HomeMy WebLinkAboutLexington Lighting Options Committee report, 01-04-1991LEXINGTON LIGHTING OPTIONS COMMITTEE )
January 4, 1991
REPORT TO THE LEXINGTON SELECTMEN
BOSTON EDISON PROPOSAL FOR CONVERSION TO HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM STREET LIGIITS
The potential conversion to high pressure sodium (HPS) street lights in Lexington is a sensitive and
emotionally charged issue. The letters to the Minutemen and filing of a Citizens Warrant are early
indications. While an important issue, it is not the primary purpose of this report to discncc the many
concerns related to color and quality of light.
It is also significant that Lexington's street lighting system is antiquated with its oldest fixture dating to 1923.
Over one-third of the system is over 25 years old and more than another one third is over 20 years old. There
is no question that new technology offers potential savings through energy efficient product design. Boston
Edison's (13E) proposal for conversion to HPS is one alternative. There are other technical options with
varying tradeoffs between efficiency and light quality. (See Appendix B.)
However, all cost savings alternatives that focus only on the lamp type limit the potential savings to that
achievable through product selection, e.g., while the BE proposal results in an energy reduction of 46%, the
total budget savings is only 17%. This differential exists because BE's charge for maintenance and
amortization (M&A) is the more significant portion of Lexington's lighting budget (approximately $257,000 -
out of a total street lighting budget of $428,000 in fiscal 1990 - and $262,000 under BE's proposal). This
M&A charge is paid virtually in perpetuity with periodic rate escalation. We have been paying for our 1923
fixture for 67 years even though BE's amortization is 25 years.
The only method for achieving significant cost savings and at the same time for obtaining control over the
choices offered by a changing technology, is to own one's own system. Owning one's system does not mean
running a utility company - improvements and maintenance would be contracted to independent bidders.
The Committee has therefore studied the experience of other communities who own their own systems,
some through buy-out. These include Yarmouth, Falmouth, Belmont, Wellesley and Concord. (See
Appendix 13.) We have also inquired into the experience in other States, notably California where municipal
ownership through buy-out has been broadly recognized as the most cost effective way to provide street
lighting. The attached letter from Russell L. Hamm, an electric utilities specialist and Executive Director for
lighting. The attached letter from Russell L. Hamm, an electric utilities specialist and Executive Director for
the California City -County Street Lighting Association, is of particular interest in that he responds to specific
data provided by us concerning Lexington's options. (See Appendix A.)
Many factors will of course ultimately enter into buy-out negotiations and price settlement. However, there
are precedents for establishing and determining costs and procedures and help is available from the
Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (MDPU), informed members of the legislature, other town,
consultants and residents, all of whom have participated in the regulatory process. If purchased for $90,000
(low) to $350,000 (high), the resultant savings should permit amortization within 3 to 5 years. Once owned,
improvements and maintenance would be contracted to independent service companies through competitive
bid. There would be virtually no increase in administrative time or need for DPW personnel involvement.
Lexington would retain absolute control over lighting policy and flexibility to respond to new technologies.
After purchase and amortization, it is estimated that our total annual costs for street lighting will be
approximately $276,000 (fiscal 1990 $). This is a potential savings of $152,000 per year which will be realized
year after year. Additional savings will be realized by avoiding BE's escalation for M&A. Subsequent
conversion to a more efficient light source will also increase potential savings.
KEY ISSUES FOR SELECTMEN CONSIDERATION
1. Conversion to HPS as proposed by BE offers only limited short-term savings with Long-term
commitments to M&A costs and with a compromised quality of light.
2. Buy-out appears to be the only method for achieving significant long-term savings and for obtaining
absolute control.
3. The age of our lighting system, 75% fully or nearly amortized, provides a strong basis for buy-out
negotiations.
4. By the same token, a precipitous decision to convert to HPS in 1991 would significantly increase a
future buy-out cost and negate the flexibility of choice.
5. Additional savings achievable through energy efficient technology can be taken advantage of after
purchase and at lesser cost.
RECOMMENDATION
It is therefore the recommendation of this Committee that the Lexington Selectmen: reject BE's conversion
proposal; evaluate the recommendations of this Committee with the aid of technical and legal council; and
subsequently enter into negotiations with BE for the buy-out of the Lexington street lighting system.
Respectfully submitted,
Lexington Lighting Options Committee
John Davies, Bob Domnitz, Myla Kabat-Zinn, Peter Kovner, Don Olson
mgm/z-beltg