Through this review three main options were identified: 

• Department + - Maintain the electric utility as a City department but embark on major structural and process improvements such as improving asset management, operations, work and resource management, customer insights, leadership, and strategy. 
• Municipally Controlled Corporation (“MCC”) - the electric utility is legally separated from The City and operated as a municipally controlled corporation following the procedures outlined in the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). 
• Divest - The electric utility assets are sold for either a lump sum, ongoing payment, or a mix of 

No decisions, other than requests for more information, have been made by Council at this time. 

EU Department+ Model	EU Municipally Controlled Corporation (MCC)	EU Divest
The EU operates as a department of the City and is regulated by Council, with added improvements and structure changes.	The EU legally separates from the City and becomes its own entity, able to operate under a dedicated Board.	The City sells all EU assets to a third party company and becomes hands off. Many sub-options

Three Utility Governance Models (pdf)

Through research, including best practices, industry trends and our own financial and operational analysis, we summarized the opportunities and risks of each option.

Governance Model Options	EU Department+ Model	EU Municipally Controlled Corporation (MCC)	EU Divest
Opportunities	Lower transition demands The City retains maximum control and remains out of AUC regulatory authority Rates and policy decisions stay with Council	Organizational capacity increased Independent, qualification based, utility focused board Decision making stays in the community and can advance according to a local board Control via formation documents Increased opportunities to use electricity as a lever for economic growth Potential for greater financial benefit City debt decrease	Organizational capacity increased One time cash contribution City debt decrease
Risks	Challenging to keep up with industry sophistication given capacity constraints Struggle to develop business acumen, regulatory awareness, and political independence within board and org structure	Lower City control Requires intensive implementation resources EU MCC would have limited ability to scale which could hamper profitability City debt limit decreased	Lowest City control City loses long term dividend income and service sharing We lose localized decision making for electrical distribution and distribution priorities City debt limit decreased Rates dependent on AUC and Owner

Governance Model Options - Opportunities (pdf)
Governance Model Options - Risks (pdf)