Jul. 15, 2009 - Issue #717: Edmonton Musicians Directory 2009
Epcor Sale: Still some fight left in ‘em
Despite legal setback, those opposed to sale of Epcor generating assets pledge to continue the fight
The April 17 closed-door decision by city council to sell off its
power-generating assets to create Capital Power has left Edmontonians with
much to debate around the issues of privatization of public assets and the
need for greater transparency under the pyramid.
Since the announcement in early May—fully three weeks after the deal
was approved by all but two city councillors—a range of voices has
decried the move, charging that city council abandoned its democratic duty by
making the decision in secret, while others believe the sale itself should
not have occurred. Many Edmontonians became concerned about the public nature
of the city-owned company and the future security of public resources and
assets. Richard Zwicker was among them.
"When I heard of the sale on May 8 I was gobsmacked," Zwicker recalls. "I
called public interest groups in the city and tried to find out who was going
to do something about this. It turns out a number of other people were making
the same call, and so we formed Our Power."
Our Power is the citizen action group which filed a court injunction in an
attempt to stop the closing of the sale, which was rejected on July 3
by
Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Ged Hawco, giving the green light to the
initial public offering for Capital Power.
But even though the group failed to stall the sale, Zwicker says the group
plans to move forward in its campaign to challenge the sale, both inside and
outside the courtroom, as it looks forward to the next round of municipal
elections in October 2010.
"This is not a done deal. We have standing in the courts to examine everyone
on council under oath," Zwicker says. "But we don't want to rely on the
courts. We are putting together a campaign and building Our Power to initiate
a petition for the next election that would call for a plebiscite on the
sale. We need 85 000 signatures in a period of 60 days. But our main
message right now is that this is not a done deal, as the mayor and Epcor
would have you believe."
But Bill Pidruchney, the lawyer bringing the case forward on behalf of Our
Power, says that since the decision was made in secret, the group's legal
strategy is necessary to properly inform Edmontonians about the details of
the sale.
Another legal action calling for a judicial review of the sale was filed on
July 7 by the Alberta Federation of Labour, Civic Services Union 52 and CUPE
30.
"It seems the only way citizens are going to find anything out is through the
courts, rather than the open and transparent government we expect from our
leaders," Pidruchney says.
What Edmontonians do know is that they own less of Epcor now than they
previously did. The April 22 decision put the power generating aspect of the
business into a publicly traded company, 71 percent owned by Epcor and 29
percent owned by shareholders.
But Ward 5 Councillor Don Iveson, who voted in favour of the deal at the
meeting, says council did the best job it could for the city and insists that
the sale doesn't significantly change the status quo, since the
power-generating aspect of the business already had a publicly traded side in
Epcor Power LP, which Epcor owned just 30 percent of.
"Functionally, Edmonton Power was privatized into Epcor; it was privatized in
1996," Iveson says. "So I understand the frustration that it's not under
public ownership, but ownership does not mean that it was under our control.
This is really just a restructuring of our ownership, not a restructuring of
control that we didn't really have."
But Zwicker insists something has changed, and he says the Our Power campaign
aims to let Edmontonians know what they might be missing out on now that the
sale has happened.
"If you look at when they deregulated power to make it easier to invest in
power generating assets, the risk for producing power is nil. Everyone needs
power," Zwicker says. "By owning our own portion we can control how much we
put into the grid. Even though the rate is not controlled there is a return
to Edmontonians and a security of supply, instead of shipping it down off the
border, which I fear will happen. I am frightened for the future of our
public resources."
But it's precisely that deregulated market, including the federal
government's recent changes to rules on income trusts and future
environmental regulations on fossil fuel-based industries, that Iveson says
made city council think twice about continuing to be in the power generation
business.
"Epcor representatives suggested, as the electricity-generating aspect of the
company is the riskiest, we should look at a model to reduce the risk and
potential fluctuations in our dividends," he says. "So the decision was the
power-generating business would be put into Capital Power, and sell a portion
of that company to raise money to grow the three stable lines of the company:
fresh water, waste water and electricity transmission."
Despite voting in favour of the deal—only councillors Ben Henderson and
Amarjeet Sohi voted against it, while Linda Sloan was absent from the meeting
due to a family emergency—Iveson has been outspoken about his
discomfort with the process through which council arrived at such a critical
decision.
"I was really uncomfortable with the private nature of the decision. I asked
an awful lot of questions of our legal counsel, Epcor's legal counsel and
their independent counsel," he says. "Then we talked about it as a city
council a great deal to do this decision publicly and it was ultimately
decided that we had to put the whole decision together first and then make
the decision public."
The whole experience, Iveson says, has made him realize some changes are
required to ensure adequate public input on similar decisions in the
future.
"On July 22 I'm bringing forward a motion to council to move us closer to
public disclosure on decisions as Epcor shareholders," he says. "It will look
at amendments to our bylaws, the Epcor shareholder agreement and their bylaws
as a corporation to ensure, particularly with assets owned by the City of
Edmonton, that any further business cases for sale would have to come to the
City of Edmonton, rather than these closed-door sessions as
shareholders."
It's a sentiment that Zwicker can definitely agree with. He argues that the
way the decision was made, and the overlapping roles of city councillors and
Epcor shareholders means the decision was a violation of the Municipal
Government Act, and something that needs to be clarified before similar
decisions are made in the future.
"City councillors pretended they were shareholders of Epcor to make the
decision," he says. "They didn't need to and we believe we have strong legal
grounds that it violates the act." V
More stories in front »
New comments for this entry have been turned off and any existing ones are hidden. We apologize for any inconvenience.





