HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-05-20 Min - Board Director Aguera moved, and Director Hillstrom seconded, that the Board award a Task Order to
Inland Ecosystems in an amount not to exceed $1,500 to amend the District's Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan; and authorize the transfer of up to $250 from the Electric Department General
Fund to the Water Department General Fund and up to $1,250 from the Reserve for Future Meters
fund to the Water Department General Fund to cover the cost of the contract.
ROLL CALL: All Directors aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED
CONSIDERATION OF THE AWARD OF AN ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR MOTOR VEHICLE
FUELS This item involves the award of an annual contract for motor vehicle fuels.
Director Hillstrom moved, and Director Aguera seconded, that the Board award the contract to
Western Energetix for the purchase of Diesel and Gasoline for a period of two years with the option
to extend the contract for one additional year for an annual not to exceed amount of $160,000.
ROLL CALL: All Directors aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED
CONSIDERATION OF THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR TREE TRIMMING This item
involves the award of a contract for tree trimming services.
Director Bender moved, and Director Aguera seconded, that the Board award the FY09 Tree Trim-
ming — Pole Clearing Contract to Loggers Unlimited Inc. for an amount not to exceed $192,000.
ROLL CALL: All Directors aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED
CONSIDERATION OF THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR A COMMERCIAL SMART
.. IRRIGATION WATER CONTROL SYSTEM This item involves the award of a contract for
Commercial Smart Irrigation Water Control Systems.
Director Bender moved, and Director Hillstrom seconded, that the Board award a contract in an
amount not to exceed $33,000 to HydroPoint Data Systems for the purchase and installation of
Commercial Smart Irrigation Water Controllers.
ROLL CALL: Director Sutton, abstain; All other Directors aye, by voice vote. SO MOVED
WORKSHOP
DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC OUTREACH FOR WATER RATE STUDY PROGRAM This item
involves information about water rate study public outreach.
Steven Poncelet gave a presentation:
• California State mandate for water meters
0 1+ year public process on implementation
o Pilot meter program began last fall
o Must begin billing by water usage in 2010
o May 6th Board meeting workshop on possible new water rate structure designs
• Board requested public outreach plan
o Public input is welcome and needed
o June 3rd Workshop is next step
o September— November setting new rates
. o New rates begin to take effect 2010
• Water Rate Outreach Plan
o Ads in local media: Sierra Sun, Moonshine Ink, TD News, KTKE Radio
2 Minutes: May 20, 2009
,. o Press release
o Direct communication: homeowner associations, partners
o Website (www.tdpud.org)
o Handouts: customer service desk, Truckee Home and Building Show
There was no public comment.
Board discussion:
• Great program- good layout- entice people to come to the workshop and provide thoughts
• People don't look at ads- a letter to the editor or an opinion piece may be noticed more
• Have you notified all local districts
• What is the ad size
• This subject deserves bold editorial coverage
• Reno paper has a Truckee insert- make contact with them
• How does staff communicate with homeowners associations
• Comprehensive approach to public outreach
DISCUSSION OF A CONTRACT FOR METER INSTALLATION This item involves a discussion
of meter installation for Phase 2 of the water meter project.
Neil Kaufman gave a presentation:
• AB 2572 requires that the District begin reading all water meters installed since 1992 and
commence billing on a volumetric basis
, - • Summer 2008, the District issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the provision of an
automated meter reading (AMR) system and the installation of water meters
• Five proposals were received: three for drive-by systems and two for fixed-based systems
• District determined that a fixed-base system would best serve its needs
o Contract awarded to Measurement Control Systems (MCS) using Aclara radios and
Neptune meters for the pilot program
o Pilot program is to verify that the selected system will function in Truckee and gather
consumption data to be used in developing volume-based water rates
o Aclara/Nepture pilot involves 412 units and pre-existing Datamatic pilot was expanded
from 10 to 30 meters
• Advantages of Aclara/Neptune System
o Aclara software package is more polished & has better built-in reporting functions
o Single company to deal with. MCS is both manufacturer's representative and installer
• Disadvantages of Aclara/Neptune System
o Problems with vendor performance
o Aclara radios must be reprogrammed in the field
o Most common need for reprogramming would be adjustment of reading interval in a leak
situation
• Advantages of Datamatic system
o Metal meter box lids cause interference with the radio signals
■ Change out of lids is necessary to optimize performance of the Aclara system
■ Datamatic system is not as sensitive due to shorter transmission distances
o Datamatic radios will provide automated leak detection with existing Badger meters
o Datamatic system requires fewer central collectors. Lower cost for data backhaul to District
o Datamatic radios can be read in the field
• Disadvantages of Datamatic system
3 Minutes: May 20, 2009
o Multiple parties involved
• Conclusions
o Both AMR systems will work locally
o Each system has certain technical advantages/disadvantages
o Compatible electric meters exist for both systems
o MCS has not met schedule deadlines set forth in its contract
• Three options available
o Continue to work with MCS
■ Set clearly defined schedule with intermediate milestones
■ Set liquidated damages associated with intermediate milestones
■ Require performance bond tied to intermediate milestones
■ Require on-site manager in TDPUD office. District would provide a desk
o Reject Aclara/Neptune system & enter into contract with Vulcan for Datamatic system
■ Cost associated with converting Neptune meters from Aclara to Datamatic radios
o Restart the AMR acquisition process
■ Least favorable option
■ Bid contract for installation of registers on existing Badger meters- complete by Fall
■ Issue new RFP for AMR/radio portion of the project with installation in the spring of
2010
■ Allows "technical" compliance with AB 2572 since it does not mandate billing interval
■ Will create problems with customer education and the overall transition
• Current Phase 2 cost estimates
Component MCS Vulcan
Meter mounted radios $744,000 $758,000
Retrofit existing Badger meters $245,000 $290,000
Retrofit existing Sensus meters $ 76,000 $ 59,000
New Meters $309,000 $239,000
Meter box lid replacement/retrofit $532,000 $250,000
AMR system infrastructure $114,000 $105,000
Labor& project management $220,000 $600,000
Total $2,240,000 $2,301,000
• Fiscal Impact
o Overall costs are essentially the same
o Cost of water meters and other equipment is less expensive in Datamatic system. This is a
future savings when new customers are connected.
o Labor cost is lower under MCS proposal. District has asked for clarifications regarding
expected level of effort and appropriate prevailing wages
o Current pricing of electric meters is:
Meter Aclara Datamatic
Standard read $120 $139
With remote disconnect $305 $325
• District has potential for funding of Meter Box Retrofit project through the State Revolving
Fund from Federal Stimulus monies
o Priority list of projects has been published by Dept. of Public Health
o First 75 projects were allocated funding
o District's Meter Box Retrofit project is number 85 on priority list
o Projects above number 85 can drop off or be denied funding if they are not "shovel-ready"
• Compliance with AB 2572 is required for this funding
4 Minutes: May 20, 2009
Public comment:
Will costs changes regarding the prevailing wage be available before June 3
Board discussion:
• Good to hear about grant and/or SRF funding
• Interesting numbers comparison between MCS and Vulcan
• Are we getting what we pay for in this project
• Impose additional restrictions for labor and project management- are we getting what we
need and pay for it- need an answer
• So MCS is authorized distributor and installer
• Need to know labor number with all requirements
• Were the missed deadlines reasonable or a black hole experience
• Where is MCS located and where is Vulcan located
• Do numbers all include installation
• How are labor numbers set up
• Meter bid cost is significant portion- how about the cost to go with plastic lids instead of
metal- don't want to pay for plastic lids when already have lids
• What is the operational maintenance cost over the years- with there be operations and
maintenance time for staff
• What about maintenance failures- would MCS be responsible
• Will the two-way Aclara radios be available this summer
DISCUSSION OF NON-CONFORMING WATER ACCOUNTS This items involves the upcoming
transition from flat rate billing to volume based billing.
Neil Kaufman gave a presentation:
• AB 2572 requires that the District begin reading all water meters installed since 1992 and
commence billing on a volumetric basis
• Re-examination & updating of water rate structure is needed for compliance with AB 2572
• Staff is reviewing the status of the existing water customers: 11,814 residential accounts and
680 commercial accounts
• Non-conforming water accounts are those that are not in compliance with current practices
regarding metering as described in Title 6 of the District code
o Multiple accounts in a single structure- single structure such as a duplex or mixed-use
facility that is fed by a single service line, but each unit receives a separate bill for water
service
■ Units are under common ownership, or they are owned by separate parties
■ Individual units cannot be easily separated
■ Individual customer cannot be disconnected for non-payment
o Single-family residential in multiple structures- separate single-family residential structures
fed by a single service, but each residential structure receives a separate bill for water ser-
vice
■ Mobile home parks
■ Ownership and maintenance responsibility of the exterior piping may be unclear
o Unbilled services- Multiple connections serving the same property. Only one bill for
service is issued. Often the extra connection was installed for irrigation purposes
5 Minutes: May 20, 2009
o Flat rate agreements- Commercial customers where the District agreed (either verbally or
in writing) to accept a flat payment for service
o Other unique situations
• Recommended approach
o Require full compliance with current Title 6
■ Expensive
■ Who is financially responsible?
o Master metering
■ Acceptable party must exist to take responsibility for billings
■ Could require modification of lease agreements
■ Revenue impact to the District
o Create New Class of Service (Non-Conforming Bulk Rate)
■ Customer's usage would be unknown
■ Bill would be well above the average for a similarly-sized metered service
■ Compliance with current practices upon resale or significant remodel?
o Other Issues
■ Property Conversions: customers should be classified to current use
■ Construction water: meter should be set at time of connection; customer should be
billed based upon meter readings
• Fiscal impact: using the master metering approach, it is expected that the total count of
single-residential accounts will be reduced by about 200
o Partially offset by creation of new master metered accounts
o Issue will be discussed with HDR (water rate consultant). Adjusted customer count will be
developed for revenue calculations
There was no public comment.
Board discussion:
• We need to be in compliance
• District has an obligation to accept non-conforming arrangement that were accepted
previously
• Are there any mobile home parts that have individual meters
• Most multi dwellings with more than four units have a HOA
• Work out the non-conforming meters as we go along- see what is out there
• The District Code needs to be modified to define conforming meter
• How many non-confirming situations are there in the District
DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSITION TO A TWO-YEAR BUDGET CYCLE This involves a
discussion of a biannual budget cycle process.
Bob Mescher gave a presentation:
• Background
o Budgets have been prepared annually prior to FY10-11
o Changing to a two-year budget will reduce Board and staff time, promote long-term
planning and facilitate rate stabilization
o Board approved Title 3 revisions: two-year budget beginning FY10-11 and review
semiannually
6 Minutes: May 20, 2009
New Information
o Two-year budget process similar to annual budget process, except two years are
prepared, approved and reviewed concurrently
o First year's budget process is same as annual budget
o Second year's budget is first year is basis, multipliers used to estimate cost changes from
prior year and account for major items separately (purchased power, capital projects,
staffing changes)
• 2009 Workshops
o September
■ Mission, goals and objectives
■ Assumptions
■ Staffing and labor costs
■ Existing debt
■ Purchased power
o October
■ Revenue projections
■ Reserve funding
■ Departmental operating and capital budgets
■ New debt
o November
■ Public hearing
■ Board adoption
` • Budget Preparation and Review Cycle
o Aug to Nov 2009: FY10-11 Budget Preparation
o June 2010: mid-year review
o December 2010: mid-cycle review
o December 2011: end-of-cycle review
o June 2011: mid-year review
There was no public comment
Board discussion:
• What happens when an assumption is made and costs change
• How does second year budget get changed
• Seems there would be a lot of variances in the second year
• When would the next two year budget process start
• The second year would have amendments
• Board can make changes at semiannual reviews
• What are the rate consequences when approve a budget for two years
• Already not happy when staff says an item has already been approved in the budget
• With a two year budget, need a lot more information so can connect with it
UPDATE ON BROADBAND AND LEASING OF BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE This
involves information on broadband and lease of the Broadband infrastructure.
Steve Hollabaugh gave a presentation:
• Background / History
o District Strategic Plan (1999)
7 Minutes: May 20, 2009
o Application to Nevada Co. LAFCo (approved 1999)
o Customer Survey findings (2000/2003/2007)
o Preparation of Business Case (1999— 2007)
o Choice of technology (approved 2002)
o Cable Television franchise (approved 2003)
o Bidding (approved 2004)
o Financing (initial COP Docs approved 2004)
o Regulatory Approval (August 2004)
o Lawsuit filed by Cequel III (2004)
o Defeated Legal Challenge (December 2005)
o Defeated Appellate Court Challenge (June 2007)
0 180 Connect/Quanta/Victor Capital —design/finance/build offer(June 2007)
o Victor Capital bows out (December 2007)
o Began investigating lease of telecom infrastructure (August 2008)
o Board approves contract with Uptown Services LLC for consulting services to support
leasing of broadband infrastructure
• Description of asset
0 4 fibers from Reno to Sacramento
o Some conduit throughout District
• Next Steps
o Issued RFP for Leasing of Telecom Infrastructure in January 2009
o Three responses to Leasing of Telecom Infrastructure RFP were received April 2009
o Uptown Services helped staff evaluate the proposals and is supporting the due diligence
phase of the project
o Once the due diligence phase is complete and a contract can be negotiated, a contract
for leasing infrastructure will be presented to the Board
• Broadband related disbursements (thru FY08)
o Capital disbursements $143,969
■ Engineering Services
■ Fiber asset
o Non Capital disbursements $2,685,110
■ Study and analysis
■ Legislative
■ Legal
■ Advertising/PR
■ Consulting
There was no public comment.
Board discussion:
• Accurate history
• What is the amount owed in legal fees
• Did the District start with four strands of fiber and sell two, or was it the conduit that was sold
• Are the proposals from people who want to sue the dark fiber
• Does staff have a sense of the asset is worth
8 Minutes: May 20, 2009
ROUTINE BUSINESS
TREASURER'S REPORT: APRIL 2009
Approval of the report: Director Sutton moved, and Director Hillstrom seconded, that the Board
approve the interim treasurer's report for the month ended April 30, 2009.
ROLL CALL: All Directors, aye. SO MOVED.
Approval of disbursements: Director Aguera moved, and Director Hemig seconded, that the Board
approve the April 2009 disbursements report.
ROLL CALL: Director Sutton, no (feels the Board should approve the checks before they are
mailed); All other Directors, aye. SO MOVED.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 15 AND MAY 612009
Director Hillstrom moved, and Director Bender seconded, that the Board approve the minutes of
April 15 and May 6, 2009. ROLL CALL: All Directors, aye. SO MOVED.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 PM.
TRUCKEE D ER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
7oA.,
J. o emig, resident
Prepared by :I
Barbara Cahill,Deputy District Clerk
9 Minutes: May 20, 2009