1. Basit
Mustafa
2975
13th
St.
Boulder,
CO
80304
Mr.
David
L.
Eves
President
&
CEO
–
Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado
1800
Larimer
Street,
Suite
1100
Denver,
CO
80202
October
24,
2011
Dear
Mr.
Eves
–
Thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
send
Boulder
voters
a
letter
detailing
Xcel
Energy’s
opposition
to
ballot
measures
2B
and
2C.
I
typically
don’t
send
letters
of
thanks
to
those
who
waste
ink
&
paper
to
fill
my
mailbox
with
threats,
pseudo-­‐truths,
&
baseless
supposition.
However,
as
a
previously
undecided
voter
on
the
question,
your
note
helped
me
cast
my
vote
in
favor
of
2B/2C
this
afternoon
without
trepidation.
Now,
Mr.
Eves,
I
appreciate
that,
as
an
officer
of
Xcel
Energy,
you
are
duty-­‐bound
to
act
in
the
interest
of
your
shareholders,
but,
that
does
not
absolve
you
of
the
responsibility
to
be
up-­‐front
with
your
customers
or
afford
you
license
to
play
fast
&
loose
with
the
truth.
Your
claims
that
2B
and
2C
necessarily
incur
or
somehow
constitute
a
“hostile
condemnation
process
in
the
courts”
involving
“years
of
litigation”
are
simply
not
true
–
they
are
baseless
supposition
at
best.
In
fact,
I
see
the
situation
as
quite
the
opposite:
Xcel
controls
whether
this
process
would
go
smoothly
or
be
mired
by
what
you
describe
as
“litigation
and
uncertainty”
simply
by
the
level
of
cooperation
the
Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado
(PSCo)
exhibits
(or
chooses
not
to)
in
divesting
distribution
&
generation
assets
at
a
fair
market
value.
Or,
on
the
other
hand,
PSCo
has
sole
discretion
in
making
these
threats
a
reality
by
acting
in
a
retaliatory
manner
by
inflating
sale
prices,
throwing
forth
technical
barriers,
and
complicating
demarcation
to
try
and
retain
control
of
grid
assets
or
mire
the
municipalization
process
in
costs,
delays,
and
negative
press.
However,
that,
or
any
other
red
herring
–
be
it
costs,
Xcel’s
claimed
progress
towards
renewables,
or
fancy
glossy
marketing
materials
&
slogans
from
Xcel
aren’t
what
cast
my
ballot
for
me.
These
are
all
distracting
accouterment
adorning
the
core
of
the
issue:
Xcel
Energy
is
responsible,
by
nature,
to
its
shareholders
and
the
profit
motive.
Intrinsically,
there
is
nothing
wrong
with
this
notion.
In
fact,
as
a
shareholder
of
many
corporations,
former
employee
of
a
major
corporation,
and
a
founder
of
my
own,
I
truly
appreciate
that
idea.
But,
I
also
appreciate
the
deeper
implications
it
has
for
energy
policy
in
Boulder.
I’m
not
interested
in
the
fancy
portmanteau
named
programs
Xcel
has
touted
as
“innovative”
in
renewable
capacity
(many
of
which
were
done
in
part
or
in
whole
to
meet
state
or
Federal
mandated
generation-­‐mix
or
clean-­‐air
requirements,
I
might
add).
I’m
also
not
convinced
by
Xcel’s
claims,
graphs,
and
thick
glossy-­‐stock
printed
collateral
boasting
a
“proven
track
record”
in
renewable
energy.
Instead,
as
an
astute
investor,
businessman,
and
shareholder,
I’m
particularly
swayed
by
certain
facts
gleaned
from
your
annual
report,
balance
sheet,
and
investments,
which
frankly
speak
louder
to
the
issues
than
any
letter
you
might
send
my
way
(speaking
directly
to
facts
that
Xcel
has
largely
kept
off
their
talking
points
prompter
on
the
issue,
for
obvious
reasons!).
Anyway
you
slice
it,
Xcel
is
“big
coal”,
and
has
not
been
“responsible”
by
Boulder
customers
(let
alone
nature).
Xcel’s
2010
SEC
10-­‐K
filing
demonstrates
that
the
PSCo
enjoyed
a
19%
improvement
in
diluted
earnings
per
share.
Of
course,
the
informed
voter
will
not
be
surprised
that
this
is
the
case,
since
Xcel
fought
for
(and
was
awarded)
the
nation’s
2nd
highest
electrical
rate
increase
(21.4%)
in

2. 2010.
The
story
becomes
even
more
sordid
when
you
recall
that
the
primary
justification
for
this
rate
increase
to
the
PUC
was
a
$1.3
billion
expenditure
to
construct
the
brand-­‐new
Comanche
3
coal-­‐fired
plant
and
the
conversion
of
a
former
nuclear
facility
to
fossil-­‐fuel
based
generation.
This
is
not
the
picture
of
the
clean
and
renewable-­‐centric
Xcel
your
corporation
has
spent
millions
trying
to
portray,
is
it?
There
are
so
many
more
examples
of
how
the
entire
gamut
of
Xcel’s
asset
mix,
investment
posture,
and
business
model
demonstrate
that
Xcel
is
neither
committed
to
renewables
nor
interested
in
any
other
goal
than
protecting
their
profit
motive
and
their
shareholders’
pecuniary
interest
(either
in
Boulder,
in
the
PSCo,
or
across
their
entire
portfolio
of
businesses,
distribution
infrastructure,
or
generating
capacity).
In
reality,
the
facts
(and
history)
confirm
an
even
more
disappointing
outcome:
Xcel
(and
the
PSCo)
will
act
in
its
own
pecuniary
interest
and
do
only
what
they
must
when
their
feet
are
held
to
the
(coal)
fire
to
demonstrate
a
(token)
shift
to
renewables,
and
not
only
do
they
remain
firmly
encamped
in
coal
country,
but
they
continue
to
lay
deeper
foundations
there,
too.
But,
I
won’t
waste
your
time
(or
any
more
paper)
waxing
poetic
about
the
story
the
actual
numbers
tell
themselves
(I’ll
believe
an
audited
10-­‐K
filing
over
glossy
inserts
in
my
Xcel
bill/from
an
Xcel
funded
PAC
any
day,
by
the
way).
Instead,
I’ll
leave
you
with
this
thought:
after
being
bullied
&
threatened
by
your
letter
and
the
various
“citizens
groups”
Xcel
has
funded
to
the
tune
of
nearly
$250,000.00
(at
last
count
–
the
number
invariably
will
continue
to
tick
upwards
in
the
final
days
of
the
campaign),
I’m
left
with
solid
confirmation
that
our
energy
future
is
not
well-­‐cared
for
in
your
hands
and
should
not
be
in
the
hands
of
your
corporation.
Xcel’s
values
&
conduct
in
the
past
decade
in
how
it
has
done
business
and,
more
recently,
with
how
it
has
approached
the
2B/2C
question
has
given
me
pause
and
reason
to
be
excited
to
see
even
an
inefficient,
bumbling,
and
slow
government
entity
take
the
reins
(although
I
truly
believe
the
City
of
Boulder
can
do
much
better
than
that
and
isn’t
nearly
as
incompetent
has
Xcel
has
painted
them
to
be!).
Again,
Mr.
Eves,
thank
you
for
clearing
the
air
on
these
ballot
issues
–
it
helped
me
do
something
“Responsible
by
Nature”
and
vote
to
find
a
way
to
put
more
naturally
responsible
leadership
in
place
for
my
utility
needs.
Sincerely,
Basit
Mustafa
Boulder,
CO
Meter
#17B782800A
cc:
Ms.
Erica
Stutzman,
Boulder
Daily
Camera
Editorial
Board
Mr.
Benjamin
G.S.
Fowke
III,
Chairman
of
the
Board,
President,
and
CEO
–
Xcel
Energy

3. (l Xcel Energy•
RESPONSIBLE BY NATURE 1M
David L. Eves
President and CEO
Public Service Company of Colorado
1800 Larimer Street, Suite 1100
Denver, CO 80202
October 20, 2011
Dear Voter,
The upcoming election is very important-you'll decide who will be your electric service provider
with your vote on ballot measures 2B and 2C.
You have probably received and heard information from both sides of this important issue. While
it may be difficult to determine the validity of the many projections and claims about forming a
- city-owned and-o-p-erateue1e-ctric utility, it's easierto---onderstam:l""what you--a-treadynave-oy lool<ing
at Xcel Energy's proven track record in renewable energy, reduction of carbon dioxide and other
emissions, energy conservation programs, highly reliable service and reasonable rates.
Measures 2B and 2C do not keep options open or increase leverage with Xcel Energy.
Recently, the proponents of 28 and 2C have claimed that approval of these measures would
simply keep Boulder's options open and set the stage for future negotiations. Nothing is further
from the truth.
Measures 28 and 2C fund and authorize the start of a hostile condemnation process in the
courts, launching years of litigation and uncertainty, both for the city and Xcel Energy. The
measures close doors rather than open them.
We serve more than 170 Colorado communities and 1.3 million customers outside of Boulder.
Each city and town expects us to treat it fairly and not provide one community an unaue
advantage, even with the prospect of condemnation looming. Municipalization is not the right path
to obtain more renewables or reduce carbon . But if the city decides to form a municipal electric
system, we need to protect the interests of our other customers.
Measures 2B and 2C could affect access to our popular renewable energy and energy efficiency
programs.
Approval of these measures would cause us to act quickly to determine, with the city and the
Colorado Public Utilities Commission, whether Boulder customers may continue to participate in
many of our programs, such as Solar*Rewards, SaversSwitch, energy efficiency and
conservatiOn -caemand-s1ae management or ITSIV1) programs ana -our proposeanew long-term
Windsource® program.
The benefits you receive as participants in these programs are based upon an on-going
relationship with us. Program funding and rebates are borne by all Xcel Energy electricity
customers, even though our Boulder customers participate and benefit at much higher levels than
average.
It's questionable if these renewable energy and efficiency programs can continue in Boulder over
the next five to seven years- the time it could take to go through the condemnation process-
without the city's commitment to reimburse other customers and the company for costs incurred
in Boulder.
It is misleading to say there are no adverse consequences if 28 and 2C are approved. Due to key
undcrootimoting in the city'a foCil@ibility otudy, H1c. cre>!;ltion of
::1 municip~l utility Qnt:Jil~ ~ignifir.a nt
drawbacks. During the five to seven years it will take to form the utility, renewable energy and
energy efficiency funding may be completely stopped.

4. Get the facts
There are a variety of inaccurate statements being made about your service, our programs , the
ballot measures, our energy portfolio mix and the true costs of forming a municipality. One recent
example is the claim that Xcel Energy has plans to build new coal plants in Colorado- this is false
and completely unfounded.
There are additional reasons to vote NO on 28 and 2C, including the illusion of on-going rate
parity, unlimited city bonding authority, the fact that the measures do not require or guarantee
additional renewable energy, and the risk to reliable service. Get the facts by reading the
"Challenges of Municipalization" on our website at xcelenergy.com/boulder and reviewing the
actual ballot language.
We want to continue as your energy provider. We are proud of our environmental
accomplishments, our renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, our highly reliable
service, our customer service and our reasonable rates.
We believe that by working together we can achieve your energy and environmental goals faster
and more effectively than through the city's condemnation of our business and facilities in
Boulder.
Sincerely,
David L. Eves
President and CEO
Public Service Company of Colorado
An Xcel Energy company

5. The challenges of municipalization
Voter approval
In November, registered voters in the City of Boulder w1ll have the opportun1ty to
X 28: Approves an increase and 2-year extension in the
utility occupation tax to fund the condemnation
vote on two ballot measures that, if possed, would ullow the r;ily lu bormw hundreds
procp,ss. r.osling about $12 million
of millions of dollars to takeover and operate Xcel Energy's electric system.
If 28 and 2C pass, the city has no plans to ask voter permission for this
X 2C: Gives thfl city permission to form a municipal utility
and gives the city unlimited bonding authority for on
decision again. uncertain takeover cost
Acquire the electric system through litigation Cost Estimate Comparison (in Millions): Boulder vs. Xcel Energy
Boulder needs to acquire the el ectric system - the poles, wires, substation, -:1.!11!4-Hf1!:!!M
equipment and other infrastructure. Two matters would be decided in court: $121M f- $150M
Condemnation: A state court decides if Boulder can condemn the Separation $15M 1 $1OO+M
I
system and what is fair market value, plus what damages should be Startup $45M $45M
paid to Xcel Energy GuiiiU Cur rcerr r $0 $3CiOM
Stranded Costs: The Federal Energy Regu latory Commission and a Stranded Cost
-- ~~ ~
$0
f----~~--
$335M
federal court decide what Boulder owes Xcel Energy for economic damages Programs (SmartGridCity® Energy Efficiency/
/
$0 $100M
associated with having acquired electric generation to serve Boulder Solar• Rewa rds)
Other (Cash Reserve/Interest/Debt Service) $102M $100M
This legal process will potentially cost millions in consulting and legal fees and
Underwriting $3M $6M
take five or more years to complete. Further, we believe the city's plan does
not represent the full cost of a takeover. An unbudgeted expense (see TOTAL $286M ?
chart) of more than $112 million puts its break-even point in jeopardy. *From UtiliPoi nt analysis of Boulder feasibi lity study_See xcel energy.com/Boulder for report
Finance the takeover and continued system operations
Boulder would not know the final takeover cost until litigation concludes,
and it would need to seek municipal bonds to pay for it so 2C gives Boulder
unlimited bonding authority.
Acquire Electricity from Renewable Sources Electricity Supply Comparison:
Colorado Municipal Utilities vs. Xcel Energy
The city would need to contract fo r who lesale electricity, with the promise of
75%
providing more renewable energy to meet Bou lder's energy future goals. When
compared to Colorado's municipal utilities, Xcel Energy offers a more diverse
electricity supply with less coal and more rene wa ble ene rgy on our system .
Much of the renewable energy that Colorado municipal utilities supply comes
from long-time, lost-cost hydroelectric contracts that are not available in the
market today.
Boulder has offered no guarantee that it will be able to provide as much
or more renewable energy as Xcel Energy, and the potential costs are XCE ENERGY {C } COLOR
L O ADO SPRINGS FORT COLLINS LONGMONT LOVELAND
• COAL • NATURAL GAS • WIND/SOLAR • HYDRO OTHER
not included in the city's current financial analysis.
Source: Governor's Energy Offi ce, 2010 Co lorado Utilities Report, w::ing 2009 data
Utility Startup Customer Rate Comparison: National Average vs. Xcel Energy (CO)
The city will need to develop an organizaliurlol structure, hire personnel, learn 1 0 ~/kWi r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---::;;:;;,;:;===--i
to operate the system and other services There is no guarantee of safe. NAtinnA I AvP.rAQP:
relinble service ond rcoJonobh:; Guatomcr rotGa.
Xcel Energy's electricity rates are currently below the national average as set
by the Colorado Public Utilities Comm ission in a process that includes input
Xcel En ergy- Colorado
frorn state consumer advocates and other parties The Boulder City Council 6¢/kWh t =-="<---- - - - -- - -- -
would set customer electricity rates and fees under the municipal utility
2001 2010
Source: Energy Information Adm inistration
(l Xcel Energy® © 2011 Xcel Energy lnc. l 1·800·895·4999l xcelene rgy.com I Xcel E
P for by the Xcel En ergy Issues Comm ittee
aid
nergy is a registered trademark of Xcel Energy Inc. Public Service Company of Colorado. an Xcel Energy Company 111 ·09·1 00

6. (l Xcel Energy·
Xcel Energy: A Proven Energy Partner for Boulder
Creating a clean energy future at a reasonable cost
• Serving Boulder for over 100 years • Customers can already choose • $4 million spent in 2010 with
• High reliability with electricity 100% renewable energy through Boulder companies
available 99.98 percent of the time our Windsource® program • Most generous corporate giver in
• $13.5 million in fees and taxes pai d Colorado (Denver Business Journal)
• Electric rates below the
national average to Boulder in 2010 for the past three years; contributed
$162,000 in 2010 to Boulder non profits
One elwirollmentalllrcrderh-etptng-an-oth-erl"eader
• No. 1 utility wind energy provider in the United States (American Wind Energy Association)
• In the top 10 for solar capacity (Solar Electric Power Association)
• One of the largest voluntary green energy programs, Windsource®(NREL)
• Five times on Dow Jones Sustainability Index North America
• American Carbon Registry Utility Excellence winner 2011
• Power Company of the Year 2010, Platts Global Energy Awards
• EPA Energy Star Partner of the Year 2011
• We're ahead of schedule to meet the state's renewable energy standard of
30 percent renewables by 2020, the second-highest standard in the United States.
We are on track to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions 28% by 2020 from 2005 levels
30
20
10
2005 MEASURED IN MilliONS OF TONS 2020
We offer customers clean energy choice
Our successful energy-saving and voluntary renewable energy programs provide
customers choice in how they receive and use energy. These programs are popular
with Boulder customers. For information about our programs. visit xcelenergy.com.
34%of
Colorado
BOULDER CUSTOMERS