Some of the comments below are far off the mark. The AGPA board works without any compensation and submits to an external audit every year. Those annual audits, along with an independent auditors opinion are public record. Those audits, year after year, show that AGPA is in full conformance with GAAP, and state statutes. AGPA is doing a good job!

Contingent debt is used to advance the project voters asked for without using taxpayer dollars. The FNSB attorney, and other legal experts have repeatedly said any contingent debt incurred by AGPA is not a liability of Valdez or the FNSB. The debt, according to current financial statements is just sky of $9,000,000.

Page 2:

AGPA saw that GVEA (as an electrical cooperative) had the ability to borrow money for significantly less interest cost than AGPA- perhaps as many as 500 basis points less. That, combined with GVEA's cost of service pricing structure ensured that if any LNG trucking plan could be put together, that the (debt) costs would be as low as possible, and, very importantly, those savings would be passed on to Interior residents.

AGPA has received most of its funding from private sector partners. The bullet line, AGIA, and even the Denali project are all extremely costly- and their multi hundred million dollar expense has been paid for with public dollars. The guys doing the most, with the least, for the best project is AGPA.

Since 1974....

ahem, since 1974 I have been beating Alaskan's brains out with my sledgehammer trying to get everybody to realize the extremely important difference between LPG and LNG !! [only a few got the message]

just to start...

LPG = propane [boiling point -42F]

LNG = methane [boiling point -260F]

https://gas4alaska.info/Propane.html

http://s281.photobucket.com/albums/kk209/DistantThunderbolt/?action=view&current=6inchgaslineP2FBX.jpg

If 2years ago anybody at AGPA would have bought a good used propane 2500gallon single-axle tanktruck for $15k another $15k additional expenses.. then all of the accrued debt obligations by AGPA could have been paid off by now, plus a million gallons of propane could have been delivered to railbelt by now.

http://www.truckpaper.com/list/list.aspx?ETID=1&catid=237&bcatid=27

Bear Ketzler in Tanana has more brains than everybody in Fairbanks..

I agree with posts here that suggest the AGPA has not lived up to the original voter mandate and public disclosure required to have any real credibility going forward. Yet I do not think there is any reason to suspect any volunteer board member of the AGPA ever intentionally lied about the debts owed by the AGPA. The AGPA’s financial statements acknowledge the presence of many contingent bonds, memorandums of understanding, and what triggers the payment. Contingent bonds appear to be between $8 million and $26 million. An amount close to $9 million was recently acknowledged in an AGPA meeting.



In a different meeting the FNSB (wisely) called with the AGPA accountant, I got the impression the AGPA accountant admitted they had not seen or audited the actual agreements. The accountants, public and even board members could find this very difficult. Some agreements could even need to be interpreted by aspects of international law (Mitsubishi v AGPA). It really appears to take an attorney to determine the current (contingent bonds) debts of the AGPA. This is another risk for stakeholder/taxpayers that are already funding millions of dollars in litigation annually.

This is in part why it is so important to reign in the AGPA and define the “Project”. These debts are clearly a measure of risk that should be understood with any “non-voter mandated project” or AGPA bond issue.

I personally do think there are many well intended AGPA board members that could have little knowledge in this area.

Also, none of these (contingent bonds) debts I discuss appear to be payable to the Law Offices of Bill Walker.

I strongly support the resolution to get the proposition off the ballot. In their confusion and fear and from within the sea of disinformation in which we interior residents swim, I could easily imagine the voters approving the borough's pursuit of AGPA's trucking plan, not even having heard of the competing GVEA-FHR plans, or considering how they affect AGPA's plan. Such an approval would merely be a go-ahead for pouring borough resources into a burn pit. If AGPA is willing to be forward with the public and acknowledge this, that's maybe the one good thing I will remember about AGPA.

Electra says: Fig Newton should know that well over half of the heating fuel for Fairbanks is supplied by the Petro Star Refinery and much of that is retailed by their sister company Sourdough Heating Fuel (Both owned by Arctic Slope Regional Corporation). The market sets prices and the dominant market supplier is the price leader, and that is not Flint Hills. Also both GVEA and Flint Hills have stated they would talk to FNG, the University, Military or any other entity that might want to purchase trucked natural gas. They have not "grabbed" the trucking scheme for just themselves

Electra – This emphasizes my point. Petrostar’s production does set the market price in FSNB, and now Flint Hills will be able to produce their share at a lower cost, and sell it at or only marginally below the Petrostar price. And vehicle fuels will continue to be priced at the same point that Tesoro and other refiners sell at. Flint Hills earns a greater margin, but energy costs for residents don’t decrease. I don’t begrudge Flint Hills for doing so – exploiting competitive advantage is how the system works. Flint Hills has little incentive to help Petrostar lower its cost of production; to do so would be reducing its own margins. So I don’t expect to see Flint Hills step up and offer Petrostar or any other competitor a lower cost of production.

And what makes you think that GVEA and Flint Hills are talking to FNG, UAF, FTWW, EAFB or anyone else. GVEA’s press release doesn’t say that. http://www.gvea.com/news/?id=1080

Flint Hills press release is the same as GVEA’s http://www.fhr.com/newsroom/news_detail.aspx?id=218

An article in DNM quotes FNG’s owner as saying “Although it may undercut his own plans, Britton said, the partnership could be good for the community.” Undercutting residential gas sales expansion sounds like grabbing the deal for themselves to me. All GVEA and Flint Hills have said is that they might have some amount of gas leftover to sell after they fill their own uses. Neither one has the ability to distribute gas to residences, so the impact of this deal is minimal to the community.

This deal is not a negative for the community, and I hope they proceed with it. There will be some clean air benefits from it. But it’s just not a significant impact, and not worth a lot of flag waving or attention. It’s just a drop in the ocean.

Fig Newton should know that well over half of the heating fuel for Fairbanks is supplied by the Petro Star Refinery and much of that is retailed by their sister company Sourdough Heating Fuel (Both owned by Arctic Slope Regional Corporation). The market sets prices and the dominant market supplier is the price leader, and that is not Flint Hills. Also both GVEA and Flint Hills have stated they would talk to FNG, the University, Military or any other entity that might want to purchase trucked natural gas. They have not "grabbed" the trucking scheme for just themselves.

For AGPA to be considered viable, it needs to concentrate on the marketing of Alaska LNG. If they would come back with some letters of interest from real buyers, companies and municipalities, and not just a vague indication that “Asia” might buy LNG, then they would be getting somewhere. They are wearing out their tune of why AGIA is a bad idea, but they are not making real progress toward developing the all Alaska gasline. I guess they are waiting for some angel buyer to swoop in and say “I want Alaska LNG and I want it right now.”

I think we as borough residents need to take another vote on re-authorizing AGPA. I’d give them two years to come back with a valid, realistic marketing plan that has real customers, not continents, identified with their expected purchase amounts. If they don’t get that done in the time allowed, then we defund AGPA and let it dissolve.

I’m glad AGPA is officially out of the trucking scheme. It didn’t seem like they were bringing much to the table.

But the sad part about GVEA and FHR takeover of the truck deal is that is does nothing substantial for Fairbanks energy costs. Sure, GVEA claims it will provide 10% lower electric rates, but electric costs are only about 15% of our total energy bill. Space heating is the big part of the energy cost, and this GVEA Flint Hills announcement does nothing for space heating. Flint Hills will use this to lower their cost of business, and has no obligation or incentive to reduce heating oil prices to match their reduced cost. They’ll continue to sell heating oil at the highest price they can get and earn a greater margin. So by grabbing this trucking scheme for themselves, GVEA and Flint Hills have effectively denied 30,000 residents in the greater Fairbanks area the opportunity to switch to gas, and for the community to see real reductions in energy costs. I guess anything that helps disconnect our energy costs from the crude oil index is a good thing, but the GVEA Flint Hills deal is not worthy of public celebration – it just doesn’t have a real impact.

AGPA again? So, they couldn't get a trucked gas deal off the ground - a deal that HAD a committment to supply gas - to supply less than 7bcf a day to Fairbanks? Is that right? And they are the ones that keep asking us to let them operate a 35 BILLION dollar LNG project? It is time for these jokers to go away. They have already bilked millions out of the City of Valdez, FNSB, and the NSB. At least the NSB had the sense to cut ties with these guys. Valdez has poured millions of dollars into this with nothing left in return except for a depressed economy, declining population, and a flat out fleeing of local businesses from town. Great job AGPA! As long as you get paid...what do you care?

face it this resolution means they will use it to obtain more tax payers money for their hair brain scheme without the people ever voting on it. Bill Walker's law firm wrote the resolution for the Port Authority. They are after the $300,000 State money that was meant for studies for delivery of gas to this community which they managed local Senators to be changed to be used for a truck plan. Now there sits the $300,000 that they thought was theirs and they have no truck plan. This resolution is a scheme for them to get their hands on it.

Follow the money with this group, by they way where has all the millions gone to? We know Hickel got a million from them for options to buy no good permits. Wonder who else has gotten money. This community needs to say you can have all the moral support you want, but not one more penny.

"The resolution approved Wednesday passed with an amendment that softens the language concerning the Port Authority’s abandonment of the trucking plan, allowing the option to restart investigating alternatives to a pipeline."

As a citizen stakeholder of the AGPA, I objected to this motion in the 8/10/11 AGPA meeting. Chairman Whitaker told me I was out of order and did not let me communicate my concern!

Thank you Matt for understanding and communicating the risk to the people and private business.

It is the AGPA that is out of order, not the people!

This community needs to do what Barrow did and disassociate itself from the AGPA, plain and simple. The Port Authority is $9 million in debt, a debt the Mayor of Valdez a board member lied about to this communities borough assembly, when he stated they were only about $1 million in the hole. The Port Authority has never been transparent about anything, always stating due to confidentiality we can not disclose.

Now they are trying to pull another fast one and keep this community stuck with their plans and a new scheme. Problem is until a new majority and Mayor is voted into the assembly that is not tied to the Port Authority's umbilical cord, they will maintain the approval votes of the assembly. This has never been about this community, this has been about saving the Port of Valdez and who knows what other deals the have signed under confidentiality. Time for new blood with plans that are aimed at the community needs and not the needs of the good old boys and who knows what agenda. The APGA and the Assembly have failed this community in bringing alternative energy to this community, time to fire the bunch of them and get in people who know what they are doing.

It is good to see that the Port Authority has resolved to focus on the "project" the voters authorized them to pursue.

However, I don't understand why they are thinking about "allowing themselves the option to restart investigating alternatives to a pipeline", because doing so would be outside of the scope of the "project" the voters authorized them to pursue.

A good case could be made that the Port Authority, with the assistance of the FEDC, a former assembly member, two current assembly members, and the mayor has delayed the arrival of an alternate source of natural gas in the interior for two years because they surreptitiously pursued a project that the voters had not authorized them to pursue.