect an appropriate restoration time frame goal, and to
reflect the average franchise expense in the rate. For Miscellaneous Lighting Service,
CenterPoint Houston proposes to change the charges to reflect the revenue requirement as
described in the proposed allocation study and to reflect the average franchise expense in the
rate.
b. Rate Charges by Function
The Application explains the proposed Customer Charge, Metering Charge, Distribution
System Charge, and Transmission System Charge. In the event the Commission does not adopt
the Company's proposed Rider DCRF, discussed below, the Company proposes an alternate rate
design only for the residential customer class that consists of an $18.18 Customer Charge and,
correspondingly, a decrease in the volumetric Distribution Charge.
c. Retail Delivery Service Riders and Charges
1. Rider DCRF - Distribution Cost Recovery Factor ("Rider DCRF")
CenterPoint Houston proposes new Rider DCRF to address the increasing demand for
additional spending on reliability programs such as system hardening, vegetation management,
pole and line inspections, the intelligent grid, as well as energy efficiency and conservation. This
alternative cost recovery mechanism will offer the Company a reasonable opportunity to recover
its non-transmission cost of service inclusive of a fair return without the attendant regulatory lag
and costs associated with a general rate proceeding. The Rider DCRF rate adjustment may be
positive or negative. The Company is not seeking to recover any costs through Rider DCRF in
this proceeding. Rather, the Company is asking the Commission to approve the policy and
template for Rider DCRF so that it may be implemented beginning June 1, 2011.
2. Rider SH - System Hardening ("Rider SH")
CenterPoint Houston seeks to recover through its base rates certain system hardening
operations and maintenance expenses currently not included in test year costs in a similar manner
as a just and measurable adjustment to base rates. If this approach is not accepted, these
operations and maintenance expenses can be recovered, as well as associated capital costs,
through Rider DCRF. If the Commission does not approve Rider DCRF, however, the Company
seeks adoption of new Rider SH, which will allow the Company to recover costs associated with
system hardening. If the Commission allows the operations and maintenance costs to be
included in base rates and Rider DCRF is adopted to recover capital costs, then the costs
intended to be recovered by Rider SH would be included in Rider DCRF and Rider SH would be
unnecessary.
3. Rider AMS - Advanced Metering System Surcharge ("Rider AMS")
As required by the order of the Commission in Docket No. 35639 and Substantive Rule
25.130, CenterPoint Houston is requesting the following adjustment to its existing surcharge
under Rider AMS, beginning with the billing cycle in February 2011:
Residential
$3.05 (for 48 billing cycles)
Secondary <= 10kV A
$3.14 (for 78 billing cycles)
Secondary> 10 k V A
$3.16 (for 78 billing cycles)
Primary
$3.16 (for 78 billing cycles)
4. Rider SCUD - State Colleges and Universities Discount ("Rider
SCUD")
The Application proposes to remove Rider SCUD consistent with the Commission's
decision in pending Docket No.3 8214. Based on the historical usage levels for the REPs with
customers eligible for Rider SCUD, CenterPoint Houston foregoes collection of approximately
$2 million per year in otherwise recoverable transmission and distribution charges due to the
application of Rider SCUD.
5. Rider EECRF - Energy Efficiency Cost Recovery Factor ("Rider
EECRF")
As required by Substantive Rule 25.181 (f)(2), the Application proposes to update Rider
EECRF to reflect the addition of energy efficiency costs that were previously in base rates.
CenterPoint Houston is therefore requesting approval of an adjustment to Rider EECRF to
recover in 2011: (1) the $22,925,492 in current energy efficiency program costs in the
Company's base rates; (2) the $7,858,508 in estimated 2011 projected energy efficiency program
costs in excess of the amount of energy efficiency costs included in base rates; (3) the
$5,069,095 energy efficiency performance bonus earned based on 2009 achievements; and (4)
$1,436,550 in lost revenue due to verified and reported 2009 energy savings; reduced by a
regulatory liability in the amount of $504,858.
6. Other Riders
The Company requests changes to several other riders, as follows:
· Rider SBF - System Benefit Fund: CenterPoint Houston proposes to update this
rider to reflect the proposed revenue requirement and the resulting allocation of
costs.
· Rider TCRF - Transmission Cost Recovery Factor: CenterPoint Houston
proposes to set the charges for this rider to collect only temporary items and
proposes to update the Rider TCRF allocation factors consistent with the
proposed allocation study in this case.
· Rider ESS - Retail Electric Service Switchovers: This rider is applicable to a
customer that meets the provisions of the rate and chooses to switch to another
utility for electric delivery service. CenterPoint Houston proposes updating the
charges to reflect the present cost of providing this service.
· Rider CMC - Competitive Metering Credit: The Company proposes to reflect
CenterPoint Houston's present cost of meter ownership and to reflect that Rider
CMC is only available to customers that are required by ERCOT to have an
interval data recorder meter.
· Rider RCE - Rate Case Expenses Surcharge: CenterPoint Houston is proposing
to change this rider to recover rate case expenses determined to be reasonable by
the Commission in this case.
· Rider EMC - Excess Mitigation Credit: CenterPoint Houston is proposing to
remove this rider as it is currently not applicable and not likely to ever become
applicable.
· Rider RURC - Rider UCOS Retail Credit: CenterPoint Houston is proposing to
remove this rider as it will no longer be applicable by the completion of this
proceeding.
d. Discretionary Charges
CenterPoint Houston proposes to update the charges for the Discretionary Services to
reflect CenterPoint Houston's current cost of providing such services. The Company is also
proposmg a new Discretionary Charge for Transmission Facility Outage Scheduling and
Notification, which IS necessary under the soon-to-be-implemented ERCOT Nodal Market
Design.
There are six discretionary charges associated with AMS remote access meters that the
Company proposes to update to reflect the status of its AMS meter deployment. Based on the
settlement in Docket No. 35639, these discretionary charges are to be updated annually to reflect
the cost savings associated with the investment in the AMS meters.
Additionally, the Company is proposing to remove the administrative cost embedded in
the development of all discretionary costs, which is currently $1. CenterPoint Houston proposes
that this administrative cost be ret1ected in the overall Company administrative costs and be
included in base rates.
e. Other Changes
The Application contains certain other Company-specific changes to the Tariff for Retail
Delivery Service.
Tariff for Wholesale Transmission Service
The Tariff for Wholesale Transmission Service includes CenterPoint Houston's proposed
wholesale transmission rate and the terms under which wholesale transmission service will be
provided. The Company proposes changes to this tariff to ref1ect CenterPoint Houston's current
cost of providing this service.
The Company also proposes to change Rider RUWC - UCOS Wholesale Credit ("Rider
RUWC"), which is applicable to Distribution Service Providers assessed a transmission ~ervice
charge under rate schedule Wholesale Transmission Service - WTS. Rider RUWC remains in
effect until it has returned $19.2 million pursuant to the settlement agreement in Docket 32093.
It is anticipated that $19.2 million will be returned before the completion of this proceeding.
However, the Company has received insurance proceeds from Hurricane Ike associated with its
transmission system in the amount of $1.569 million. As such, the Company proposes renaming
Rider RUWC as Rider IPC - Insurance Proceeds Rider and for the tariff to be updated to ref1ect
the credit amount of $1.569 million to be returned over an anticipated three-year period or until
the funds are fully returned.
C. Effect of Proposed Change on Company's Revenues
The Application supports a net increase in retail transmission and distribution rates of
approximately $76 million over adjusted test year revenues, which is an increase of around 5%.
It also supports an approximately $18 million increase for wholesale transmission service, which
is an increase of around 7.5%. The proposed increase constitutes a "major change" as that term
is defined in PURA 9 36.101.
D. Advanced Metering System Surcharge and Reconciliation
Consistent with the Final Order in Docket No. 35639 and Substantive Rule 25.130,
CenterPoint Houston has included in this Application its reconciliation and adjustment to its
AMS surcharge. CenterPoint Houston used January 1,2009 through March 31, 2010 as the
AMS reconciliation period. In addition to the reconciliation required by Docket No. 35639 and
Substantive Rule 25.130, the Application also proposes an adjustment to the AMS surcharge to
account for the acceleration of its AMS project due to the receipt of a Smart Grid Investment
Grant from the Department of Energy. As ref1ected above, the proposed adjustments to Rider
AMS keep the surcharge amounts at the same level as the surcharge amounts approved in Docket
No. 35639, but they will be charged over a shorter period of time.
E. Rate Case Expenses
CenterPoint Houston seeks recovery through Rider RCE of all reasonable rate case
expenses incurred by the Company or by any intervening city awarded such recovery in this
case.
VI. PROTECTIVE ORDER
CenterPoint Houston has included in Section VII of the rate filing package a proposed
protective order. The proposed protective order is the same as the protective order issued in
Docket No. 36918, the proceeding to determine the Company's Hurricane Ike restoration costs,
with two minor exceptions: the Office of the Attorney General has been added to the parties
listed both in the last sentence of paragraph 8 and in the last sentence of paragraph 35.
CenterPoint Houston has designated certain documents included in this Application as
either Protected Material or Highly Sensitive Protected Material under the terms of the proposed
protective order and anticipates it being necessary for the Company or other parties to submit
additional documents containing confidential material during discovery in this case. The
Company therefore requests approval of the proposed protective order included in Section VII of
the rate filing package. Until a protective order is issued in this proceeding, the Company will
provide access to the confidential information submitted with this Application to parties that
agree in writing to be bound by the proposed protective order as if it had been issued by the
Commission.
VII. NOTICE
CenterPoint Houston intends to provide the following notice of this proceeding as
required by Procedural Rule 22.5l(a):
· pursuant to Procedural Rule 22.5l(a)(1), CenterPoint Houston intends to publish
the form of notice attached as Exhibit B in the Houston Chronicle, a newspaper
having general circulation in each cOlmty containing territory affected by the
proceeding, once each week for four successive weeks;
· pursuant to Procedural Rule 22.51 (a)(2), CenterPoint Houston intends to mail the
form of notice attached as Exhibit B to (a) each of the ERCOT wholesale
transmission customers on the service list in Docket No. 37680, Commission
Staff's Application to Set 2010 Wholesale Transmission Service Charges for the
Electric Reliability Council of Texas and (b) each REP listed on the
Commission's website as of the date on which notice is sent;
· CenterPoint Houston intends to provide a copy of the Application and rate filing
package B to each party in Docket No. 32093, the Company's last general rate
case; and
· CenterPoint Houston intends to provide a copy of the form of notice attached as
Exhibit B to each party in Docket No. 35639, the proceeding that approved the
Company's AMS Deployment Plan.
In a separate motion, CenterPoint Houston requests approval of its proposed form of notice prior
to publishing and distributing that notice as indicated above.
VIII. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
CenterPoint Houston requests that the Commission (1) approve the rates requested in this
Application, including Rider DCRF; (2) approve the reconciliation and adjustment to Rider
AMS; and (3) grant CenterPoint Houston such other relief to which it has shown itself entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
J~~A"4-
Assistant General Counsel
State Bar No. 24033150
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
P.O. Box 61867
Houston, Texas 77208
713.207.7261
713.574.2261 (fax)
Ann Coffin
State Bar No. 00787941
Parsley Coffin Renner LLP
P.O. Box 13366
Austin, TX 78711
512.879.0900
512.879.0912 (fax)
COUNSEL FOR CENTERPOINT ENERGY
HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC
CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFIDAVIT
THE STATE OF TEXAS i
COUNTY OF HAlUUS ~
I, e...h \J c..i. f,v~ e.L~~.J "'i1fL-, as a member of the City of La Porte ~d{} NGtL
, make this affidavit and hereby on oath state the following: I have a
substantial interest in a business entity or real property as defined in Chapter 171, Texas Local
Government Code. and a vote is to be taken or a decision is to be made that will have a special
economic effect on this business eDtity or real property.
I have a substantial interest for the following reasons: (check all which are applicable)
Ownership of 10% or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity.
== Ownership of 10% or more or $15~!xx) or more oftbe fair market va1ueofthe
~ entity.
~ Funds received from the business entity exceed 10% of gross income for the
previous year.
_ Rea1property is involved and I have an equitable or legal ownership of the
property with a fair market value of at least $2,.500.
_ A relative of mine has a substmtial interest in the bI2siness entity or real
property that would be affected by a. decision of the public body of which I
am a member.
Upon filing of this affidavit with the City Secretary. I affirm that I will abstain from voting on any
decision involving this business entity or real property and from any further participation on this
matter by di~!':.cion or debate.
Singed this '2.L day of :r u lj . 20 10 .
~cial~~
THE STATE OF TEXAS~
COUNTY OF HARRIS ~
~t. .. lie} on !his day J""SODlllly awe=!
J:nown to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to !he
foregoing' a.cl::nD ledged to me that helsbe executed the same for the purposes and
consideration therein expressed.
Given tmier my hand and seal of office this Z!J:: day of 1"", .I III . 2O~.
(SEAL) ~
4
~'131""
MARTHA GfI:LETT
. My Commission Expires
\. \ V'- / August 31. 2013
',s.,,",._ :"-;:',~'./