Clark Public Utilities board race pits two veterans

Byron Hanke

Age: 80.

Residence: Vancouver.

Education: Degree in business administration from the University of Washington.

Occupation: Incumbent Clark Public Utilities commissioner.

Past elected positions: Utility commissioner for 12 years.

Endorsements include: IBEW Local 48; IBEW Local 125; Building Industry Association; Vancouver Firefighters Local 452; 11 Vancouver First Citizen Award recipients.

Campaign funds: $19,267

Web: www.byronhanke.com.

Jane Van Dyke

Age: 62.

Residence: Vancouver.

Education: Juris doctor – Lewis and Clark, Northwestern School of Law; bachelor’s – University of California.

Occupation: Executive director, Columbia Slough Watershed Council.

Past elected positions: Clark Public Utilities commissioner for 18 years.

Endorsements include: Scott Brattebo; Julia Anderson; Mark Carter, Anne McEnerny-Ogle; David McDonald.

Campaign funds: $9,619

Web: janevandyke.com.

Although it’s a nonpartisan race devoid of any campaign-defining controversies, the two candidates for Clark Public Utilities commissioner aren’t shy about zinging each other over who’s a better fit for the job.

In the Nov. 4 general election, Jane Van Dyke is challenging incumbent Byron Hanke for the District 3 seat on the utility’s three-member board. Van Dyke argues Hanke, who seeks a third six-year term, approaches the job passively, not attending enough commission meetings and, when he does attend, too often letting important discussions go by without a word. “I just think you need someone who’s been an active participant, who’s clearly read the materials,” she said.

Hanke counters that Van Dyke, who served as a Clark Public Utilities commissioner from 1984 to 2002, is behind on experience while he’s up to speed. “My experience is relevant, it is up to date,” he said. “I’m on top of everything that’s gone on in the last 12 years.”

They’re competing for a shot at helping decide the customer-owned utility’s annual budgets, set electric and water rates, and oversee the utility’s CEO — all for an agency that provides electricity to more than 185,000 customers, and that supplies water to more than 31,000 homes and businesses in the region.

The utility is well-regarded, with top showings in customer surveys. But the two candidates differ over who’s most responsible for those sterling results. And a recent voter forum attended by Van Dyke and Hanke revealed their contrasting approaches to handling the utility’s roughly $50 million rate stabilization fund.

One of the major responsibilities of the utility, created by voters in 1938, concerns the production and purchase of the electricity it sells to its customer-owners. Last year, the utility bought about 55 percent of its power supply from the Bonneville Power Administration, which markets electricity generated by hydroelectric dams in the Pacific Northwest. The utility derives the rest of its power supply from its natural-gas-fired River Road Generating Plant in Vancouver and from market purchases.

‘Very encouraging’

Out of four candidates, Van Dyke and Hanke emerged as the top two vote-getters in the Aug. 5 primary election. Van Dyke received about 35 percent of the vote. Hanke got 31 percent. In the primary, only voters in District 3, which encompasses an area that includes Vancouver west of Interstate 205, were allowed to choose among the candidates.

In the general election, all voters in Clark County may cast a ballot.

Van Dyke said her primary results were “very encouraging for someone who’s not the incumbent. I was very pleased.”

Hanke said Van Dyke’s first-place showing in the primary “did surprise me” but that it “did not concern me.” He added, “It was a low voter turnout in a specific district, and things happen in that particular district that may have been more favorable to Jane.”

When Hanke was elected to the District 3 position in 2002, he succeeded Van Dyke, who’d decided against running for re-election after serving the utility for 18 years. Now, Van Dyke has returned to try to unseat Hanke.

Both candidates say they’ll work to ensure customers receive reliable power and water at stable prices. They each tout their respective professional and civic experiences as reasons for voters to select them. And they say they’re running because they’re effective leaders with deep knowledge of utility issues.

Van Dyke has been a leader of nonprofit organizations for some 20 years, currently as executive director of the Columbia Slough Watershed Council. She said her longtime interest and participation in energy and conservation issues, as well as “a legal background to understand documents and contracts,” make her the top choice.

Hanke’s previous professional work includes serving as executive director of the Port of Vancouver and holding administrative positions at the utility. He said he has a wealth of public sector experience, including as a utility policy setter and former employee. “I know the ins and outs of the day-to-day operations,” he said.

Candidates debate

Both candidates engaged in a civil, yet pointed, discussion during a recent voter forum held by the League of Women Voters of Clark County at the Vancouver Community Library. Van Dyke and Hanke sat behind a conference table, not far from each other, taking questions from a moderator.

Van Dyke said the policies that led to the utility’s well-recognized customer service and focus on efficiency and conservation “were all initiated when I was (a utility) commissioner.” Hanke noted the utility was recently ranked by J.D. Power & Associates as best in customer satisfaction for the seventh year in a row. “I’ve been part of that,” he said.

At one point, the utility’s roughly $50 million rate stabilization fund surfaced as a topic of debate. Its purpose is to shield ratepayers against unforeseen spikes in power supply costs. The fund’s sources of income include sales of surplus power and power supply savings. The fund is separate from the utility’s rate-setting process. Van Dyke said the utility needs to establish procedures and policy goals for the fund’s use instead of handling it in a “willy-nilly” fashion. Otherwise, she said, the fund is just sitting there, not working for customers. Hanke said the utility shouldn’t consult a “policy book” about how to use such a fund. The fund “doesn’t come out of your pocket,” he said. “We set it aside to help you pay your bill.”

The rate stabilization fund is “owned by us,” Van Dyke said. “We are a customer-owned utility.”