Blog

Jul 30, 2023

Acquiring new light: Killeen looking to buy 4,500 streetlights in the city from Oncor

Taking the first step of what may be a lengthy, difficult process, the Killeen

Taking the first step of what may be a lengthy, difficult process, the Killeen City Council agreed to move towards purchasing the approximate 4,539 streetlights in Killeen from energy utility Oncor.

This decision was the result of an update from Tanko Lighting, Inc, a national consulting firm based in San Francisco that specializes in assisting municipalities with street lighting needs. The city entered into a professional services agreement with the firm to explore the possibility of taking ownership of its streetlights in January of 2021 for what is not to exceed $197,000. Since then, the firm has conducted a financial analysis through a third party to determine the overall cost of street lighting and whether or not it would be overall beneficial for Killeen. Last year, some of the primary reasons for entering into the agreement were to have a more stable maintenance schedule and to generally increase the amount of lighting within the city.

Street lighting has been a point of concern for residents, some of whom have said that strong lighting may help deter crime; Mayor Pro Tem Debbie Nash-King said the same in January 2021. The city has made steps to improve its lighting, including passing an ordinance that reduces the minimum distance between two light poles in new developments.

Before beginning the presentation, Nick Fiore, a spokesman for Tanko, provided a list of cities that owned their own streetlights, such as San Antonio, Arlington and Austin.

"Tanko works with municipalities all over the country, and no one ever regrets buying their streetlights," he said.

According to Fiore, the city's streetlights are owned and managed by Oncor, which charges a rate, or "tariff", of $10.31 a month for every 100 watt, high pressure sodium streetlight, or about $701,110 annually for the whole system. If the city were to undergo an LED conversion under Oncor, the city would be charged a new rate of approximately $11.52, an increase of about 12% per light.

When Councilwoman Mellisa Brown asked why it could cost more for the LED lighting conversion despite a lower general maintenance cost, City Manager Kent Cagle said it was "because they’re going to charge us from now until forever" in recovering capital costs.

If the city owned its own streetlights, the cost of an LED streetlight would be about 50 cents, Fiore said.

Capital costs

According to Fiore, the total project cost, which includes the purchase and modification of Killeen's streetlights, would be at most $3 million, though CEO Jason Tanko assured Council members that it was "highly unlikely" to hit that limit and would likely be "much lower."

Fiore also explained that, after a roughly five and a half year buyback period, the city's yearly cost would be roughly $169,875, down from a current yearly cost of about $716,607, or a reduction of roughly 76%.

The LED improvement program would cost an additional $2.4 million, and would extend the buyback period by about two years.

Additionally, after a trial period of about one to two years of outsourced maintenance, Killeen could begin to look at conducting in-house maintenance on its streetlights — something it doesn't quite have the expertise to do currently, Cagle said.

What's the catch?

However, Mayor Jose Segarra said, the real "bear" isn't the capital investment cost — it's Oncor.

Cagle concurred, adding that he had received a call from Oncor prior to the meeting informing him that they "did not want to sell." If Killeen moves forward, he said, it would likely find itself embroiled in a lawsuit.

"The real issue is going to be that Oncor says they don't want to sell; they have a lot of lobbyists, if they don't have the law on their side, they’ll look to other methods," he said. "If we move into this next phase, we’ll have to do so with our eyes wide open."

According to Cagle, the process for forcing Oncor to sell is what is known as "condemnation" — a process he stressed is not as bad as it sounds.

After the city extends its initial offer letter and engages in good-faith negotiations, Oncor will have the option to approve or deny the offer. If negotiations fail, then the city would be forced to "condemn" Oncor, forcing them to sell through a special commission; if Oncor appeals that commission's decision, which appears likely, then the city would find itself in "a courtroom setting."

The entire process could take over a year just to get to court, City Attorney Traci Briggs said. However, Cagle reassured the City Council that the potential savings far outweigh the costs.

Additionally, Tanko explained that any court fees raised by his firm from fighting on behalf of the city would be covered in the lawsuit.

Brown asked if this process could result in a retaliation on Killeen residents, to which the answer was no; any increase in "tariffs" would have to be system-wide, and could not target Killeen.

As the City Council voiced its support for engaging with the purchase order, Councilwoman Jessica Gonzalez asked the City Council to consider installing network controls prior to LED installations.

Brown attempted to push back the item until March 15, but failed to receive a second.

Nash-King instead made a motion of direction for city staff to extend an offer letter to Oncor immediately, which passed 6-0.

[email protected] | 254-501-7552

Democracy versus Republic:

This brings me to today where we have another set of circumstances in Killeen, Texas where we are dominated by a set of instructions called a 'Charter for the City of Killeen, Texas' in which we now suffer the indignities of a city council of 7 in which a superior vote of only 4 controls what the city of over 150,000 have to abide by. So is this freedom or is it 'just another form of tyranny?

You take the illustration of this recent article in which this newspaper says in a headline, 'Acquiring new light: Killeen looking to buy 4,500 streetlights in the city from Oncor'. Now that was to get your attention and it worked, but did you follow through and read this article for it's content for it goes on to say that, and I paraphrase here:

1. Taking the first step of what may be a lengthy, difficult process, the Killeen City Council agreed to move towards purchasing the approximate 4,539 streetlights in Killeen from energy utility Oncor.'

2. It goes on to say that 'This decision was the result of an update from Tanko Lighting, Inc, a national consulting firm based in San Francisco that specializes in assisting municipalities with street lighting needs. The city entered into a professional services agreement with the firm to explore the possibility of taking ownership of its streetlights in January of 2021 for what is not to exceed $197,000. Since then, the firm has conducted a financial analysis through a third party to determine the overall cost of street lighting and whether or not it would be overall beneficial for Killeen. Last year, some of the primary reasons for entering into the agreement were to have a more stable maintenance schedule and to generally increase the amount of lighting within the city.'

3. 'Street lighting has been a point of concern for residents, some of whom have said that strong lighting may help deter crime; Mayor Pro Tem Debbie Nash-King said the same in January 2021. The city has made steps to improve its lighting, including passing an ordinance that reduces the minimum distance between two light poles in new developments.'

Now if you would, consider the statement by Mayor Pro Tem Debbie Nash-King that 'this passing of an ordinance, which was parroted by a past District 1 city council member that was in essence directed at the North side, of which the current holder of this position is also a District 1 city councilwomen. Do you not see the parallel that this city is becoming deluded into thinking that 'it is a minority based structure and is now positioning itself to not providing for the majority but for the minority, which is the basis of a Democracy.

Democracy versus Republic:

'In a democracy, minority rights are overridden by the majority. Conversely, Republic system protects the rights of minority groups or an individual. In a democracy, the power rests with the population, however in the case of the Republic the power is in the hand of law which are created to safeguard the interest of the people.'

But is it true in Killeen, Texas that the minority rights are overridden by the majority? You be the judge.

In Killeen, do you see the parallel of the rights of the individual being supplanted by the city council/city manager/city government being superimposed over the rights of the citizen, in all respects, especially when it comes to money matters. No, I personally feel that they continue to foolishly spend 'our money' at the whim of others'.

To continue:

4. 'When Councilwoman Mellisa Brown asked why it could cost more for the LED lighting conversion despite a lower general maintenance cost, City Manager Kent Cagle said it was "because they’re going to charge us from now until forever" in recovering capital costs.

If the city owned its own streetlights, the cost of an LED streetlight would be about 50 cents, Fiore said.

5. According to Fiore, the city's streetlights are owned and managed by Oncor, which charges a rate, or "tariff", of $10.31 a month for every 100 watt, high pressure sodium streetlight. If the city were to undergo an LED conversion under Oncor, the city would be charged a new rate of approximately $11.52, an increase of about 12% per light.'

'According to Fiore, the total project cost, which includes the purchase and modification of Killeen's streetlights, would be at most $3 million, though CEO Jason Tanko assured Council members that it was "highly unlikely" to hit that limit and would likely be "much lower."

6. Fiore also explained that, after a roughly five and a half year buyback period, the city's yearly cost would be roughly $169,875, down from a current yearly cost of about $716,607, or a reduction of roughly 76%.

The LED improvement program would cost an additional $2.4 million, and would extend the buyback period by about two years.

Additionally, after a trial period of about one to two years of outsourced maintenance, Killeen could begin to look at conducting in-house maintenance on its streetlights — something it doesn't quite have the expertise to do currently, Cagle said.'

7. According to Fiore, the total project cost, which includes the purchase and modification of Killeen's streetlights, would be at most $3 million, though CEO Jason Tanko assured Council members that it was "highly unlikely" to hit that limit and would likely be "much lower."

Fiore also explained that, after a roughly five and a half year buyback period, the city's yearly cost would be roughly $169,875, down from a current yearly cost of about $716,607, or a reduction of roughly 76%.

Now here's the kicker" 'However, Mayor Jose Segarra said, the real "bear" isn't the capital investment cost — it's Oncor.'

'Cagle concurred. If Killeen moves forward, he said, it would likely find itself embroiled in a lawsuit.'

"The real issue is going to be that Oncor. if they don't have the law on their side, they’ll look to other methods," he said. "If we move into this next phase, we’ll have to do so with our eyes wide open."

According to Cagle, the process for forcing Oncor to sell is what is known as "condemnation" — a process he stressed is not as bad as it sounds.

'This will have to be settled in the courts.

'The entire process could take over a year just to get to court, City Attorney Traci Briggs said. However, Cagle reassured the City Council that the potential savings far outweigh the costs.'

'Additionally, Tanko explained that any court fees raised by his firm from fighting on behalf of the city would be covered in the lawsuit.'

Nash-King instead made a motion of direction for city staff to extend an offer letter to Oncor immediately, which passed 6-0.'

Now do you see how this city council has overridden the citizen in the Democracy vs Republic role?

This note is the final opinion that is delivered by 'An American who remembers what it was like to be an American.

Copy: 'Taking the first step of what may be a lengthy, difficult process, the Killeen City Council agreed to move towards purchasing the approximate 4,539 streetlights in Killeen from energy utility Oncor.

This decision was the result of an update from Tanko Lighting, Inc, a national consulting firm based in San Francisco that specializes in assisting municipalities with street lighting needs. The city entered into a professional services agreement with the firm to explore the possibility of taking ownership of its streetlights in January of 2021 for what is not to exceed $197,000. Since then, the firm has conducted a financial analysis through a third party to determine the overall cost of street lighting and whether or not it would be overall beneficial for Killeen. Last year, some of the primary reasons for entering into the agreement were to have a more stable maintenance schedule and to generally increase the amount of lighting within the city.

Street lighting has been a point of concern for residents, some of whom have said that strong lighting may help deter crime; Mayor Pro Tem Debbie Nash-King said the same in January 2021. The city has made steps to improve its lighting, including passing an ordinance that reduces the minimum distance between two light poles in new developments.

Before beginning the presentation, Nick Fiore, a spokesman for Tanko, provided a list of cities that owned their own streetlights, such as San Antonio, Arlington and Austin.

"Tanko works with municipalities all over the country, and no one ever regrets buying their streetlights," he said.

According to Fiore, the city's streetlights are owned and managed by Oncor, which charges a rate, or "tariff", of $10.31 a month for every 100 watt, high pressure sodium streetlight, or about $701,110 annually for the whole system. If the city were to undergo an LED conversion under Oncor, the city would be charged a new rate of approximately $11.52, an increase of about 12% per light.' End of copy.

Now let me get this straight. First Killeen, Texas provided the mechanism back in 2021 for Tanko, which is a national consulting firm based in San Francisco that specializes in assisting municipalities with street lighting needs, to get a contract not to exceed $197,000 in which Tanko provided a 3rd party financial analysis to determine the overall cost of street lighting and whether or not it would be overall beneficial for Killeen. The city entered into a professional services agreement with the firm to explore the possibility of taking ownership of its streetlights, but it goes on to say that 'Last year, some of the primary reasons for entering into the agreement were to have a more stable maintenance schedule and to generally increase the amount of lighting within the city'. Now my question is, 'why doesn't this company, Tanco, have the means for electrical contracting of a city wide means of leaving the present company, Oncor, and using this new company if the cost is to drop from $10.31a month per 100 watts to an estimated cost of 50 cents with the new unit.

Now this article says that 'Oncor charges, it doesn't mention the fact that it is a lease arrangement nor how much longer the lease, if there is a lease arrangement, is to run, but the lighting fixture is charges at a rate of $10.31 a month for every 100 watt, high pressure sodium streetlight.

Copy: "Tanko works with municipalities all over the country, and no one ever regrets buying their streetlights," End of copy.

Copy: 'If the city were to undergo an LED conversion under Oncor, the city would be charged a new rate of approximately $11.52, an increase of about 12% per light'. End of copy.

So:

Copy: 'When Councilwoman Mellisa Brown asked why it could cost more for the LED lighting conversion despite a lower general maintenance cost, City Manager Kent Cagle said it was "because they’re going to charge us from now until forever" in recovering capital costs'. End of copy.

Copy: 'If the city owned its own streetlights, the cost of an LED streetlight would be about 50 cents, Fiore said.

Capital costs

According to Fiore, the total project cost, which includes the purchase and modification of Killeen's streetlights, would be at most $3 million, though CEO Jason Tanko assured Council members that it was "highly unlikely" to hit that limit and would likely be "much lower."

Fiore also explained that, after a roughly five and a half year buyback period, the city's yearly cost would be roughly $169,875, down from a current yearly cost of about $716,607, or a reduction of roughly 76%'. End of copy.

So the question comes back to 'what arrangements does Oncor have concerning the contractual arrangement, IE: lease or what ever and why does not the city of Killeen, Texas have an easy out? As I understand it, the city of Killeen, Texas has a legal team that it pays dearly for that is supposed to have contract arrangements to supply representation for the city of Killeen, Texas, why are they not available to sort out this fiasco as to whether or not this is a valid type of contract. You know, two different company's that I worked for had a 'sweet heart contract' that the El Paso Gas company was to 'fill our needs for natural gas' to the extent that 'others' had to have their natural gas cut off during cold snaps, but low and behold the government put the kebosch to that and we were told to 'shut off our natural gas supply within 30 minutes as they were going to stop our supply. Maybe tis is a similar situation as there has to be some condition that would allow this city to remove itself from the Catch 22 situation they seem to be caught in.

As I understand it the State of Texas was regulated but in the year 2000 the State of Texas became a de-regulated commodity. In that light Oncor became the transmission high line service provider for this city. Now I am not provided with the terms of service but it seems to me that the Tanko company and the Oncor transmission company has 'pulled the wool over on this city as they now have a service contract valued at 'not to exceed $197,000 of which they seem to tend to have this city go with the Oncor version of a contracting arrangement that will cost this city an additional 12% per light and there is approximately 4,539 street lights, and this number is constantly going up, with no way out of this service arrangement. Copy: 'Street lighting has been a point of concern for residents, some of whom have said that strong lighting may help deter crime; Mayor Pro Tem Debbie Nash-King said the same in January 2021. The city has made steps to improve its lighting, including passing an ordinance that reduces the minimum distance between two light poles in new developments'. End of copy.

In this regard, then it seems like the proverbial problem of 'if crime is going up then the solution is, 'hire more police to keep the crime in check', with the version of this city council, that is 'pay the extra money because we have so much of it'. Sorry but that is not a satisfactory answer, the answer is, 'rid the city of trouble makers not put more police on the payroll'. The crime went up following the Hurricane and it has not diminished. And it has continued to this day. And this city council 'jumps before the iron is hot saying 'It's all money and the citizens all have deep pockets'. Not the way to handle this situation I don't think.

Well, this has been an interesting problem and in my opinion, again not the best solution was arrived at.

Log In

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,racist or sexually-oriented language.PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming anotherperson will not be tolerated.Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyoneor anything.Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ismthat is degrading to another person.Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link oneach comment to let us know of abusive posts.Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitnessaccounts, the history behind an article.