Rent Increase Survey

Have you submitted your latest rent increase data to the rent increase survey?

Alameda Municipal Power to Raise Electric Rates

Alameda Municipal Power will raise electricity rates 3.7% effective July 1, 2010, following approval of next-year’s budget by the City of Alameda Public Utilities Board.

In a press release, Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) indicated that the utility has not raised rates in the past 5 years; AMP says that a typical household using 400 kilowatt-hours per month will see an increase of about $1.51 in their monthly bill in the coming year.

AMP attributes the need to increase rates to higher power and transmission costs outside of their control. AMP’s employee count has been reduced to pre-1993 levels, but this includes headcount reductions due to the sale of the utility’s failed cable and telecom division.

Public Utilities Board meeting materials are available online at AMP’s website.

5 comments to Alameda Municipal Power to Raise Electric Rates

  • Hot R

    $1.51 a month? Where is the outrage among all you people who voted against the schools? And this rate hike is a DIRECT RESULT of the costs run up by BOE’s idiotic idea to compete with Comcast – the mega cable company. At least the school district is only suffering as a result of State cuts.

    What no cries that you can’t afford electricity now? No cries of mismanagement? What about an examination of the number of executives to workers when compared with other electricity companies? Have you looked at the salary structure of BOE employees and compared it to all other people living in Alameda? What is their retirement plan? Why do they have it so good? Don’t they know that now is not the time for a rate hike? How about personal attacks against all the employees at BOE, their cushy pensions, the exorbitant salaries being paid to their executives, consultants and lawyers? At least be consistent.

  • Measure E’s annual increase was $350/year; AMP’s rate increase is $18/year. That’s a 20x difference.

    This publication covered extensively the sale of the cable and telecom division, and the subsequent lawsuits, and gave voice to someone who was critical of the utility’s foray into into the telecom business from the beginning.

    We also note that so far as we know, AMP has not re-paid a $2.3 million loan to the City’s general fund that was made several years ago to support the ailing telecom division. We’ve sent an inquiry back to AMP’s spokesperson to confirm, and we await a response.

    And if we were to learn that AMP employed two direct relatives of the PUB, as AUSD does re: Mike McMahon of the school board, we would report that too.

  • Barb

    Our electricity has always been cheaper than PG&E’s. Has that changed? And the Bureau is required to transfer money to the City’s general fund annually. Which it did easily until the cable fiasco. They don’t have a Webmaster or attorney on staff. Mostly engineers, linepersons, and technicians. Of course the salaries are a bit too high in today’s economy. We can’t change their salaries any more than we can change teachers or administrators salaries. They pay into PERS and have excellent benefits. But eveyone uses electricity. The rate increases affect all equally. And in a storm at night if power goes out, they get out of bed and go fix it.

    I have been able to lower my total electric consumption by replacing old appliances with Energy Star appliances as they break. And get rebates for buying those appliances. I have received free energy efficient light bulbs from Pagano’s. If I can’t afford my bill, they will work with me. And above all, I can simply use less to lower the bill to what I can afford. A little different than someone tacking $659 on to my tax bill whether I can pay it or not. And foreclosing if I can’t. Or $9500 to some business owner who is barely making it in his or her effort to bring something to our community that the residents need or just enjoy.

  • Hot R’s contortions to relate this to Measure E are an exercise in the Absurd. I fought actively, with Len Grzanka and XXX against the conversion of BOE to AP&T, and we lost by only 350 votes. (I had seen their business plan.) Hot R claims that the only reason AUSD is in financial straits is takeaway by the State, not the increases in teachers’ pay, Supe Vital’s pay, her enormous overhead spending with political consultants and attorneys. Keeping more physical plant open than required in a district with declining enrollment, bringing in students from other districts that don’t pay their own full freight. The list goes on. Mismanagement by AUSD threatens taxpayers even more than mismanagement by AMP threatens ratepayers, by about a factor of 20! Hot R says we shouldn’t mind that $659/year, but won’t tell us if he will contribute that much to the schools in spite of losing the election. ‘Nuff said.

  • Sorry, “XXX” a placeholder for “Rich Sherrett,” developer of Belena Bay, and brother of Donald, former AUSD exec.


  • ,
  • ,
  • ,
  • ,
  • ,