Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStratigic Plan for 2002 STATUS REPORT Strategic Plan for 2002 The past year has been focused on water supply and related infrastructure, growth of our customer base through development, Donner Lake, Glenshire, wholesale power costs, broadband planning, restructuring the organization, bringing new staff into the organization, and securing our financial health. We did not accomplish all the strategic tasks. They are work in progress that extend beyond one year. 1.1.Increase water supply Issue: Need more wells, at least one more by spring of 2002. Current water master plan is general, need to develop sites, explore environmental issues, etc. Action: Develop a long-term well drilling program that proactively meets community needs. Includes advance site selection, environmental documentation, permits, agreements, facility definition, etc. Must include controlling agreement with PCWA, who have established conditions for serving in Placer County. In short, a way to coexist in basin with us, PCWA, Northstar and others Status: We are performing CEQA review at this time. We are going to bid for test hole at this time. Anticipate drilling production well this fall. Action: Attorney hold a workshop with Board on (1) the requirements of CEQA, (2) the issue of growth inducing, (3) other critical guidelines for the Board contained in law Status: This task has not yet been accomplished 1.2. Implementing the water master plan Issue: the District adopted a water master plan in 2001. We want to make sure this valuable document does not simply sit on a shelf. It is an important guide for us to follow. Any water system project that we construct should follow the master plan Action: When staff prepares the annual budget or works with a developer the master plan should be consulted to make sure we are expanding our system appropriately. Status: This has been accomplished. We are constructing a storage tank, developing a well program, constructing a booster pump station, replacing water lines in Tahoe Donner, all in accordance with the Water System Master Plan. 1.3. Establishing safe, sustainable yield of basin Issue: Determination of quantity of water available for consumption and the impacts of the withdrawal of water from the basin. Determine management practices that maximize water availability. Action: Apply for a grant to fund a study, which will include monitoring and development of a three-dimensional basin model of the entire Martis Valley basin. The model will establish the water availability from the basin and identify the impacts of water withdrawals. Status: We completed the Nimbus groundwater study. We will move to the next phase, determination of the groundwater model after discussions with PCWA and Northstar. The grant we applied for has not been funded. 1.4. Changing water utilization Issue: Houses now being built with large landscapes, many bathrooms, etc. Peak use increasing. Result is more water use per household/per connection. Peak use determines size of the system. Action: Hold a Board discussion on water use, meters, conservation, equitable rates, customer education on landscaping, etc. Status: We are developing a program to monitor water use, focusing primarily on irrigation use. We have not yet launched the program (water use graph) 1.5 Joint planning with PCWA on Basin Issue: The District shares the Martis Valley water basin with PCWA and Northstar Community Services District. We will need to cooperate on basin management practices in order to make sure the quality of the basin in not compromised and to avoid disputes over water availability. Action: Prepare a basin management plan jointly and adopt procedures for management of the basin Status: This item has not been accomplished. 1.6.Truckee water system maintenance, upgrade, replacement Issue: The District's water system continues to be used heavily and is growing older. Maintenance and replacement of this system will be expensive, and will become more so as time goes on. We need to be able to predict when major components need to be replaced, and develop the appropriate funding source. A system facilities maintenance and replacement master plan needs to be prepared. Action: Prepare a water system maintenance and replacement master plan Status: The strategic plan calls for this task to be performed in 2003 Issue 2. Financial master plan 2.1. Need a financial master plan Issue: We need immediate cash, especially for Donner Lake. Ultimately need one or more loans to cover other needs. Our cash position has been reduced to a low figure. Revenues must be sufficient to repay loans. Action: Contact auditors and others to define the outside help we need. Prepare a statement of work. Issue a request for qualifications. Develop with consultant to develop a financial master plan. Bring to the Board. Status: Mary, Steve and Peter are working on this. Mary is contacting GFOA for recommended policies on working capital and debt capacity. We will take the first run at this in house Issue 3. Human resource management 3.1. Prioritize staff priorities for GIS Issue: Some internal things need to be done. Support needed for water— locations, assessment district, land maps. Everyone is requesting and will request more in the future — GIS support Action: This is a staff issue. Helpful if each manager makes GIS requests, establishing size of job, schedule needed, and relative importance — and brings to staff meeting. Staff must set priorities and, if needed, request additional resources Use cost benefit as measuring stick Status: Because the initial land use base and electric network development were completed at the end of 2001, Ian has been able to devote more time to this subject. A few things have occurred that has made requests for GIS support more manageable with a better process flow A Work Request form has been established and made available at the entrance to the GIS work area. This request form allows the tracking of requested work, from the user requesting, to the date required to the type of materials requested. This form also allows the tracking of hours performed on work orders, allow for the estimating of time required on future work requests. A Field Work Function form has been created and implemented (currently in Electric Department only, but will move to Water later this year). This form allows the tracking of changes in the field that requires the GIS to reflect the updates. Because the work is recorded and handed into the GIS department, these updates can be worked on in the GIS system at a reasonable pace without the fear of missing field changes. The GIS department has taken advantage of the Truckee High School on-paid internship program this year, allowing for more GIS analysis and data collection to be performed without the incurring costs. This has been successful thus far. The GIS department has minimized data collection by training and loaning GPS equipment to outside consultants working on TDPUD specific projects. An example of this has been Greenpoint Springs and the new Glenshire pipeline. The Districts Data Exchange Agreement has help in reducing data collection. With the town, we have obtained a large number of land base information, including aerial photos, high quality contour data, and building footprints. 3.2. Current staff shortage Issue: Urgent staff shortages exist now. New water service areas have immediate needs: one accountant, three field technicians, two clerical (water and finance), one management level Action: Staff will bring these needs to the Board along with justification Status: This has been accomplished 3.3. Review organizational structure (continue excellence) Issue: What will it take to continue to do things competently? We are moving at full tilt. We may not always be able to maintain standards if we keep like this. We have needs beyond our ability to meet them with excellence. Action: GM will bring recommendation to Board for review and possible action Status: This has been accomplished 3.4. Maintain high customer service standard Issue: As the District operations grew and we tried to serve the public without increasing staff, our ability to respond to customer requests suffered. We were slow to return phone calls. We were slower to perform fieldwork requested by customers. We have not provided customers with the most convenient processes to establish and account with us (apply by phone, deposit requirements) and pay their bills (they are asking for credit card or ATM payments). Our interaction with customers has become hurried, when patience would be more appreciated. Action: We need to review all customer contact points and determine a standard for dealing with customers. We need to utilize application and payment methods that are customarily used in other commercial activities, that mirror what the customer is a is accustomed to experiencing. A recommendation will be presented to the Board Status: This has not yet been accomplished 3.5. Customer communications Issue: In the past we exerted considerable effort to inform our customers about who we are, what we do, what they should do. More recently legal dispute occurred and we were off local TV. Must resume putting our message out. In 2002 we celebrate our 75th anniversary. We can use this as a springboard. Action: Develop a customer communications plan. Include newsletters, website, other media. Bring to Board for review and action; Status: We have been advertising our 75h anniversary. We were a presence in the July 4 parade. We are beginning to advertise broadband. There is much more to do. Issue 4. Facilities 4.1. Headquarters plan Issue: The District is growing, we recently acquired the Donner Lake water system and there is discussion and movement in the acquisition of Glenshire Mutual Water Company. The District is also considering going into the Telecommunications business. The needs of the District should be evaluated to determine what and how much space is required for our own needs. Action: Evaluate the current needs of space, to look at a footprint of the space that is required for telecommunications equipment and to look at the personnel that will needed for telecommunications, any new staff the water department might need and the same with the Administrative Services Status: Not yet complete 4.2. Corporate Yard Issue: The District is currently storing material, vehicles and equipment at multiple locations due to lack of space at the District office. With the acquisition of Donner Lake Water system, potential going into the telecommunications business and acquiring the Glenshire water system, this problem will only become worse. Action: Meet with the Department heads of water, electric, telecommunications and find out what new equipment, material and vehicles will be required. To put all the ideas and requirements into one corporate yard. Status: Not yet complete issue 5. Broadband 5.1 Williams conduit ownership Issue: In September 1999, the District entered into an Agreement with Williams Communications to assist in the permitting of that portion of their conduit run that fell within the District's service area. Williams Communications agreed to provide the District with two 2" conduits following a sixteen and one half-mile route from Hirschdale to Donner Lake. Action: Following the installation, mapping and testing of conduit District staff will enter into and Agreement with Williams Communications, signing off on the completed Project and accepting ownership of sixteen and one half miles of two 2" conduits and ancillary access points. Status: Williams Communications conveyed the conduit to us. 5.2. Keep broadband plan moving along Issue: The District has, since mid 1999, evaluated the construction of a Broadband infrastructure that would provide Water and Electric business units enhanced SCATA services, and competitive Cable Television and High Speed Date services within the District's service area. Action: There are still a number of steps that must be approved by the Board prior to the District formally entering into the provision of Broadband Services. During the first quarter of 2002 the District's Telecommunications Manager will bring forward for Board approval: 1) a final Business Performa including FSG's Engineers Estimate; 2) agreements for the financing of the proposed Broadband infrastructure; 3) a request for authorization to prepare and seek bids for the construction of the proposed Broadband Business Unit; and 4) the awarding of these bids. Status: Much has been accomplished here. Much more need to be done. Issue 6. Growth 6.1. Integrating all service areas — water, electric, broadband Issue: The District has traditionally served water and electricity in the greater Truckee area, but our services have not been exactly coterminous. We are now planning to offer Broadband services. With acquisition of Donner Lake and Glenshire water service territories our service boundaries are becoming more coterminous with each other. We feel that there is good reason to offer our services to all of our customers alike. Action: Work to consolidate our services such that we offer all our services to all our customers by working with other agencies such as Sierra Pacific Power Company, LAFCo and PCWA. Report to the Board by September of 2002 on status Status: On Going. The District has contacted Sierra Pacific Power Company concerning serving their customers in our territory, as well as serving their customers immediately adjacent to our current territory. To date, Sierra has not been interested, but we will continue to inquire with Sierra from time to time concerning this issue. 6.2. Effects of economic situation Issue: There has been a major economic slowdown since early 2000. We need to continuously monitor our organization's financial well being as we move aggressively to offer services. Action: Review monthly the cash position of the District and predict monthly the future commitments we are making. Status: Mary Chapman has provided staff with weekly updates of our cash position. We made several presentations to the Board regarding our cash position. The loans recently approved by the board have helped the situation. We not must make sure we set our rates and fees to cover the debt service. 6.3. Technology plan Issue: Some departments are still without the technology required to enhance their abilities and reduce the job time. We need to push more of the technology that we have begun to implement to all departments and enhance existing technology Action: Assistant General Manager and GIS coordinator will develop a plan and submit it to the Board for review and discussion Status: It has become apparent that, although the District owns the technology, it is not fully utilized. The assumptions of this plan are: 1. All computers should be running the same and most up to date software. 2. There should be on going refresher courses for technology in use. 3. All personnel should be able to use the proper technologies that will improve their performance without getting so advanced that we hinder their performance. 4. Technology that improves performance should be made available. 5. Duplication of work should be avoided with the integration of software into a workflow plan. The results of this plan will be made available by the end of 2002. Issue 7. Electric 7.1. Electric plan master plan Issue: The current Electric System Master Plan is out of date. As a result, our electric facilities fee schedule is out of date. A revised Master Plan needs to be presented to the Board for review and eventual adoption, along with adoption of a new facilities fee schedule. Action: Present the draft master plan to the Board and recommend a new electric facilities fee schedule. Status: Done. The Electric Master Plan is complete. The CEQA is completed and a workshop concerning facilities fees has been presented. The board will consider adopting the master Plan at the July 17 meeting. 7.2. Power supply cost mitigation Issue: We have a contract to buy power at a fixed rate from 2002 through 2009. We have surplus power that we must sell. We are buying above market and will sell at market, resulting in a loss to us. Action: Mitigate the Idacorp contract. Status: In progress. The mitigation of the Idacorp contract is progressing. The District is vigorously defending our position. We are pursuing our interests at FERC and in court. Issue 8. Mid-course review 8.1. Periodic review of annual plan Issue: After the strategic plan is adopted unanticipated factors arise that prevent the plan from being fully implemented. A review mid-course process would help keep our work program relevant. Action: Review the strategic plan action items with the Board in July of 2002 Status: We are doing this now 07/17;2002 GLENSHICE WATER SYSTEM DISCUSSION What problem has the Glenshire water system experienced? a) Glenshire water system wells were experiencing high levels of arsenic. The water quality failed to meet federal government drinking water standards. b) The Glenshire water system wells did not have the capacity to pump enough water to meet demand of the customers. The Glenshire area does not have the ability to yield enough water in new wells to meet capacity. How did Glenshire approach the problem? a) Glenshire Mutual Water Company prepared an engineering report that concluded the arsenic could be removed from the water through treatment, but that the cost would be approximately $3,000,000. However, once the arsenic is filtered out, disposal would be expensive. b) The engineering report also concluded that the water quantity was a problem and needed to be addressed. It would cost at least an additional $1,000,000 to develop a supplementary water supply to meet the Glenshire water demand. What alternative did Glenshire Mutual Water Company consider? Glenshire Mutual Water Company approached Truckee Donner PUD about the PUD becoming the water purveyor in Glenshire. After lengthy discussions and a vote of the Glenshire property owners, the Glenshire water system was conveyed to the PUD for ownership, operation and maintenance. This transfer required the PUD to solve the water quality and water quantity problems. The customers of the Glenshire water system need to pay the cost to install the facilities to solve the problems. This cost is to be spread over the Glenshire property owners as an add-on to the monthly water bill. Is the cost to the Glenshire property owners less under the PUD alternative than under the arsenic treatment alternative? a) Yes. As stated above, the cost for Glenshire to solve its problems on its own would be approximately $4,000,000. The PUD can solve the problems for approximately $2,700,000. b) Under the arsenic treatment alternative, water rates in Glenshire were projected to be $76.66 per month. c) Under the PUD alternative, water rates are expected to initially be $51,57 per month, decreasing as the land owned by the Glenshire Mutual Water Company is sold, actual construction costs are complete and additional new connections are made. 07/17/2002 Ii What about the Glenshire water distribution system? The Glenshire water distribution system is in fairly good condition. It is twenty years old, but it is not experiencing significant structural problems. The PUD agreed to assume ownership, operation, repair and replacement of that system. The system does not need to be fully replaced at this time as a condition of service. Did the Glenshire property owners get any credit for the assets in plant materials and cash? Yes. The material and equipment were sold by the PUD and the proceeds were placed into a separate fund that will be used to pay for the system improvements installed to solve the water quality and water quantity problems. The cash was placed in that same separate fund and will be used only to help pay the cost to solve the water quality and quantity problems. How much cash did Glenshire Mutual Water Company give to the PUD to help cover the costs to solve the water quality and quantity problems? a) The PUD received $768,90272 at the time of the closing. b) Since that time the PUD has received an additional $5,897.35 in proceeds from the sale of materials that had been owned by Glenshire. c) The PUD paid $58,848 for equipment that we chose to keep. d) We also credited Glenshire with $57,396.90 that we collected in our first billing to Glenshire customers, which occurred prior to the closing. e)Thus, the entire cash amount received to defray the cost of solving the problem is $891,044.97. What is that status of the cash? a) $334,000 has been used as buy-in to the well that will serve Glenshire. b) $51,000 is reimbursement for the conduit in the Truckee River Bridge that will allow the water pipeline to be constructed. c) $19,000 was transferred to the PUD general fund to pay for accrued benefits of the Glenshire employees who were hired by the PUD. d) The remaining $487,044.97 will be used to help defray the cost of implementing the solution to the water problems for Glenshire. o7m2oo2 How was the proposed additional rate component of$10.75 determined? a) The PUD has borrowed $1.74 million to correct the water quality and quantity problem. We borrowed that money for fifteen years at 5.98 % interest. b) The principal and interest payments total $177,318 per year. c) That amount is spread over the current active Glenshire customers: $177,318 divided by 1,375 customers divided by twelve months equals $10.75 per month. Will the additional rate component of $10.75 ever be changed or eliminated? a) Yes. The rate component will be reduced as Glenshire property owners of vacant lots connect to the Glenshire system. b) It will also go down if other land near Glenshire is developed and connect to the water system. They will need to pay their share of the improvements. c) It will co up or down as the actual costs of construction of the needed improvements are known. Thtadditionai rate component will be repealed when the debt is fully paid. d) The rate component will go down when land is sold. e) The entire additional rate component will be repealed when the debt is fully paid. What is the status of the construction of the facilities needed to solve the water quality and quantity problem? We are opening bids for construction of the pipeline on July 27th. We plan to award a contract on August 71h. Construction will occur during August, September and October, provided we get an acceptable bid. This is not the ideal time to be bidding pipeline projects. If the bids are too high, we will consider re-bidding the project in the spring--a time when we tend to get more competitive bids. 1994-2002 Well Production Seven Day Running Averages 10,000,000 I I I -- _ I 1 I - 1993 I 1 I 9,000,000 ----- 1994 - ------ -----1 ------ ------I- --------------- - t - 1995 1 I 1 1996 I I I $000,000 - - ..� �-1997 ---- - - -- -- ---i _ - 1 I 1998 1999 1 I I 7,000,000 2000 -- - -t--- -- - _- _- ----- ------ -- 2001 I I I 2002 0 R 6,000,000 -- rn 0 ci 5,000,000 o r`' IL 4,000,000 3,000,000 - ` tt I I t 2,000,000 I I I - �� July 4 Labor Day 1,000,000 I 1 1 Memorial Day-__---►I I I I I I 0 Jan-01 Feb-20 Apr-11 May-31 Jul-20 Sep-08 Oct-28 Dec-17 Date A