Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2000-10-18 Agenda Packet - Board (7)
y,6 w Staff Report To: Board of Directors From: Peter L. Holzmeister Date: October 13, 2000 Public hearing on ordinance adjusting the compensation of the general manager The Board scheduled a public hearing to consider an ordinance adjusting the compensation of the general manager. The hearing is scheduled for 7:00 PM on Wednesday evening. My current salary is $94,286.40 per year. The other management and professional employees received a salary increase of 4%. The union received a 1% wage increase plus a 3% increase in contribution to the pension benefit. If the Board approved a 4% increase for me the amount of the increase wold be $3,771.46 per year, for a salary of$98,057.86. To provide you with a comparison, the general managers of TSD and TTSA earn $108,000 and $99,600 annually respectively. At the conclusion of the public hearing you will be able to consider adopting an ordinance setting the salary. Attached is a copy of the current ordinance. 0 Page 1 0Ft©INANCE NO g901 (?F-THE : e TRUCKEE DQNNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT EFFECTING,A comPENSAvoN ADJusTmENT Ft1R THE GENERAL AMAGER WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it appropriate for the General Manager to receive a compensation adjustment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED by the Board of Directors of the District that effective thirty days from the date of passage of this ordinance the following action occur: 1. That the General Manager receive a 3% salary increase retroactive to January 1, 1999 increasing the current salary of$91,540.80 by$2,746.22 to $94,287.02. 2. That the Deputy District Clerk of the District be directed to publish this ordinance in accordance with the laws of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors at a meeting duly called and held within the District on the third day of March 1999 by following roll call vote: AYES: Aguera, Hemig, Maass, Sutton and Jones. NOES: None. ABSENT. None. TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT By Peter L. Holzmeister, Clerk of the Board ATTEST: Susan M. Craig, Deputy District Clerk smc QUESTIONS RAISED BY ROGER TERNEUZEN 0 1. Why doesn't Vectren or someone else seek its own franchise and do the business itself? Vectren or any other firm can come to Truckee, apply for a franchise, and offer services. To date District staff is unaware of any private organization seeking to offer broadband services to Truckee residents. Since current service providers are failing to satisfy customers' expectations, and since Truckee residents and businesses appear to have confidence in TDPUD, we are considering filling the service void. 2. Ratepayers and Town residents would be asked to pay their share of $14 million. Only those Truckee customers who subscribe to the services offered by TDPUD will pay for the construction of the full service network. These potential subscribers are already paying USA Media or PacBell for services, but they are not fully satisfied and want another option. This investment represents no additional cost to the Truckee ratepayers. Instead of sending money to USA Media or to PacBell, some will choose to send it to TDPUD. 3. Public money is at risk. Public funds would not be at risk with the implementation of the proposed Risk Mitigation strategy. 4. The document clearly states that the Navigant document is flawed. This is an incorrect statement. The Vectren study not only validates the Navigant study and Sierra Market Research survey, it goes a step further than those studies. It provides the District with a complete view of all services that can be provided on a full service network. As technology moves ahead, so must the District's plans to provide services to Truckee residents. 5. This will be a stand-alone business separate from the TDPUD. No. It will be an additional business unit operated by TDPUD. As with the District's electric and water units it will support itself and pay its fair share of District overhead costs. 6. Vectren plans to be here for a long time — 25 years. The duration of Vectren's involvement has not yet been determined. The Study does include a proposed partnership for a period of 25 years. This is viewed by District staff as a strength due to the long-term nature of the proposed partnership with an organization that holds financial power and intellectual capital in the telecommunications field. 7. What new products or services are included in the plan? Just what is already offered by USA Media and PacBell. Services proposed by Vectren and District staff include: Point-to-point data services — Not currently available in Truckee Community High Speed Data Platform — Not currently available in Truckee Community Competitive Cable Television Services — Incumbent provides fewer channels at higher cost Competitive Local Telephone Services — Incumbent provides service at higher cost 8. There is no promise to provide even the same level of service or programming that USA Media already provides. This is not a correct statement. Under the Vectren proposal the District intends to initially provide a Basic Service package of 60 channels, an array of premium services, and roll out Digital services during the second year. 9. A full 78-channel lineup may not be offered initially. Initial basic service will include a mix of 60 broadcast and satellite services. In accordance with prior Board recommendations, and the plan to implement a customer advisory board, the specific channels/programming has not been determined. 10. Internet is at best a dream. Because you need to negotiate with another entity to obtain these services and share a portion of revenues. No. It has been found that in communities providing a "high speed" services platform, such as in Ashland and Alameda, ISPs actively pursue the opportunity to become part of the system. 11. Metropolitan wide-area Network is mentioned, but the costs are in addition to the $14 million. No. The cost to construct a MAN throughout the District's service area is included in $14 million system proposed in the Study prepared by Vectren. 12. Is there any serious interest in this type of network today in Truckee? Definitely. As shown in the Vectren Study, and Sierra Market Research Telecommunications Customer Survey, Truckee residents have a high level of dissatisfaction with the incumbent cable television and telephone operators. Thus, there is a high level of interest in the provision of competitive services. Additionally, many of the services proposed by the Vectren Study are technologically superior to those offered by the incumbents. Our demographics studies demonstrate a need in Truckee for the provision of cutting edge broadband services, and we expect such services to be widely accepted, and subscribed to. 13. The rates are fairly easy to determine. $33.43 per month for basic service, $10.00 for premium, $2.95 for PPV. The Vectren study proposes the following costs for services: I Basic Service (60 channels) - $29.95 yr. 1, $34.95 yr. 2 Premium Services - $10.00 (packaging/bundling of services will drive price per premium service down.) PPV - $2.95 (priced $1.00 less than incumbent) 14. There is no mention of Digital programming. The Vectren study proposes the introduction of digital services in year 2 of the plan. 15. There is no discussion of how you intend to get broadcast television stations from Reno, Sacramento, San Francisco. The Vectren Study does not include information on the design of the District's proposed system. As such detailed information regarding how signals will be received has not been included. Vectren and District staff have met and discussed the methods in which "off air" broadcast signals will be received. A conceptual plan is in place and will be provided to the Board as the District moves into the system design phase of the project. 16. How many bay area, Reno and Sacramento stations will be represented on you new system? Again, details regarding system design, programming offered and charges for services offered will come to the Board as we move through the design phase of the project. 17. You plan to collect $750,000 to $1 million per year on interior wiring for telephone. What will your connection charges be? Again, details regarding system design, programming offered and charges for services offered will come to the Board as we move through the design phase of the project. 18. Getting cable into the house would be in addition to the $14 million. No. On-premise wiring charges are included in the Vectren study. 19. If it weren't for the unlawful actions of TDPUD management to prevent or delay USA Media from deploying optical fiber cable. In late November of 1999 local and out of state USA Media personnel began "deploying optical fiber cable" without first obtaining authorization, as required under the District's Pole Contact License Agreement", to attach their new facilities to District poles. As such District management, in conjunction with District legal counsel, filed a restraining order to halt continued attachments. Federal Court approved the order, requiring USA Media to abide by the License Agreement, and receive District authorization prior to attaching facilities to District poles. 20. TDPUD is a non-profit organization and should not be in competition with private business. No, the Telecommunications Act disagrees and actually encourages public entities like the District to do so. Further, the California Public Utility District Act disagrees, and provides for PUD's to provide telecommunications and other means of communication. Finally, the Truckee community disagrees, and this is shown in both of the District's customer opinion surveys. Broadband services are critical to a communit's welfare, and the incumbent telephone and cable television providers are failing to provide acceptable service levels. A Community such as ours can take its destiny into its own hands. The Truckee Donner Public Utility District has been here for 75 years. We will not sell out for quick profits. We have, and will continue to provide service to the community.