WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:10.600
 Monday, December 11th, 2023, we're going to just jump right into this.

00:00:10.600 --> 00:00:15.720
 Are there any members of the public that would like to speak at this point?

00:00:15.720 --> 00:00:19.320
 We're full of City of Denton folks, all right.

00:00:19.320 --> 00:00:20.920
 This is the regular meeting.

00:00:20.920 --> 00:00:23.480
 There are no presentations from the members of the public.

00:00:23.480 --> 00:00:26.520
 We'll move straight into the consent agenda.

00:00:26.520 --> 00:00:30.160
 I've already had a request.

00:00:30.160 --> 00:00:31.160
 Go ahead, Mr. Ryback.

00:00:31.160 --> 00:00:37.960
 I would like to remove items A, C and E from the consent agenda.

00:00:37.960 --> 00:00:38.960
 Any others?

00:00:38.960 --> 00:00:47.920
 Seeing that there be none, I will entertain a motion to approve of the consent agenda

00:00:47.920 --> 00:00:54.240
 items B, D, F, G, H, I, J and K.

00:00:54.240 --> 00:00:56.880
 We have a motion.

00:00:56.880 --> 00:00:57.880
 Second.

00:00:57.880 --> 00:01:00.680
 And a second from Mr. Plotk.

00:01:00.680 --> 00:01:02.560
 All those in favor, please say aye.

00:01:02.560 --> 00:01:03.560
 Aye.

00:01:03.560 --> 00:01:04.560
 Any opposed?

00:01:04.560 --> 00:01:05.560
 Passes unanimously.

00:01:05.560 --> 00:01:12.080
 Mr. Ryback, item A, and I believe Mr. Rayner may have had a question on that as well.

00:01:12.080 --> 00:01:18.880
 Yes, I was just curious about the sudden appearance of nearly a million dollars in charges.

00:01:18.880 --> 00:01:24.320
 I'm sure there's an obvious and excellent reason for it, but it just seemed unusual

00:01:24.320 --> 00:01:27.640
 and I would like to get some further information about it.

00:01:27.640 --> 00:01:30.800
 Good morning, Vispa Pantabong, ADF Finance.

00:01:30.800 --> 00:01:35.800
 So when we calculate these T-cost expenses, we actually net them.

00:01:35.800 --> 00:01:41.700
 So there's revenue coming in from the city, which are other TSP providers that are using

00:01:41.700 --> 00:01:42.760
 our assets.

00:01:42.760 --> 00:01:48.800
 And then the expenses that are going out, that's other TSP basically or that's us using

00:01:48.800 --> 00:01:50.320
 other TSP's assets.

00:01:50.320 --> 00:01:53.520
 So when we do the billing, it's net of revenue and expenses.

00:01:53.520 --> 00:01:59.240
 So with the ongoing rate case, so basically that affected the calculations and those two

00:01:59.240 --> 00:02:03.160
 particular TSP's were the one that basically changed.

00:02:03.160 --> 00:02:04.160
 Okay.

00:02:04.160 --> 00:02:11.800
 So these were simply the result of a recalculation based on ongoing charges and expenses.

00:02:11.800 --> 00:02:17.200
 If you recall Mr. Rybeck, we had already brought the majority of those forward about a month

00:02:17.200 --> 00:02:18.200
 ago or so.

00:02:18.200 --> 00:02:19.200
 Yes, sir.

00:02:19.200 --> 00:02:22.000
 And yeah, these were as a result of a recalculation basically.

00:02:22.000 --> 00:02:23.000
 Okay.

00:02:23.000 --> 00:02:28.720
 It's not necessarily a change in budget, it's a change in who gets the money from the T-cost,

00:02:28.720 --> 00:02:29.720
 correct?

00:02:29.720 --> 00:02:30.720
 Yes, correct.

00:02:30.720 --> 00:02:31.720
 Yes.

00:02:31.720 --> 00:02:32.720
 Not a change in budget.

00:02:32.720 --> 00:02:40.280
 And for some context in total, we're spending about 25, 26 million dollars now a year in

00:02:40.280 --> 00:02:45.720
 transmission costs to others that we pay out on an annual basis.

00:02:45.720 --> 00:02:46.720
 Okay.

00:02:46.720 --> 00:02:51.400
 So will this continue to happen then throughout the year as the last time there'll be an adjustment

00:02:51.400 --> 00:02:52.400
 since it's December?

00:02:52.400 --> 00:02:53.400
 Yeah.

00:02:53.400 --> 00:02:56.840
 There's ongoing rate cases that happen and so there's adjustments throughout the year,

00:02:56.840 --> 00:03:00.280
 certainly not as big as these, but yeah, those can happen and they're normal.

00:03:00.280 --> 00:03:01.280
 All right.

00:03:01.280 --> 00:03:03.560
 So we may continue to see these as the year goes on then.

00:03:03.560 --> 00:03:10.640
 Yeah, if they exceed the staff's authority that's been allocated -- not allocated, but

00:03:10.640 --> 00:03:15.240
 what's the word that I'm using for -- delegated to staff.

00:03:15.240 --> 00:03:16.480
 Okay.

00:03:16.480 --> 00:03:19.760
 What is that authority, just for my information?

00:03:19.760 --> 00:03:20.760
 I think that's 50,000.

00:03:20.760 --> 00:03:21.760
 Okay.

00:03:21.760 --> 00:03:22.760
 Okay.

00:03:22.760 --> 00:03:23.760
 Very good.

00:03:23.760 --> 00:03:24.760
 State law, correct?

00:03:24.760 --> 00:03:25.760
 Yes, correct.

00:03:25.760 --> 00:03:26.760
 50,000.

00:03:26.760 --> 00:03:27.760
 Thank you.

00:03:27.760 --> 00:03:31.440
 Mr. Chair, I move that we accept item A from the consent agenda.

00:03:31.440 --> 00:03:34.480
 We have a motion to approve by Mr. Ryback.

00:03:34.480 --> 00:03:35.480
 Second.

00:03:35.480 --> 00:03:37.320
 Second by Mr. Taylor.

00:03:37.320 --> 00:03:40.840
 All those in favor, please say aye.

00:03:40.840 --> 00:03:41.840
 Aye.

00:03:41.840 --> 00:03:42.840
 Aye.

00:03:42.840 --> 00:03:43.840
 Any opposed?

00:03:43.840 --> 00:03:44.840
 Passes unanimously.

00:03:44.840 --> 00:03:49.800
 Item C is in cat, Mr. Ryback.

00:03:49.800 --> 00:03:52.840
 Thank you.

00:03:52.840 --> 00:03:57.400
 So I was concerned about this not so much that it does exist or that it has a pretty

00:03:57.400 --> 00:04:01.400
 big dollar amount and I thought perhaps would be of value for us to learn a little more

00:04:01.400 --> 00:04:02.400
 about it.

00:04:02.400 --> 00:04:03.400
 Yes, sir.

00:04:03.400 --> 00:04:06.360
 Just about the credit card processing contract in general?

00:04:06.360 --> 00:04:07.360
 Sure.

00:04:07.360 --> 00:04:11.600
 This is a credit card contract for the entire city for all 25 locations, some odd give or

00:04:11.600 --> 00:04:16.680
 take, on the day that take credit cards over the phone, in person, or over the Internet.

00:04:16.680 --> 00:04:18.440
 We went out for bid in 2020.

00:04:18.440 --> 00:04:22.900
 We go out for bid every five years along with our depository contract.

00:04:22.900 --> 00:04:28.800
 We had three bids at that time and we started the contract in 2021 and it will end in 2026.

00:04:28.800 --> 00:04:33.360
 Historically, you know, we look at our past actuals and see what those have been and we

00:04:33.360 --> 00:04:36.640
 based our numbers for the contract on that.

00:04:36.640 --> 00:04:41.880
 And it just seems this year, in the last couple of years, we have increased our volumes across

00:04:41.880 --> 00:04:43.600
 the board from the city.

00:04:43.600 --> 00:04:48.560
 Customer service alone, we share these costs across the city based on their own volumes.

00:04:48.560 --> 00:04:53.120
 Customer service going from payment to invoice cloud allowed your customers to have a lot

00:04:53.120 --> 00:04:57.000
 of bells and whistles and other options to pay so it increased their adoption to their

00:04:57.000 --> 00:04:58.960
 credit card rate.

00:04:58.960 --> 00:04:59.960
 Also building safety.

00:04:59.960 --> 00:05:05.400
 They have a lot of construction and building going on so the permits have increased.

00:05:05.400 --> 00:05:08.360
 Also the landfill has seen a high increase in volume.

00:05:08.360 --> 00:05:14.260
 So our actual cost to the credit card processor stayed the same through the contract.

00:05:14.260 --> 00:05:18.520
 Our volumes have increased and it's the actual card brands and their interchange rates that

00:05:18.520 --> 00:05:22.840
 are increasing as well because they're allowed to increase every two times a year.

00:05:22.840 --> 00:05:25.800
 So it's just that volume just kept growing and growing.

00:05:25.800 --> 00:05:29.560
 So the last year of the contract, I am just not had enough money.

00:05:29.560 --> 00:05:33.520
 So we went ahead through the regular process and increased this as allowed by the purchasing

00:05:33.520 --> 00:05:34.520
 contract.

00:05:34.520 --> 00:05:35.520
 Okay.

00:05:35.520 --> 00:05:40.240
 So is this a new provider or is it the same provider with a different rate structure?

00:05:40.240 --> 00:05:44.960
 It is the same provider we've had the same provider for almost 10 years and Wells Fargo

00:05:44.960 --> 00:05:48.240
 Merchant Services and their rate stays the same.

00:05:48.240 --> 00:05:52.080
 It's the card brand interchange rates that go up and down.

00:05:52.080 --> 00:05:57.640
 So as a card holder, I can come one day and use my debit card and that's one rate and

00:05:57.640 --> 00:06:01.100
 I can come another day and use my reward card and that's another rate.

00:06:01.100 --> 00:06:02.840
 So all those variables playing in.

00:06:02.840 --> 00:06:05.520
 So our providers rate is the same.

00:06:05.520 --> 00:06:10.360
 It's just the cards that your card user actually using pushes through and that's a straight

00:06:10.360 --> 00:06:12.440
 pass through to the card brands.

00:06:12.440 --> 00:06:16.840
 So what we pay Wells Fargo Merchant Services is consistent, but what we pay the card brand

00:06:16.840 --> 00:06:18.720
 is based on their own interchange rates.

00:06:18.720 --> 00:06:19.720
 Okay.

00:06:19.720 --> 00:06:24.120
 So this is a net increase to our cost of doing business as a city.

00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:25.120
 Yes.

00:06:25.120 --> 00:06:27.120
 And each department budgets these.

00:06:27.120 --> 00:06:31.160
 So they have everybody has a bucket in there for their banking services, if you will.

00:06:31.160 --> 00:06:35.760
 So that's whether they put in cash in the bank, they're doing checks or they're doing cards.

00:06:35.760 --> 00:06:38.880
 So this will impact all departments budgets to some extent.

00:06:38.880 --> 00:06:39.880
 Yes.

00:06:39.880 --> 00:06:42.360
 But they've already budgeted for that slightly.

00:06:42.360 --> 00:06:45.680
 They look every year and do what they can to see what's coming.

00:06:45.680 --> 00:06:46.680
 Okay.

00:06:46.680 --> 00:06:47.680
 Yes, sir.

00:06:47.680 --> 00:06:50.280
 I don't have any further questions.

00:06:50.280 --> 00:06:51.280
 Okay.

00:06:51.280 --> 00:06:52.840
 Mr. Rainer.

00:06:52.840 --> 00:06:58.840
 So you said, good morning, you said that you look at this twice a year or is that when

00:06:58.840 --> 00:06:59.840
 they.

00:06:59.840 --> 00:07:03.940
 The card brands come out with new pricing structures twice a year.

00:07:03.940 --> 00:07:10.320
 And so we may be looking for a another price change of some sort the middle of next year.

00:07:10.320 --> 00:07:11.320
 No, sir.

00:07:11.320 --> 00:07:12.320
 They fluctuate.

00:07:12.320 --> 00:07:15.640
 So each card brand just kind of gives and takes, they may offer more rewards on a different

00:07:15.640 --> 00:07:16.640
 card or whatever.

00:07:16.640 --> 00:07:19.400
 So again, it's based on the card user use.

00:07:19.400 --> 00:07:22.400
 So the card brands go up and down twice a year.

00:07:22.400 --> 00:07:24.980
 They add more programs, they take away others.

00:07:24.980 --> 00:07:29.980
 So it really our fees are based on what our card holders are using day to day.

00:07:29.980 --> 00:07:30.980
 Okay.

00:07:30.980 --> 00:07:31.980
 Thank you.

00:07:31.980 --> 00:07:32.980
 Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:07:32.980 --> 00:07:33.980
 Thank you, Mr. Rainer.

00:07:33.980 --> 00:07:39.740
 Any other questions for item C. Seeing there are none, I'll entertain a motion to approve

00:07:39.740 --> 00:07:41.480
 item C of the consent agenda.

00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:42.480
 So moved.

00:07:42.480 --> 00:07:43.480
 Motion.

00:07:43.480 --> 00:07:44.480
 Second.

00:07:44.480 --> 00:07:46.440
 We have a second.

00:07:46.440 --> 00:07:48.920
 All those in favor, please say aye.

00:07:48.920 --> 00:07:49.920
 Aye.

00:07:49.920 --> 00:07:50.920
 Any opposed?

00:07:50.920 --> 00:07:51.920
 Passes unanimously.

00:07:51.920 --> 00:07:57.120
 Move on to item E, Edward, E isn't Edward.

00:07:57.120 --> 00:08:03.520
 My question regarding item E is I was, it caught my eye that there are two different

00:08:03.520 --> 00:08:07.720
 departments, one of which is Parks and Rec, where the Public Utility Board, and I'm just

00:08:07.720 --> 00:08:16.240
 curious about the implications between our civic duty and that of the Parks and Rec Board.

00:08:16.240 --> 00:08:18.240
 This equipment's going to them.

00:08:18.240 --> 00:08:23.640
 Hello, Tom Grammer, Director of Facilities and Fleet.

00:08:23.640 --> 00:08:24.920
 I don't know the answer to that question.

00:08:24.920 --> 00:08:26.320
 That seems like a financial question.

00:08:26.320 --> 00:08:30.360
 I'll be happy to get that answer and bring it back to the board.

00:08:30.360 --> 00:08:38.560
 Well, I think the reality is that when it comes to items that are not utility related,

00:08:38.560 --> 00:08:41.040
 the PUB does not have authority on that.

00:08:41.040 --> 00:08:43.200
 That usually goes straight to the City Council.

00:08:43.200 --> 00:08:47.320
 The Park Board does not have oversight of that either, so those expenditures go.

00:08:47.320 --> 00:08:50.720
 Just for ease of documentation, these were aggregated together.

00:08:50.720 --> 00:08:56.920
 Obviously, there's synergies in buying these diggers together in multiple quantities, but

00:08:56.920 --> 00:08:57.920
 that's really the only purpose.

00:08:57.920 --> 00:09:04.320
 And so really what's in front of the PUB is that they're diggers specific to DME only.

00:09:04.320 --> 00:09:05.320
 Okay.

00:09:05.320 --> 00:09:12.400
 But again, I just asked that question about if this equipment goes to Parks and Rec in

00:09:12.400 --> 00:09:18.640
 part or do the utilities own and operate the equipment?

00:09:18.640 --> 00:09:25.920
 There actually will be the Parks and Rec folks will have their own digger tool, if you will.

00:09:25.920 --> 00:09:26.920
 Yes.

00:09:26.920 --> 00:09:27.920
 Parks will have their own, I believe that.

00:09:27.920 --> 00:09:31.480
 We've set up two different accounts funded in one, so DME is paying for two, Parks is

00:09:31.480 --> 00:09:32.480
 paying for one.

00:09:32.480 --> 00:09:36.360
 But again, as Tony said, it's to buy three at the same time is easier and cheaper.

00:09:36.360 --> 00:09:41.180
 I think it's always useful to aggregate and get a better deal.

00:09:41.180 --> 00:09:50.540
 I'm just curious about our authority to suggest to the City Council that Parks and Rec buy

00:09:50.540 --> 00:09:52.600
 equipment and we're the ones doing the approving.

00:09:52.600 --> 00:09:56.760
 If it doesn't make any difference, that's fine, but I'm just curious about that.

00:09:56.760 --> 00:10:01.720
 I think this is the first time I've seen something where something's come before us that also

00:10:01.720 --> 00:10:05.240
 had to do with equipment for a different department or a different group.

00:10:05.240 --> 00:10:06.240
 Yeah.

00:10:06.240 --> 00:10:11.840
 This is not unlike what you've seen Public Works come out and they show you what they're

00:10:11.840 --> 00:10:17.800
 going to be doing in a neighborhood area for streets and sidewalks, but within those project

00:10:17.800 --> 00:10:22.840
 costs, you also have water, wastewater costs, you may have electric costs, and so this is

00:10:22.840 --> 00:10:26.280
 a very similar, it's all being brought at the same time.

00:10:26.280 --> 00:10:29.360
 There's economies of scale for why those are done at the same time.

00:10:29.360 --> 00:10:33.280
 There's also kind of an administrative component here, right, for us to have to separate out

00:10:33.280 --> 00:10:38.360
 just the DME component, now you're talking about a separate item, a separate agenda.

00:10:38.360 --> 00:10:40.200
 There's separate things that go with that, right?

00:10:40.200 --> 00:10:44.640
 So this is just from an administrative standpoint to make it a little bit easier for staff, right?

00:10:44.640 --> 00:10:47.880
 We bring to the PVB exactly what we're taking to the Council, even though some items may

00:10:47.880 --> 00:10:51.840
 not necessarily be within the authority of the Council, but it's just a little bit administrative,

00:10:51.840 --> 00:10:54.080
 a little bit easier for us to do it that way.

00:10:54.080 --> 00:10:58.840
 But all of the other things you've talked about with the sidewalks all still fall within

00:10:58.840 --> 00:11:05.240
 the utilities, wastewater, power, water, you know, those are all wastewater functions,

00:11:05.240 --> 00:11:09.520
 not all public utility functions, I'm sorry.

00:11:09.520 --> 00:11:12.800
 They're probably worse functions, but the funding is different.

00:11:12.800 --> 00:11:16.440
 So the funding for the sidewalks, the funding for the streets is not coming for water and

00:11:16.440 --> 00:11:17.440
 wastewater.

00:11:17.440 --> 00:11:20.840
 It's only the water/wastewater components that are coming for water/wastewater, of which

00:11:20.840 --> 00:11:22.880
 the Board has authority over.

00:11:22.880 --> 00:11:27.960
 Right, and the roads, of course, are roads and transportation, not utilities, so, okay.

00:11:27.960 --> 00:11:33.240
 Yeah, but streets is not considered a utility for purposes of the Board's authority.

00:11:33.240 --> 00:11:39.680
 Okay, I don't think that answered my question, but I have a better understanding, thank you.

00:11:39.680 --> 00:11:40.680
 Mr. Rayner?

00:11:40.680 --> 00:11:44.240
 So, if I understand it, we're buying in bulk, which is fine.

00:11:44.240 --> 00:11:48.640
 Two departments, pardon, just to keep it simple, you're gonna get two, we get one, and we get

00:11:48.640 --> 00:11:52.480
 one, you get, or we get two and you get one, is that kind of how that works?

00:11:52.480 --> 00:11:53.480
 Correct.

00:11:53.480 --> 00:11:58.840
 Okay, and who keeps it, you know, my neighbor borrowed my weed whacker and I'm still waiting

00:11:58.840 --> 00:12:02.240
 for it to come back, so, you understand my point?

00:12:02.240 --> 00:12:06.120
 Absolutely, so when we purchase these vehicles, they're allocated to the departments through

00:12:06.120 --> 00:12:08.520
 our work order system and asset tracking.

00:12:08.520 --> 00:12:12.840
 The department takes responsibility throughout the life cycle of the vehicle or the asset,

00:12:12.840 --> 00:12:17.280
 so when we get this on site, it's identified as a DME asset, or the two DME assets would

00:12:17.280 --> 00:12:22.440
 be put under their purview and capitalized and everything else with DME, and then the

00:12:22.440 --> 00:12:26.000
 one would be put with parks and identified as a parks asset, so there would be no interchanging

00:12:26.000 --> 00:12:27.000
 of the assets.

00:12:27.000 --> 00:12:31.080
 So, let's say you wear yours out, would it be, it seemed like it would be natural that

00:12:31.080 --> 00:12:35.440
 you would maybe contact us to borrow one of our diggers, would that be kind of how that

00:12:35.440 --> 00:12:36.440
 would work?

00:12:36.440 --> 00:12:40.440
 There's potential for that, obviously, however we can get the job done as fast as possible

00:12:40.440 --> 00:12:44.520
 to limit the impact of the operation, we would do that, but we don't make a common practice

00:12:44.520 --> 00:12:47.040
 to flip-flop assets on the long term.

00:12:47.040 --> 00:12:48.040
 Yes.

00:12:48.040 --> 00:12:50.560
 If we do, we'd have to make sure the financial implications of the backside are handled.

00:12:50.560 --> 00:12:54.360
 Thank you, appreciate it, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:12:54.360 --> 00:13:00.680
 Okay, thank you, that's just a follow-up question based on their questions, the account

00:13:00.680 --> 00:13:04.680
 numbers that are listed here for the fiscal information, where do they fall under?

00:13:04.680 --> 00:13:07.760
 One under public utilities and two under parks, is that correct?

00:13:07.760 --> 00:13:11.200
 It should be two under DME and then one under parks, right Dave?

00:13:11.200 --> 00:13:12.200
 That's correct.

00:13:12.200 --> 00:13:13.200
 Two to one.

00:13:13.200 --> 00:13:14.200
 Okay, it's the opposite of that.

00:13:14.200 --> 00:13:18.800
 Okay, that answers my question, all right, any other questions?

00:13:18.800 --> 00:13:23.840
 Seeing there is none, thank you.

00:13:23.840 --> 00:13:27.760
 All those in favor of approving item E as in Edward?

00:13:27.760 --> 00:13:28.760
 No.

00:13:28.760 --> 00:13:34.320
 Oh, that's true, entertain a motion to approve item E.

00:13:34.320 --> 00:13:35.520
 Move we approve item E.

00:13:35.520 --> 00:13:36.520
 You have a motion?

00:13:36.520 --> 00:13:37.520
 Second.

00:13:37.520 --> 00:13:38.880
 We have a second.

00:13:38.880 --> 00:13:40.320
 All those in favor, please say aye.

00:13:40.320 --> 00:13:41.320
 Aye.

00:13:41.320 --> 00:13:42.320
 Any opposed?

00:13:42.320 --> 00:13:48.600
 There being none, it passes unanimously, so we can move on to item three, items for individual

00:13:48.600 --> 00:13:50.520
 consideration.

00:13:50.520 --> 00:13:53.800
 Consider approval of the November 13th, 2023 minutes.

00:13:53.800 --> 00:13:57.240
 Move a motion for Mr. Plot?

00:13:57.240 --> 00:13:58.240
 Second.

00:13:58.240 --> 00:13:59.240
 Second, Mr. Taylor?

00:13:59.240 --> 00:14:02.000
 All those in favor, please say aye.

00:14:02.000 --> 00:14:03.000
 Aye.

00:14:03.000 --> 00:14:04.000
 Any opposed?

00:14:04.000 --> 00:14:05.000
 Passes unanimously.

00:14:05.000 --> 00:14:10.040
 All right, item B, I believe there's gonna be some questions on this.

00:14:10.040 --> 00:14:18.440
 We did take this up last week in a risk management team meeting and decided to take it from the

00:14:18.440 --> 00:14:25.720
 consent to individual consideration, so we'll go ahead and start with board members with

00:14:25.720 --> 00:14:27.200
 any questions.

00:14:27.200 --> 00:14:34.200
 Billy, actually, we have a quick presentation, if you don't mind, and then we can have questions

00:14:34.200 --> 00:14:35.200
 after that.

00:14:35.200 --> 00:14:36.200
 Harry?

00:14:36.200 --> 00:14:37.200
 From Mr. Terry Nolte.

00:14:37.200 --> 00:14:42.400
 Good morning, Terry Nolte, Assistant General Manager, DME.

00:14:42.400 --> 00:14:50.360
 So first question is what is outage insurance, and basically it's insurance that covers

00:14:50.360 --> 00:14:55.480
 mechanical failures of the Denton Energy Center.

00:14:55.480 --> 00:15:01.040
 The way that this has worked in the past is that in order to have a valid claim, you have

00:15:01.040 --> 00:15:08.200
 to have an outage of at least one unit, and the second unit starts the claim process.

00:15:08.200 --> 00:15:17.960
 It pays the difference between the hourly wholesale price and the generation cost, so

00:15:17.960 --> 00:15:26.840
 if the generation cost was $40 and the wholesale energy price was $100, it would pay $60 times

00:15:26.840 --> 00:15:33.800
 the number of megawatt hours that were affected by the outage.

00:15:33.800 --> 00:15:38.500
 And the premium is charged based on the payout limit.

00:15:38.500 --> 00:15:44.040
 You know, the limits can be anywhere from -- yeah, usually the policy limits are anywhere

00:15:44.040 --> 00:15:54.620
 from 10 to 25 million for the two-month winter period.

00:15:54.620 --> 00:16:03.700
 So the energy risk management policy is a policy that we follow in managing the overall

00:16:03.700 --> 00:16:08.420
 portfolio risk of the supply.

00:16:08.420 --> 00:16:15.720
 The energy risk management policy does require us to purchase this insurance for the winter.

00:16:15.720 --> 00:16:23.120
 We have noticed through our procurement efforts that the premiums have gone up considerably,

00:16:23.120 --> 00:16:28.460
 and the coverage has gone down.

00:16:28.460 --> 00:16:35.900
 So as we look at this winter, we view this winter as we see here on today, you know,

00:16:35.900 --> 00:16:36.900
 December 11th.

00:16:36.900 --> 00:16:40.060
 It's going to be 62 degrees today.

00:16:40.060 --> 00:16:46.420
 As we look at the weather forecast out the next month, we don't see any significant weather.

00:16:46.420 --> 00:16:53.940
 And it's El Nino winter, so we expect winter temperatures to be on average a little bit

00:16:53.940 --> 00:16:58.140
 warmer than normal.

00:16:58.140 --> 00:17:04.220
 We don't -- we don't discount the potential for really, really cold weather.

00:17:04.220 --> 00:17:10.260
 There could be -- as we are in Texas, it could be a couple days of extremely cold weather.

00:17:10.260 --> 00:17:13.900
 And -- but we estimate that probability.

00:17:13.900 --> 00:17:19.340
 We do regression analysis down at less than 10 percent for those events that would cause

00:17:19.340 --> 00:17:23.020
 us significant concern.

00:17:23.020 --> 00:17:27.880
 When we have experienced a unit outage, there have been very -- it's really not well correlated

00:17:27.880 --> 00:17:28.880
 with price.

00:17:28.880 --> 00:17:34.220
 So it's not like when prices go to $100, that's when we have problems.

00:17:34.220 --> 00:17:37.980
 There's really -- it's very random.

00:17:37.980 --> 00:17:44.180
 There have been a number of changes in the market since URI that mitigate our risk.

00:17:44.180 --> 00:17:49.860
 The provision and the risk policy was put in place after URI to avoid the kind of catastrophic

00:17:49.860 --> 00:17:54.280
 event that happened.

00:17:54.280 --> 00:18:00.580
 So we've seen the Texas pipeline weatherization effect, those -- all the gas compressor stations

00:18:00.580 --> 00:18:07.780
 on the line, all the dehydration units that feed into this particular line have been weatherized

00:18:07.780 --> 00:18:11.500
 and inspected by the -- by the Railroad Commission.

00:18:11.500 --> 00:18:16.700
 Same thing on power generation units.

00:18:16.700 --> 00:18:22.500
 The wholesale energy cap was reduced from $9,000 a megawatt hour down to $5,000, still

00:18:22.500 --> 00:18:27.020
 a very steep price, but significant reduction.

00:18:27.020 --> 00:18:33.440
 And there have been other wholesale generation market changes that bring additional standby

00:18:33.440 --> 00:18:36.040
 generation into play.

00:18:36.040 --> 00:18:42.900
 So based on this, we are not recommending -- we purchased the winter outage insurance.

00:18:42.900 --> 00:18:49.980
 We require a waiver of the provision of the energy risk management policy.

00:18:49.980 --> 00:18:55.860
 And we discussed this with the energy -- with the Energy Risk Committee last week, and they

00:18:55.860 --> 00:18:58.660
 agreed with our recommendation.

00:18:58.660 --> 00:19:03.660
 And so with that, I'll be glad to have any questions, and I'd ask Marcella to explain

00:19:03.660 --> 00:19:09.900
 exactly what the action is that we're asking you for today because we have an item on there

00:19:09.900 --> 00:19:12.020
 to approve a spending authority.

00:19:12.020 --> 00:19:17.900
 Yes, so consistent with Robert's rules and our parliamentary requirements, we'll actually

00:19:17.900 --> 00:19:21.660
 have someone motion in the affirmative, so just like you would normally motion for an

00:19:21.660 --> 00:19:26.980
 IC item, you'll move to approve item B. That'll get seconded.

00:19:26.980 --> 00:19:30.780
 And then if you agree with staff's recommendation, the motion would fail, which would mean that

00:19:30.780 --> 00:19:33.620
 the item would not be recommended to city council.

00:19:33.620 --> 00:19:38.540
 At city council, there's a second item that goes with this that's the actual waiver ordinance

00:19:38.540 --> 00:19:43.100
 that would allow that waiver of those terms of the energy risk management policy.

00:19:43.100 --> 00:19:48.300
 But in terms of this item, it would be a motion in the affirmative that would then fail.

00:19:48.300 --> 00:19:51.660
 Motion in the affirmative that would then fail.

00:19:51.660 --> 00:19:54.660
 You know what you said?

00:19:54.660 --> 00:19:55.660
 Yep.

00:19:55.660 --> 00:19:58.660
 I'm going to write that down.

00:19:58.660 --> 00:19:59.660
 Is it a motion and a vote in the affirmative?

00:19:59.660 --> 00:20:00.660
 It's not the vote.

00:20:00.660 --> 00:20:01.660
 No, the vote against.

00:20:01.660 --> 00:20:02.660
 And then discussion.

00:20:02.660 --> 00:20:03.660
 And then we vote.

00:20:03.660 --> 00:20:09.540
 Yeah, so the motion would be just to approve item B. There would be a second for that to

00:20:09.540 --> 00:20:10.540
 allow for discussion.

00:20:10.540 --> 00:20:14.020
 Obviously, if you have staff questions before the motion, that could be handled before the

00:20:14.020 --> 00:20:15.860
 motion.

00:20:15.860 --> 00:20:17.580
 Discussion would happen normally.

00:20:17.580 --> 00:20:24.100
 And then if you agree with staff's recommendation, you would vote no on approval of the item.

00:20:24.100 --> 00:20:27.500
 We can't just have the recommendation be against.

00:20:27.500 --> 00:20:29.180
 Okay, that's fine.

00:20:29.180 --> 00:20:34.740
 Yeah, so it's a quirky part of parliamentary procedure where motions have to be in the

00:20:34.740 --> 00:20:35.740
 affirmative.

00:20:35.740 --> 00:20:36.740
 Okay.

00:20:36.740 --> 00:20:39.740
 Mr. Rainer, do you have a question?

00:20:39.740 --> 00:20:40.740
 No.

00:20:40.740 --> 00:20:41.740
 You want to get your button?

00:20:41.740 --> 00:20:42.740
 No.

00:20:42.740 --> 00:20:43.740
 Okay.

00:20:43.740 --> 00:20:49.540
 So in my understanding, the discussion should be done after the motion has been seconded,

00:20:49.540 --> 00:20:50.540
 correct?

00:20:50.540 --> 00:20:53.820
 So there can be staff questions before the motion and the second, but discussion just

00:20:53.820 --> 00:20:56.420
 of the board members would be after motion and second.

00:20:56.420 --> 00:20:59.260
 But I could ask staff during -- after the motion has been made, though.

00:20:59.260 --> 00:21:00.260
 Yeah.

00:21:00.260 --> 00:21:01.260
 Okay, thank you.

00:21:01.260 --> 00:21:02.260
 Or now.

00:21:02.260 --> 00:21:06.300
 Or yeah, you can ask your staff questions now as well.

00:21:06.300 --> 00:21:09.900
 So I can ask a question at this time.

00:21:09.900 --> 00:21:11.940
 You first.

00:21:11.940 --> 00:21:12.940
 You may.

00:21:12.940 --> 00:21:13.940
 Thank you.

00:21:13.940 --> 00:21:19.220
 I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit more about these changes to the wholesale

00:21:19.220 --> 00:21:24.740
 market that would make this an appealing thing for us to --

00:21:24.740 --> 00:21:26.060
 Sure.

00:21:26.060 --> 00:21:32.020
 So in the wholesale market, we have what's called ancillary services, which are the services

00:21:32.020 --> 00:21:38.060
 that are required in order to keep the grid stable.

00:21:38.060 --> 00:21:46.620
 These are things like frequency, stability, non-spinning reserves, and we actually have

00:21:46.620 --> 00:21:55.940
 a new one this year called ECRS, emergency reserve -- emergency capacity reserve service.

00:21:55.940 --> 00:21:58.140
 That is a new product.

00:21:58.140 --> 00:22:05.820
 It is an online product that makes available about 1,900 megawatts of additional generation

00:22:05.820 --> 00:22:09.180
 at all times during the winter months.

00:22:09.180 --> 00:22:15.500
 So there are those changes, and then there are also some very detailed -- which I don't

00:22:15.500 --> 00:22:21.980
 want to go into because we could spend hours discussing it -- changes to the overall, what

00:22:21.980 --> 00:22:35.620
 we call the ORDIC, which is an adder for during price spikes, a certain adder.

00:22:35.620 --> 00:22:36.620
 Okay.

00:22:36.620 --> 00:22:40.860
 So how is this additional dispatchable power made available?

00:22:40.860 --> 00:22:48.780
 It's actually purchased in the day ahead market as are other of the ancillary services.

00:22:48.780 --> 00:22:50.980
 What's that cost, Terry?

00:22:50.980 --> 00:22:56.420
 Well, it has traded up as high as $3,000, $4,000 a megawatt hour, but on average it's

00:22:56.420 --> 00:23:05.060
 been running this winter so far probably $10 to $25 a megawatt hour.

00:23:05.060 --> 00:23:13.340
 And that's just generation capacity that's held out of the market, of the real-time market

00:23:13.340 --> 00:23:19.020
 because it clears in the day ahead market, so it's a reserve that ERCOT has to call on

00:23:19.020 --> 00:23:25.420
 if they run into a period where there's not enough capacity.

00:23:25.420 --> 00:23:29.020
 So it's ERCOT's reserve, not DME's and other utilities' reserves?

00:23:29.020 --> 00:23:30.020
 That's correct.

00:23:30.020 --> 00:23:34.860
 Yeah, and then I guess, Mr. Rybeck, the other big change is that we now have, since Jury,

00:23:34.860 --> 00:23:42.660
 a firm fuel program where there are 32 units that have qualified that have backup fuel

00:23:42.660 --> 00:23:48.060
 oil to generate with instead of relying 100% on gas.

00:23:48.060 --> 00:23:49.060
 Not ours.

00:23:49.060 --> 00:23:50.580
 Not ours, right, correct.

00:23:50.580 --> 00:23:57.020
 The deck is not configured to run on fuel oil.

00:23:57.020 --> 00:24:04.020
 So overall, there's just been a lot of changes made over the last three years to avoid that

00:24:04.020 --> 00:24:05.020
 Jury scenario.

00:24:05.020 --> 00:24:06.020
 Okay.

00:24:06.020 --> 00:24:08.380
 Mr. Taylor, I believe that's a follow-up.

00:24:08.380 --> 00:24:21.340
 Just trying to understand, will not purchasing this policy affect the planned operation for

00:24:21.340 --> 00:24:22.340
 January, February?

00:24:22.340 --> 00:24:23.340
 No.

00:24:23.340 --> 00:24:27.300
 So it won't change operational or forward purchase or any of that kind of stuff?

00:24:27.300 --> 00:24:28.300
 No, sir.

00:24:28.300 --> 00:24:32.220
 Okay, so we just think the risk is not as big as the cost?

00:24:32.220 --> 00:24:33.220
 Really?

00:24:33.220 --> 00:24:34.220
 Yes, sir.

00:24:34.220 --> 00:24:36.260
 We don't believe it's a cost-effective purchase.

00:24:36.260 --> 00:24:37.820
 Okay, cost-effective.

00:24:37.820 --> 00:24:44.060
 We've had the policy in place for three years, three winter, actually two winters since Jury,

00:24:44.060 --> 00:24:47.300
 and we've never had a claim.

00:24:47.300 --> 00:24:51.860
 And as you can see, the amount that we were requesting was over $900,000.

00:24:51.860 --> 00:24:59.620
 So we believe that's a good savings for customers and we can manage the risk in the real time

00:24:59.620 --> 00:25:03.780
 and into the balance of the month, balance of the week markets.

00:25:03.780 --> 00:25:11.820
 Okay, so does the DEC participate in ECRS right now or just--

00:25:11.820 --> 00:25:13.180
 Yes, we have in the past.

00:25:13.180 --> 00:25:14.260
 It's an online product.

00:25:14.260 --> 00:25:20.340
 So if the units are running, we can participate and we do when we see that to be a premium

00:25:20.340 --> 00:25:21.340
 product.

00:25:21.340 --> 00:25:22.340
 Okay.

00:25:22.340 --> 00:25:25.660
 And can we self-provide?

00:25:25.660 --> 00:25:26.660
 We can.

00:25:26.660 --> 00:25:27.660
 Okay.

00:25:27.660 --> 00:25:30.260
 We don't normally, but we can.

00:25:30.260 --> 00:25:35.300
 And as a reminder, you may recall that for the summer months, we also did not purchase

00:25:35.300 --> 00:25:38.700
 outage insurance for a lot of the same reasons.

00:25:38.700 --> 00:25:44.300
 And if you saw in this first slide, the biggest coverage that's no longer there is the loss

00:25:44.300 --> 00:25:47.580
 of fuel, right, which was the number one issue that we had during the year.

00:25:47.580 --> 00:25:48.780
 That's no longer covered, right?

00:25:48.780 --> 00:25:52.500
 That was really the incentive for us to want to have the outage insurance to begin with.

00:25:52.500 --> 00:25:54.940
 But I just want to point those out.

00:25:54.940 --> 00:25:55.940
 Thank you.

00:25:55.940 --> 00:26:02.180
 Another thing, since the event, I know there was a plan to weatherize the DEC or improve

00:26:02.180 --> 00:26:05.220
 its weather withstanding capabilities.

00:26:05.220 --> 00:26:08.740
 Has that been implemented and completed?

00:26:08.740 --> 00:26:11.300
 As it relates to this, yes.

00:26:11.300 --> 00:26:20.060
 I don't want to get off posting, but yes, we have-- in fact, we're constructing that

00:26:20.060 --> 00:26:26.980
 equipment now, we've put in some temporary systems to achieve the same goals that that

00:26:26.980 --> 00:26:32.340
 overall program, and we'll have it actually completed sometime in the first quarter of

00:26:32.340 --> 00:26:33.340
 next year.

00:26:33.340 --> 00:26:34.340
 Okay.

00:26:34.340 --> 00:26:39.380
 So we've significantly reduced our risk regarding the DEC as well.

00:26:39.380 --> 00:26:40.380
 The few-- yeah.

00:26:40.380 --> 00:26:43.140
 The risk as it relates to a loss of fuel, correct?

00:26:43.140 --> 00:26:44.140
 Yes.

00:26:44.140 --> 00:26:45.140
 Thank you.

00:26:45.140 --> 00:26:46.140
 Okay.

00:26:46.140 --> 00:26:50.240
 I think y'all have asked the two questions I was going to ask, but let me clarify.

00:26:50.240 --> 00:26:56.420
 And there are two very simple items to me that make me think this may not be worth it,

00:26:56.420 --> 00:26:57.420
 the insurance.

00:26:57.420 --> 00:27:04.620
 And one of them is the cause of the last outage, the initial cause of it, granted, that did

00:27:04.620 --> 00:27:11.020
 for some other actions or some other consequences, was the loss of gas by another party.

00:27:11.020 --> 00:27:12.020
 That's correct.

00:27:12.020 --> 00:27:13.020
 It's not covered.

00:27:13.020 --> 00:27:14.020
 Yes, sir.

00:27:14.020 --> 00:27:19.580
 So if that loss of gas causes the equipment failures at the plant, that's not covered

00:27:19.580 --> 00:27:20.580
 either.

00:27:20.580 --> 00:27:21.580
 That's correct.

00:27:21.580 --> 00:27:22.580
 Okay.

00:27:22.580 --> 00:27:30.500
 Number two, you have done-- as Mr. Rebick just asked, you have done the upgrades that

00:27:30.500 --> 00:27:36.060
 have given us a larger temperature range on the negative side, correct?

00:27:36.060 --> 00:27:42.460
 We're not completed with the total capital program, but we have put in place a temporary

00:27:42.460 --> 00:27:46.580
 solution for this winter that achieves the same objectives.

00:27:46.580 --> 00:27:48.940
 Which is what temperature?

00:27:48.940 --> 00:27:50.100
 I can't divulge that.

00:27:50.100 --> 00:27:51.100
 Estimated.

00:27:51.100 --> 00:27:52.100
 Okay.

00:27:52.100 --> 00:27:53.100
 Okay.

00:27:53.100 --> 00:27:54.100
 It's a--

00:27:54.100 --> 00:27:56.100
 Is it proprietary, I guess?

00:27:56.100 --> 00:28:02.100
 Yeah, it's a competitive matter that's protected, but it is much better.

00:28:02.100 --> 00:28:03.100
 Okay.

00:28:03.100 --> 00:28:04.100
 Yeah.

00:28:04.100 --> 00:28:05.100
 All right.

00:28:05.100 --> 00:28:06.100
 Yes, Mr. Rainey.

00:28:06.100 --> 00:28:10.700
 Now that I know what we're going to do, I still want to ask my question.

00:28:10.700 --> 00:28:18.740
 On the chart that I got, I was just curious when we-- 2017 when we had that cold and all,

00:28:18.740 --> 00:28:23.660
 how many-- first of all, do we have 12 units, or was this just a chart showing two through

00:28:23.660 --> 00:28:27.940
 12 units that-- what the cost would be and such?

00:28:27.940 --> 00:28:28.940
 Yes, sir.

00:28:28.940 --> 00:28:33.340
 We-- the deck is configured with 12, 18.75 megawatt units.

00:28:33.340 --> 00:28:41.020
 So back when everything froze up, how many units did we have affected?

00:28:41.020 --> 00:28:45.820
 Well, when we lost gas, we had no fuel, so we couldn't run any of the units.

00:28:45.820 --> 00:28:46.820
 Everybody was.

00:28:46.820 --> 00:28:51.380
 Yeah, so we lost fuel for about 24 hours.

00:28:51.380 --> 00:28:58.960
 That when we recovered the fuel back, because of the damage, we were only able to run about

00:28:58.960 --> 00:29:05.220
 8 of the 16 units-- or the 12 units, I'm sorry, 8 of 12 units.

00:29:05.220 --> 00:29:06.220
 Just historical.

00:29:06.220 --> 00:29:07.220
 I was just curious.

00:29:07.220 --> 00:29:12.900
 Yeah, and just as a reminder, the damage that we were talking about was really primarily

00:29:12.900 --> 00:29:18.940
 to the radiators that were outside, so there was some minor damage to the engines themselves

00:29:18.940 --> 00:29:25.620
 too, but it was really the radiators that froze up that were the big issue for us.

00:29:25.620 --> 00:29:32.340
 So by not getting this-- excuse me-- when we vote, if we choose whatever we're going

00:29:32.340 --> 00:29:33.340
 to choose--

00:29:33.340 --> 00:29:34.340
 Very good.

00:29:34.340 --> 00:29:42.300
 --then if this should happen again, we're going to pull money somewhere to take care

00:29:42.300 --> 00:29:43.300
 of that then.

00:29:43.300 --> 00:29:50.500
 Yes, we carry a reserve balance, fund balance that we hate to draw on, but if we had to,

00:29:50.500 --> 00:29:54.780
 we could draw on that fund balance to cover any cover damages.

00:29:54.780 --> 00:29:55.780
 Yes.

00:29:55.780 --> 00:29:56.780
 Fair enough.

00:29:56.780 --> 00:29:57.780
 Thank you for your time.

00:29:57.780 --> 00:29:58.780
 We've got it.

00:29:58.780 --> 00:29:59.780
 Yeah, something else?

00:29:59.780 --> 00:30:00.780
 Nope.

00:30:00.780 --> 00:30:01.780
 Oh, OK.

00:30:01.780 --> 00:30:11.380
 I move approval of item C, B. I'm sorry, item B.

00:30:11.380 --> 00:30:12.380
 Second.

00:30:12.380 --> 00:30:19.060
 Very precarious motion affirmative in a second for item B.

00:30:19.060 --> 00:30:20.060
 Discussion.

00:30:20.060 --> 00:30:27.700
 I know what this costs is, but this is a million dollars for a few months policy when we've

00:30:27.700 --> 00:30:32.700
 mitigated most of the risk, and this doesn't address the biggest risk that we've experienced

00:30:32.700 --> 00:30:37.900
 in the past of fuel outage and potential damage after fuel outage.

00:30:37.900 --> 00:30:43.940
 So for those reasons, it doesn't seem like a cost-effective option.

00:30:43.940 --> 00:30:45.220
 I agree.

00:30:45.220 --> 00:30:49.860
 After such a thorough discussion of explanation, even though I did second it, I probably will

00:30:49.860 --> 00:30:52.540
 be voting against the motion.

00:30:52.540 --> 00:30:53.540
 OK.

00:30:53.540 --> 00:30:57.460
 Is there any further discussion on this item?

00:30:57.460 --> 00:31:02.900
 Because if you-- let's be clear, if we vote affirmative on this item, we pass the existing--

00:31:02.900 --> 00:31:08.740
 we vote to recommend that council passes with the insurance policy in effect, correct?

00:31:08.740 --> 00:31:17.100
 If we vote against it, if we vote nay, then we're voting to not pass this, and there is

00:31:17.100 --> 00:31:21.140
 another choice for council to pass that gives that option.

00:31:21.140 --> 00:31:22.140
 Correct.

00:31:22.140 --> 00:31:23.140
 OK.

00:31:23.140 --> 00:31:30.380
 Can we have a flowchart back there?

00:31:30.380 --> 00:31:34.500
 I need an AI bot to retype that sentence.

00:31:34.500 --> 00:31:35.860
 OK.

00:31:35.860 --> 00:31:46.540
 All those in favor of passing the current item, please say aye.

00:31:46.540 --> 00:31:47.540
 Any opposed?

00:31:47.540 --> 00:31:48.780
 Vote nay.

00:31:48.780 --> 00:31:49.780
 Nay.

00:31:49.780 --> 00:31:50.780
 Nay.

00:31:50.780 --> 00:31:52.340
 It fails unanimously.

00:31:52.340 --> 00:31:53.340
 OK.

00:31:53.340 --> 00:31:54.340
 Oh.

00:31:54.340 --> 00:31:55.340
 Such a message.

00:31:55.340 --> 00:31:56.340
 I know it.

00:31:56.340 --> 00:31:57.340
 And Mr. Wendel.

00:31:57.340 --> 00:32:03.180
 Mr. Chair, we'll notify the council tomorrow as part of the presentation to let them know

00:32:03.180 --> 00:32:06.120
 the PB's recommendations, just like we did to you with the risk committee.

00:32:06.120 --> 00:32:09.900
 So the council will be informed.

00:32:09.900 --> 00:32:12.380
 Play the tape.

00:32:12.380 --> 00:32:13.380
 Yeah.

00:32:13.380 --> 00:32:17.020
 OK, so what are we saying here?

00:32:17.020 --> 00:32:18.020
 Gosh.

00:32:18.020 --> 00:32:19.020
 OK.

00:32:19.020 --> 00:32:24.500
 Well, that is B. We have item C, which are management reports.

00:32:24.500 --> 00:32:25.500
 Mr. Puente.

00:32:25.500 --> 00:32:30.660
 Mr. Chair, members of the PB, I'm going to try not to confuse you all too much here.

00:32:30.660 --> 00:32:36.220
 So the first item that you have per management report is just your upcoming 2024 schedule.

00:32:36.220 --> 00:32:42.260
 So our hope is that you don't have any issues with those dates, but if you do, please let

00:32:42.260 --> 00:32:43.900
 us know so we can look for alternate dates.

00:32:43.900 --> 00:32:46.500
 I don't think there's any action that the board needs to take there.

00:32:46.500 --> 00:32:50.900
 We just want to make you aware of what those dates are for this coming year.

00:32:50.900 --> 00:32:52.620
 OK.

00:32:52.620 --> 00:32:57.460
 There was an email that came out that Kim sent out about changing to the first and the third

00:32:57.460 --> 00:33:00.740
 from the second and the fourth.

00:33:00.740 --> 00:33:01.740
 Just for May only?

00:33:01.740 --> 00:33:04.380
 Is that because Memorial-- I mean, Labor-- which one is it?

00:33:04.380 --> 00:33:05.380
 What?

00:33:05.380 --> 00:33:06.380
 Memorial Day?

00:33:06.380 --> 00:33:07.380
 Labor Day?

00:33:07.380 --> 00:33:08.380
 Memorial Day.

00:33:08.380 --> 00:33:09.380
 Sorry.

00:33:09.380 --> 00:33:10.380
 Sorry, veterans.

00:33:10.380 --> 00:33:14.460
 Because those are listed as May 6th and May 20th.

00:33:14.460 --> 00:33:17.140
 Those dates are OK, but yeah.

00:33:17.140 --> 00:33:18.140
 OK.

00:33:18.140 --> 00:33:19.140
 OK.

00:33:19.140 --> 00:33:25.820
 Well, if you do have some issues with those dates, please let Kim and myself know at this

00:33:25.820 --> 00:33:26.820
 point.

00:33:26.820 --> 00:33:27.820
 This should be the schedule.

00:33:27.820 --> 00:33:30.740
 I think Kim will send out calendar appointments, I believe, for that.

00:33:30.740 --> 00:33:38.380
 So the next item that we have, this is a request from Mr. Rybak regarding Proposition 7, what's

00:33:38.380 --> 00:33:42.100
 called the Texas Energy Fund.

00:33:42.100 --> 00:33:46.580
 Terry and Andrew Keifer, that's kind of our legislative person, helped put this together.

00:33:46.580 --> 00:33:50.940
 Certainly, if you have any questions, Terry's here, or I'll try to respond as well.

00:33:50.940 --> 00:33:52.580
 If there's any questions on that memo.

00:33:52.580 --> 00:33:57.940
 Since I requested the memo, I read it, and I am satisfied that I better understand it.

00:33:57.940 --> 00:33:58.940
 Thank you.

00:33:58.940 --> 00:33:59.940
 I have a question.

00:33:59.940 --> 00:34:03.620
 Mr. Rybak?

00:34:03.620 --> 00:34:08.320
 I was reading the portion about potential impact to the City of Denton and Denton Municipal

00:34:08.320 --> 00:34:14.240
 Electricity question mark, and I read in here where the event that the DME determines the

00:34:14.240 --> 00:34:20.740
 need for and achieves approval to construct additional dispatchable generation, our analysis

00:34:20.740 --> 00:34:23.140
 is acceptable to the program, yada, yada, yada.

00:34:23.140 --> 00:34:28.140
 My question was, though, and achieve approval to consent.

00:34:28.140 --> 00:34:35.980
 So this is not a given that we would get any portion of the $1.8 billion.

00:34:35.980 --> 00:34:41.740
 So the intention of that paragraph was to let you know that before we would make any

00:34:41.740 --> 00:34:49.660
 commitment to even apply to the fund for funding, or for the early completion bonus, we would

00:34:49.660 --> 00:34:52.980
 need to have your approval and City Council's approval.

00:34:52.980 --> 00:34:55.420
 So that is the consent that we're referring to.

00:34:55.420 --> 00:34:57.420
 Oh, I thought you were...

00:34:57.420 --> 00:35:02.300
 I do have a question, but I'm just...

00:35:02.300 --> 00:35:03.300
 Oh, okay.

00:35:03.300 --> 00:35:09.740
 So we need to initiate the request, obviously, unless you're going to pass it on to everybody,

00:35:09.740 --> 00:35:11.100
 but then we have...

00:35:11.100 --> 00:35:14.900
 So there's procedures and such that we would need to follow.

00:35:14.900 --> 00:35:18.260
 Now, does that come before us before that money is asked for?

00:35:18.260 --> 00:35:19.260
 Yes, sir.

00:35:19.260 --> 00:35:28.140
 So later this early next quarter, sometime in the first quarter of 2024, we'll be bringing

00:35:28.140 --> 00:35:34.460
 to this body and to the City Council a revised Denton Renewable Resource Plan.

00:35:34.460 --> 00:35:44.040
 That plan will discuss our future power supply portfolio, which may or may not include additional

00:35:44.040 --> 00:35:46.220
 dispatchable generation.

00:35:46.220 --> 00:35:51.220
 If it does include dispatchable generation, is that our recommendation?

00:35:51.220 --> 00:35:56.820
 It would require approval of both the PUB and the council before we would make any application

00:35:56.820 --> 00:35:58.260
 to this fund.

00:35:58.260 --> 00:36:00.460
 And is it a grant type thing and we pay it back?

00:36:00.460 --> 00:36:01.460
 No, it's a loan.

00:36:01.460 --> 00:36:02.460
 It's a loan.

00:36:02.460 --> 00:36:03.460
 Yes, sir.

00:36:03.460 --> 00:36:04.460
 And is it at the 3% such as the other?

00:36:04.460 --> 00:36:05.460
 Yes, sir.

00:36:05.460 --> 00:36:06.460
 Okay.

00:36:06.460 --> 00:36:12.220
 So the capital program, let's just say it was a $200 million investment, you could borrow

00:36:12.220 --> 00:36:23.220
 the $200 million at 3% and then under the provisions of the law, House Bill 2627, there

00:36:23.220 --> 00:36:28.780
 would be an early completion bonus if you were able to complete the unit by, I believe

00:36:28.780 --> 00:36:30.660
 it's the middle of 2027.

00:36:30.660 --> 00:36:31.660
 Yes.

00:36:31.660 --> 00:36:32.660
 Six.

00:36:32.660 --> 00:36:33.660
 Six.

00:36:33.660 --> 00:36:35.740
 Six, yeah, that's right.

00:36:35.740 --> 00:36:40.940
 That would be paid back, that completion bonus is actually paid back over time.

00:36:40.940 --> 00:36:48.440
 So it would be actually after the units had been on for a year or better, then you would

00:36:48.440 --> 00:36:57.540
 receive funds, just a cash disbursement from the energy fund to cover a portion of that

00:36:57.540 --> 00:36:59.220
 capital investment.

00:36:59.220 --> 00:37:04.820
 You'd then restructure your loan because your loan value would be significantly lower

00:37:04.820 --> 00:37:13.460
 and you'd owe the fund than that interest and principal payment on the remaining balance.

00:37:13.460 --> 00:37:14.460
 Thank you.

00:37:14.460 --> 00:37:15.460
 Thank you, man.

00:37:15.460 --> 00:37:20.940
 I just want to point out real quick, so we were trying to respond to the question.

00:37:20.940 --> 00:37:23.720
 This is still hypothetical, right?

00:37:23.720 --> 00:37:27.820
 If we were to do this, we would qualify, I think that we were trying to satisfy the question

00:37:27.820 --> 00:37:28.820
 that was asked.

00:37:28.820 --> 00:37:34.380
 At this point, we're not making a recommendation to invest in additional dispatchable generation

00:37:34.380 --> 00:37:38.060
 and, again, we're still looking at that as part of the Denver Renewable Resource Plan.

00:37:38.060 --> 00:37:43.020
 We will bring back to the PAB, to the council, different options and kind of a menu of things

00:37:43.020 --> 00:37:45.420
 that we could potentially do going forward.

00:37:45.420 --> 00:37:50.820
 But as you guys know, we are in a very fast-growing community with a lot of different needs.

00:37:50.820 --> 00:37:59.860
 We have increasing electric load that we're serving in a very unstable market.

00:37:59.860 --> 00:38:04.740
 So, again, I just want to make that very clear that this does not mean that we're going

00:38:04.740 --> 00:38:07.900
 to go and construct a new generation facility.

00:38:07.900 --> 00:38:16.220
 Yeah, I'll also point out, Tony, that there are a number of regulatory changes that are

00:38:16.220 --> 00:38:18.460
 coming down the road.

00:38:18.460 --> 00:38:23.340
 Those regulations are being developed right now to try to restructure the market in order

00:38:23.340 --> 00:38:31.580
 to respond to the fact that we now are a heavily dominated market by wind and solar.

00:38:31.580 --> 00:38:38.500
 And so there may be new requirements imposed on all utilities across all generating utilities.

00:38:38.500 --> 00:38:41.140
 I should get my terminology right.

00:38:41.140 --> 00:38:49.140
 All load-serving entities like DME to have a level of dispatchable generation to back

00:38:49.140 --> 00:38:53.760
 up the intermittency associated with that wind and solar.

00:38:53.760 --> 00:38:55.740
 That is not the case today.

00:38:55.740 --> 00:38:58.580
 Those regulations are under development.

00:38:58.580 --> 00:39:05.640
 But should they come into place, that coupled with what Tony talked about, there is a potential

00:39:05.640 --> 00:39:11.440
 that we could recommend, and again, it's purely hypothetical, but we could recommend additional

00:39:11.440 --> 00:39:14.580
 dispatchable generation.

00:39:14.580 --> 00:39:17.540
 And are only dispatchable options natural gas?

00:39:17.540 --> 00:39:22.060
 Do we have any other alternatives for dispatchable generation?

00:39:22.060 --> 00:39:25.960
 Depends again on the problem that you're solving for.

00:39:25.960 --> 00:39:31.780
 So if it's more than a two-hour period that you would need to back up, to back up that

00:39:31.780 --> 00:39:41.220
 intermittency, then yes, I think cost-effectively, natural gas would be the way to go.

00:39:41.220 --> 00:39:46.340
 Obviously, there's batteries for a couple hours and there's nuclear energy and all kinds

00:39:46.340 --> 00:39:51.860
 of other options out there, but conventional wisdom would say gas.

00:39:51.860 --> 00:40:00.780
 Well, and one final thing in response to your question, even in that situation, you could

00:40:00.780 --> 00:40:08.620
 still enter into a PPA with a generator without you necessarily having to build your own.

00:40:08.620 --> 00:40:13.580
 And so it's just a different way to still get there if you need to get there.

00:40:13.580 --> 00:40:21.380
 Thank you, I just had a few hypothetical questions on timeline.

00:40:21.380 --> 00:40:31.340
 So there seems to be two steps in the memo references, two deadlines for the completion

00:40:31.340 --> 00:40:32.340
 bonus.

00:40:32.340 --> 00:40:37.540
 June 2026 and then June 2029.

00:40:37.540 --> 00:40:50.340
 If, what would be the expected timeline to install once approved reciprocating dispatchable

00:40:50.340 --> 00:40:51.340
 generation?

00:40:51.340 --> 00:40:56.220
 So conventional peaking generation, whether it's resip engines like we have at the deck

00:40:56.220 --> 00:41:02.180
 or whether it's arrow derivatives, probably a two-year build cycle.

00:41:02.180 --> 00:41:08.540
 So you'd have to do the engineering design ahead of that, but an expedited build would

00:41:08.540 --> 00:41:11.780
 be 18 months, but that would be tough.

00:41:11.780 --> 00:41:20.940
 So June 2026 would be very aggressive for any entity unless they've already designed

00:41:20.940 --> 00:41:24.180
 it.

00:41:24.180 --> 00:41:29.140
 We didn't try to go into a lot of detail here, obviously there's a bunch of nuances, but

00:41:29.140 --> 00:41:40.340
 in the legislation itself, there is the ability to push out that June 2026 date due to equipment,

00:41:40.340 --> 00:41:44.420
 supply chain issues and other reasons that could be pushed out as well.

00:41:44.420 --> 00:41:51.020
 The state clearly wants additional dispatchable generation and they want to deploy this money

00:41:51.020 --> 00:41:58.460
 in order to incentivize either private entities, public entities, whoever wants to build that

00:41:58.460 --> 00:42:03.020
 generation, that's what the money was allocated for.

00:42:03.020 --> 00:42:04.020
 Thank you.

00:42:04.020 --> 00:42:05.020
 Thanks.

00:42:05.020 --> 00:42:06.020
 You got another one?

00:42:06.020 --> 00:42:12.340
 Yeah, so I assume that in the event that we should decide in the future to make this decision

00:42:12.340 --> 00:42:20.460
 that we're competing with the private manufacturers or generators of electricity as well to get

00:42:20.460 --> 00:42:28.780
 this money that's potentially available to us, we've got limited supply resource availability

00:42:28.780 --> 00:42:32.940
 and probably a very limited labor market of skilled workers who can do this.

00:42:32.940 --> 00:42:36.080
 So I'm assuming this is an early bird gets the worm type thing.

00:42:36.080 --> 00:42:42.220
 Are we moving quickly with the potential idea to make another --

00:42:42.220 --> 00:42:44.380
 Yeah, I guess --

00:42:44.380 --> 00:42:46.580
 Yeah, I get what I'm saying here.

00:42:46.580 --> 00:42:48.580
 To inform the council.

00:42:48.580 --> 00:42:54.360
 So we will be bringing a definitive recommendation sometime in the first quarter of next year

00:42:54.360 --> 00:42:55.360
 regarding this.

00:42:55.360 --> 00:42:58.700
 And that's kind of where I'd prefer to leave it at this point.

00:42:58.700 --> 00:42:59.700
 Okay.

00:42:59.700 --> 00:43:05.180
 Yeah, that's maybe another thing that's private to, I guess, that discussion.

00:43:05.180 --> 00:43:06.180
 Obviously, yeah.

00:43:06.180 --> 00:43:12.380
 Any decisions that we make about that would be competitive matters and be protected from

00:43:12.380 --> 00:43:13.660
 public disclosure.

00:43:13.660 --> 00:43:14.660
 Okay.

00:43:14.660 --> 00:43:19.820
 So going on to the next item, here is future agenda items.

00:43:19.820 --> 00:43:27.220
 Just want to make you aware that at our January 8th meeting, we will be looking to elect new

00:43:27.220 --> 00:43:30.540
 officers for the board.

00:43:30.540 --> 00:43:33.220
 So kind of please start thinking about that.

00:43:33.220 --> 00:43:38.380
 As you know, right now we have our chair is Susan, Parker Billy is our vice chair.

00:43:38.380 --> 00:43:42.620
 And I thought that Barbara was our --

00:43:42.620 --> 00:43:43.620
 I think so.

00:43:43.620 --> 00:43:44.620
 Barbara was our secretary.

00:43:44.620 --> 00:43:45.620
 But so --

00:43:45.620 --> 00:43:50.140
 Did we put you in places, secretary?

00:43:50.140 --> 00:43:51.140
 Okay.

00:43:51.140 --> 00:43:54.140
 I thought we put somebody --

00:43:54.140 --> 00:43:55.140
 Well --

00:43:55.140 --> 00:43:57.260
 I thought we put somebody in places.

00:43:57.260 --> 00:43:58.860
 I think we probably did.

00:43:58.860 --> 00:44:05.100
 But on January 8th, we will reelect -- we'll elect new PAV officers then.

00:44:05.100 --> 00:44:06.100
 Okay.

00:44:06.100 --> 00:44:07.100
 So just kind of be thinking about it.

00:44:07.100 --> 00:44:09.140
 I wanted to give you -- give you that heads up.

00:44:09.140 --> 00:44:14.440
 And then on the new business action items, obviously we've provided to you the memo today

00:44:14.440 --> 00:44:17.120
 on the SB7.

00:44:17.120 --> 00:44:26.100
 We have on tab to give you a memo for the first meeting in January, I believe, as well,

00:44:26.100 --> 00:44:30.540
 a response to the third-party software.

00:44:30.540 --> 00:44:35.140
 And then the only item that we have left, which we committed to do a year from the day

00:44:35.140 --> 00:44:40.820
 that it was requested, come back with some information on where we are with EVs versus

00:44:40.820 --> 00:44:42.160
 combustion engine vehicles.

00:44:42.160 --> 00:44:45.860
 So those are the items that we have left for you.

00:44:45.860 --> 00:44:47.900
 Mr. Reiner?

00:44:47.900 --> 00:44:51.140
 I thought it was interesting.

00:44:51.140 --> 00:44:54.820
 Mr. Rybeck was asking about that third party.

00:44:54.820 --> 00:45:00.780
 And then shortly after our meeting, in the news, the North Texas Municipal Water District

00:45:00.780 --> 00:45:07.140
 was hit with ransomware, and over 2 million people didn't have water, and it was due to

00:45:07.140 --> 00:45:08.700
 a third party.

00:45:08.700 --> 00:45:16.380
 So I really hope that when we get to this, would you review that as well as to the importance

00:45:16.380 --> 00:45:18.540
 of, what, keeping it in-house?

00:45:18.540 --> 00:45:22.380
 Is that how you phrased it last time?

00:45:22.380 --> 00:45:27.140
 So the plan that we've discussed with our IT directors, we're going to give you a memo.

00:45:27.140 --> 00:45:33.540
 We hope the memo satisfies the question, but if it doesn't, as part of your agenda, we

00:45:33.540 --> 00:45:37.980
 will be able to go into closed session if we need to, if you have more specific information

00:45:37.980 --> 00:45:42.340
 that we don't want to be disclosing in public regarding some of the efforts when it comes

00:45:42.340 --> 00:45:45.500
 to cybersecurity and just general security of software.

00:45:45.500 --> 00:45:51.780
 But my hope is that the memo that Alicia will be crafting will satisfy the question.

00:45:51.780 --> 00:45:54.740
 And I don't mean to-- thank you.

00:45:54.740 --> 00:45:59.760
 I just thought, since we have an example of it, I'd like for you all to at least review

00:45:59.760 --> 00:46:04.980
 that to see if there was anything that-- make sure that we're not retracing a potential

00:46:04.980 --> 00:46:06.460
 problem that they ran into.

00:46:06.460 --> 00:46:07.460
 Yes, sir.

00:46:07.460 --> 00:46:12.980
 I'll let Alicia know, but unfortunately, that's not the only example that's gone on.

00:46:12.980 --> 00:46:17.420
 Oh, I just made my radar, because it happened a week after we talked about this, and here

00:46:17.420 --> 00:46:18.420
 we are.

00:46:18.420 --> 00:46:19.420
 It's in Texas.

00:46:19.420 --> 00:46:20.420
 Thank you.

00:46:20.420 --> 00:46:21.420
 Yeah.

00:46:21.420 --> 00:46:22.420
 Appreciate your time.

00:46:22.420 --> 00:46:23.420
 Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:46:23.420 --> 00:46:24.420
 I have a question.

00:46:24.420 --> 00:46:27.500
 I have a question regarding officers, two parts.

00:46:27.500 --> 00:46:32.540
 One, Barbara has been on the board, and she had not been reappointed.

00:46:32.540 --> 00:46:33.740
 Is that correct?

00:46:33.740 --> 00:46:35.100
 She didn't want to be reappointed.

00:46:35.100 --> 00:46:36.180
 She did not wish to be reappointed.

00:46:36.180 --> 00:46:37.740
 I believe that's the case.

00:46:37.740 --> 00:46:42.620
 So if we're going to elect officers, who else needs to be reappointed?

00:46:42.620 --> 00:46:45.980
 Because I think I'm up next year, but I'm not 100% sure.

00:46:45.980 --> 00:46:46.980
 Does anyone know?

00:46:46.980 --> 00:46:48.340
 We used to carry that on here.

00:46:48.340 --> 00:46:52.340
 I guess it's not-- and we would just come out with a normal--

00:46:52.340 --> 00:46:53.340
 Yeah.

00:46:53.340 --> 00:46:56.540
 We can-- we probably don't have the information right now, but we can certainly get that to

00:46:56.540 --> 00:47:02.460
 you to let you know who's termed out or needs to be reappointed.

00:47:02.460 --> 00:47:03.820
 When's our next meeting?

00:47:03.820 --> 00:47:04.820
 Is it January?

00:47:04.820 --> 00:47:05.820
 January.

00:47:05.820 --> 00:47:06.820
 OK.

00:47:06.820 --> 00:47:07.820
 When we're supposed to vote.

00:47:07.820 --> 00:47:08.820
 Right.

00:47:08.820 --> 00:47:13.540
 And if you'd like, we can put a memo together and put that as part of the management update

00:47:13.540 --> 00:47:14.540
 to make everyone aware.

00:47:14.540 --> 00:47:20.540
 I'd like to get an update before we have our next meeting, if at all possible.

00:47:20.540 --> 00:47:21.540
 Yeah, right.

00:47:21.540 --> 00:47:22.540
 Yeah.

00:47:22.540 --> 00:47:23.540
 OK.

00:47:23.540 --> 00:47:24.540
 So we'll send it out to you.

00:47:24.540 --> 00:47:25.540
 And we still lack a seventh member.

00:47:25.540 --> 00:47:26.540
 Is that correct?

00:47:26.540 --> 00:47:27.540
 Correct.

00:47:27.540 --> 00:47:31.940
 But that person hasn't been appointed yet, correct?

00:47:31.940 --> 00:47:32.940
 That's correct.

00:47:32.940 --> 00:47:35.780
 There still hasn't been a nomination for that position.

00:47:35.780 --> 00:47:36.780
 OK.

00:47:36.780 --> 00:47:40.980
 Do we know which city council member needs to make that?

00:47:40.980 --> 00:47:43.180
 I think it's the mayor, I believe.

00:47:43.180 --> 00:47:44.180
 Yeah.

00:47:44.180 --> 00:47:45.180
 OK.

00:47:45.180 --> 00:47:46.180
 Very good.

00:47:46.180 --> 00:47:47.180
 Thank you.

00:47:47.180 --> 00:47:48.180
 All right.

00:47:48.180 --> 00:47:53.660
 There doesn't appear to be any more questions on items for individual consideration, so

00:47:53.660 --> 00:47:55.700
 we'll move on to concluding items.

00:47:55.700 --> 00:47:58.620
 Do I need to read this?

00:47:58.620 --> 00:47:59.620
 No.

00:47:59.620 --> 00:48:00.620
 OK.

00:48:00.620 --> 00:48:04.660
 We're going into work session for item A, which is receive a report, hold a discussion,

00:48:04.660 --> 00:48:08.420
 and give staff direction regarding updates to the city of Denton criteria manuals.

00:48:08.420 --> 00:48:13.700
 Yeah, Mr. Chair, unfortunately, that item, we're going to have to pull that item.

00:48:13.700 --> 00:48:18.700
 Today, there's a couple of issues that came up, and so we're asking to pull that item.

00:48:18.700 --> 00:48:20.820
 We'll have that today for you.

00:48:20.820 --> 00:48:21.820
 OK.

00:48:21.820 --> 00:48:22.820
 So we'll just have B.

00:48:22.820 --> 00:48:23.820
 All right.

00:48:23.820 --> 00:48:24.820
 Pulled that one.

00:48:24.820 --> 00:48:27.540
 So now we have B, which is receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction

00:48:27.540 --> 00:48:36.940
 regarding the final wastewater master plan.

00:48:36.940 --> 00:48:38.460
 And I love design criteria.

00:48:38.460 --> 00:48:44.020
 I was hoping we'd get to discuss that.

00:48:44.020 --> 00:48:52.580
 Morning, I'm Kyle Pettico, I'm the water utilities planning and engineering manager.

00:48:52.580 --> 00:48:58.960
 So today, I'm going to give the third update on our wastewater master plan project.

00:48:58.960 --> 00:49:03.500
 This will also be the final update before we bring it forward for approval.

00:49:03.500 --> 00:49:08.420
 So first, I'm going to go over the phasing and growth, then the five-year capital improvement

00:49:08.420 --> 00:49:13.220
 projects that we have listed in the Hickory Creek and Clear Creek basins.

00:49:13.220 --> 00:49:16.760
 And then we'll review the next steps.

00:49:16.760 --> 00:49:20.520
 So the phasing and growth hasn't changed throughout these updates.

00:49:20.520 --> 00:49:25.940
 So in our zero to five-year window, we're anticipating an 8.1% growth rate to bring

00:49:25.940 --> 00:49:30.940
 our population up to around 223,000 people.

00:49:30.940 --> 00:49:36.860
 In the five-year to 10-year window, we're anticipating right around a 3.5% growth rate

00:49:36.860 --> 00:49:40.620
 to bring us up to 265,000.

00:49:40.620 --> 00:49:45.700
 And then in the 10-year to 25-year window, we're anticipating right around a 2% growth

00:49:45.700 --> 00:49:48.180
 rate to bring us up to 357,000.

00:49:48.180 --> 00:49:49.180
 Question.

00:49:49.180 --> 00:49:50.180
 Yes.

00:49:50.180 --> 00:49:54.500
 The population that you're using here, does that include all customers or just the city

00:49:54.500 --> 00:49:55.500
 of Dinton?

00:49:55.500 --> 00:49:56.500
 All customers.

00:49:56.500 --> 00:49:57.500
 Okay.

00:49:57.500 --> 00:49:58.500
 Yes.

00:49:58.500 --> 00:50:02.180
 So in some of these areas, that includes our MUDs and the other development out to the

00:50:02.180 --> 00:50:05.180
 west of the city.

00:50:05.180 --> 00:50:06.180
 Okay.

00:50:06.180 --> 00:50:16.740
 Continuing on, kind of similar vein, if you go back a slide, so you've indicated developments

00:50:16.740 --> 00:50:22.520
 basically on the map that correspond to the timeline.

00:50:22.520 --> 00:50:23.520
 So we have five-year.

00:50:23.520 --> 00:50:30.740
 These are developments probably underway now or starting very soon, then a 10-year to 25-year.

00:50:30.740 --> 00:50:34.940
 There are likely to be developments that we don't yet know about.

00:50:34.940 --> 00:50:41.340
 So is that, I assume these are only the developments that have reached planning staff?

00:50:41.340 --> 00:50:42.340
 Yes.

00:50:42.340 --> 00:50:47.020
 These are all the developments that we know about on the horizon.

00:50:47.020 --> 00:50:51.500
 And what we've kind of done throughout this process, the way the growth starts pretty

00:50:51.500 --> 00:50:56.500
 quickly and tapers off, it shows the initial development and then the fill-in of those

00:50:56.500 --> 00:50:57.500
 developments.

00:50:57.500 --> 00:51:03.940
 Like if you see in the southwest portion, the Hunter and Coal area, as those grow out.

00:51:03.940 --> 00:51:06.740
 So we've included all of them that we do know about.

00:51:06.740 --> 00:51:13.740
 And I believe there's a small factor of safety in there to accommodate any that we don't.

00:51:13.740 --> 00:51:14.740
 Okay.

00:51:14.740 --> 00:51:22.820
 And it's likely that come 2027 or 2028, there will be new developments that are beginning

00:51:22.820 --> 00:51:23.820
 that process.

00:51:23.820 --> 00:51:30.740
 So this slowing curve is more likely to be a straight line or linear growth?

00:51:30.740 --> 00:51:34.340
 It will probably still slow as areas get developed.

00:51:34.340 --> 00:51:37.740
 The development naturally slows down just because there's less developable land.

00:51:37.740 --> 00:51:40.020
 So it still will maintain that shape.

00:51:40.020 --> 00:51:45.500
 It might extend that, you know, that 8% growth rate by another couple of years if there's

00:51:45.500 --> 00:51:50.360
 developments, you know, like you said, that either happen quicker that we're not aware

00:51:50.360 --> 00:51:51.360
 of currently.

00:51:51.360 --> 00:51:52.360
 Okay.

00:51:52.360 --> 00:51:53.360
 Thank you.

00:51:53.360 --> 00:51:54.360
 I have a question.

00:51:54.360 --> 00:51:57.900
 It appears some of those areas you note are outside the city limits.

00:51:57.900 --> 00:51:58.900
 Yes.

00:51:58.900 --> 00:52:01.380
 So this includes all of our customers.

00:52:01.380 --> 00:52:10.820
 So any MUDs, any, you know, not just within the City of Denton, but City of Denton water

00:52:10.820 --> 00:52:12.580
 utilities customers.

00:52:12.580 --> 00:52:18.020
 So the city's wastewater and I assume water and power are serving customers who are outside

00:52:18.020 --> 00:52:19.900
 the actual city limits?

00:52:19.900 --> 00:52:20.900
 Yes.

00:52:20.900 --> 00:52:23.940
 They're within the ETJ, but outside of the city limits.

00:52:23.940 --> 00:52:31.260
 Are we not pooling any of that development on 380, close to the Wise County line?

00:52:31.260 --> 00:52:35.900
 Big Sky, I think it was, that MUD, it's a MUD district, I'm pretty sure, out there.

00:52:35.900 --> 00:52:37.980
 I'm not familiar with that name.

00:52:37.980 --> 00:52:39.980
 I'd have to check with Development Services on that.

00:52:39.980 --> 00:52:41.420
 You'd know if we were covering it, I'll bet.

00:52:41.420 --> 00:52:44.660
 So it's not on this map, but it was huge.

00:52:44.660 --> 00:52:45.660
 Right.

00:52:45.660 --> 00:52:46.660
 That might be outside of the ETJ.

00:52:46.660 --> 00:52:47.660
 Okay.

00:52:47.660 --> 00:52:48.860
 I'd have to check on that.

00:52:48.860 --> 00:52:49.860
 Gotcha.

00:52:49.860 --> 00:52:50.860
 No worries.

00:52:50.860 --> 00:52:51.860
 Okay.

00:52:51.860 --> 00:53:00.820
 So in May, this is the proposal we made back in May regarding growth in the Hickory Creek

00:53:00.820 --> 00:53:01.820
 Basin.

00:53:01.820 --> 00:53:08.540
 So we had included $151 million of conveyance and $423 million of treatment, which would

00:53:08.540 --> 00:53:13.460
 have included that proposed Hickory Creek water reclamation plant.

00:53:13.460 --> 00:53:18.460
 So that was a $574 million total for that area.

00:53:18.460 --> 00:53:22.640
 We've narrowed that down, that Hickory Creek water reclamation plant has pushed outside

00:53:22.640 --> 00:53:24.380
 of our five-year growth window.

00:53:24.380 --> 00:53:31.340
 So we've removed that, and we've looked at as the numbers have solidified, we can treat

00:53:31.340 --> 00:53:35.140
 that through the existing Pecan Creek water reclamation plant.

00:53:35.140 --> 00:53:39.020
 So that was a big reduction.

00:53:39.020 --> 00:53:40.580
 How old is that plant now?

00:53:40.580 --> 00:53:41.580
 What's that?

00:53:41.580 --> 00:53:42.580
 How old is that plant now?

00:53:42.580 --> 00:53:45.940
 The Pecan Creek, I think it's around 60 years old.

00:53:45.940 --> 00:53:51.860
 We've been doing condition assessment improvements on that, and then we also have, currently,

00:53:51.860 --> 00:53:58.340
 a CMAR project for the expansion of that plant, retrofit and expansion.

00:53:58.340 --> 00:54:04.780
 Yeah, I remember we expanded that area, predicting that that area would develop.

00:54:04.780 --> 00:54:09.180
 There was something underway, then it fell, it went belly up in the middle of the recession

00:54:09.180 --> 00:54:10.180
 in '09.

00:54:10.180 --> 00:54:15.500
 So we mothballed a lot of it, but it was there and we eventually needed it.

00:54:15.500 --> 00:54:16.500
 Right.

00:54:16.500 --> 00:54:20.000
 All right, that was just comments, excuse me.

00:54:20.000 --> 00:54:24.420
 So here was our May update regarding the Clear Creek Basin.

00:54:24.420 --> 00:54:31.100
 So we had $142 million in conveyance and $109 million in treatment for $251 million total

00:54:31.100 --> 00:54:32.100
 in that area.

00:54:32.100 --> 00:54:38.460
 Since then, we've had a slight reduction in conveyance and a slight increase in treatment.

00:54:38.460 --> 00:54:42.660
 It results in an overall net decrease to $233 million.

00:54:42.660 --> 00:54:46.820
 So those laterals to the south, those were removed from the five-year window and those

00:54:46.820 --> 00:54:54.820
 can be installed by developers as the need presents itself in that area.

00:54:54.820 --> 00:55:00.820
 So when we started this effort back in October last year, we were looking at the full 25-year

00:55:00.820 --> 00:55:05.980
 window, and I believe the number was right around $1.62 billion for that.

00:55:05.980 --> 00:55:10.900
 We've reduced and narrowed in our focus to the five-year window in May.

00:55:10.900 --> 00:55:18.660
 So if you look in May of 2023, our update came to a total of $825 million of improvements

00:55:18.660 --> 00:55:26.140
 by kind of planning it out, studying the numbers, looking at the necessity of the Hickory Creek

00:55:26.140 --> 00:55:30.980
 plant within the five-year window, or without, we were able to remove that, and our new total

00:55:30.980 --> 00:55:36.740
 is at $397 million.

00:55:36.740 --> 00:55:44.740
 So our next steps will be to present this on the consent agenda for approval, for adoption,

00:55:44.740 --> 00:55:52.320
 and then bring it to city council, and once it's adopted, use this in our impact fee study

00:55:52.320 --> 00:55:53.320
 and update.

00:55:53.320 --> 00:55:54.320
 Yes.

00:55:54.320 --> 00:55:58.540
 So kind of follow-up to Devin's question, I think, and point.

00:55:58.540 --> 00:56:04.080
 So this plan will be reviewed and revised in three years, five years?

00:56:04.080 --> 00:56:12.440
 It's a living document, so once it's adopted, we go through kind of a constant revision

00:56:12.440 --> 00:56:14.140
 process.

00:56:14.140 --> 00:56:19.820
 As projections change, as projects are completed, we go through annual updates on it with larger

00:56:19.820 --> 00:56:24.700
 reviews scheduled for those three- to five-year windows.

00:56:24.700 --> 00:56:28.500
 Thank you.

00:56:28.500 --> 00:56:40.660
 I'm kind of surprised by the Hickory Creek postponement, because I know there's so much

00:56:40.660 --> 00:56:47.100
 growth in that basin, and so is that being met by, I know that we approved a small lift

00:56:47.100 --> 00:56:54.060
 upgrade out, way out on the far south Robson, near Robson, yeah.

00:56:54.060 --> 00:57:00.340
 Is that helping, are we doing minor projects to avoid that $400 million treatment plant?

00:57:00.340 --> 00:57:03.740
 So there are minor projects, if you look at the conveyance, the way the conveyance map

00:57:03.740 --> 00:57:09.540
 here has changed to include some of these areas where we have that known level of growth

00:57:09.540 --> 00:57:15.660
 within that five-year window, by taking that and calculating where the growth is, when

00:57:15.660 --> 00:57:19.780
 it's going to happen, we've seen that we can handle that, we should be able to handle

00:57:19.780 --> 00:57:24.180
 that flow through the Pecan Creek, the existing treatment plant, with some of the retrofitting

00:57:24.180 --> 00:57:26.860
 that we're doing out there.

00:57:26.860 --> 00:57:33.940
 We're still going to need a solution at Hickory Creek, it just pushes outside of that really

00:57:33.940 --> 00:57:35.580
 kind of solid planning window.

00:57:35.580 --> 00:57:39.660
 Okay, and then on the, what's the one north?

00:57:39.660 --> 00:57:40.660
 Clear Creek.

00:57:40.660 --> 00:57:42.100
 Yeah, the Clear Creek Basin.

00:57:42.100 --> 00:57:48.460
 So this conspicuously absent in the plan maps was a development that was previously called

00:57:48.460 --> 00:57:56.660
 Hills of Denton North, which is a major development on 2164 Missile Base Road.

00:57:56.660 --> 00:58:04.460
 And that was thousands of houses, and it might be currently dormant, but my understanding

00:58:04.460 --> 00:58:09.700
 was that they're, I guess it's not within the five-year window, is that the?

00:58:09.700 --> 00:58:13.160
 Not that I'm aware of, so that's another one I'd have to check on the name because it's

00:58:13.160 --> 00:58:20.340
 not familiar top of mind, but that's, yeah, I don't think that's the five-year window.

00:58:20.340 --> 00:58:30.540
 Yeah, and then I just want to make sure in this 2.5 million gallons a day capacity there,

00:58:30.540 --> 00:58:37.340
 that does seem, I guess that facility will be able to be expanded as not yet built, not

00:58:37.340 --> 00:58:40.340
 yet in planning developments to come online.

00:58:40.340 --> 00:58:41.340
 Correct.

00:58:41.340 --> 00:58:46.740
 The facility location really with TCEQ determines how much we're able to discharge.

00:58:46.740 --> 00:58:52.620
 I believe in this area we can discharge higher than this rate, and most of our, the way we

00:58:52.620 --> 00:59:01.180
 approach planning of plants, we build in expansion capability, so typically we're really going

00:59:01.180 --> 00:59:05.300
 towards a modular expansion capability in a lot of our efforts so that we can add on

00:59:05.300 --> 00:59:09.460
 as needed without doing a complete retrofit.

00:59:09.460 --> 00:59:12.040
 Okay, thank you.

00:59:12.040 --> 00:59:13.040
 Question if I may.

00:59:13.040 --> 00:59:15.800
 Mr. Rayner.

00:59:15.800 --> 00:59:21.100
 So a lot of this is based on permits that have been put in with the city, is that what,

00:59:21.100 --> 00:59:27.820
 and so you have those, and then as the activity of that corridor looks to be building, then

00:59:27.820 --> 00:59:32.820
 you kind of do a crystal ball of expansion as to the needs, is that?

00:59:32.820 --> 00:59:41.260
 Yes, correct, so as the developments progress, we work with the developers on their development

00:59:41.260 --> 00:59:47.380
 projections, so we incorporate their timelines, their build timelines into our planning to

00:59:47.380 --> 00:59:52.620
 get a better idea of when the growth will happen.

00:59:52.620 --> 00:59:56.380
 So initially when we start out, you know, we start out with the entire development,

00:59:56.380 --> 01:00:01.620
 the number of units, the overall capacity they're going to need, and work that in,

01:00:01.620 --> 01:00:05.180
 and then as we work through the process with them, we narrow down their build timeline

01:00:05.180 --> 01:00:09.860
 and plan that out to see how it will impact our wastewater model.

01:00:09.860 --> 01:00:12.900
 And could you go back to the other basin, please?

01:00:12.900 --> 01:00:22.340
 So on the Hickory Creek, I would say the biggest user or most expense is the residential for

01:00:22.340 --> 01:00:24.620
 you all, would it not be?

01:00:24.620 --> 01:00:25.620
 I believe so.

01:00:25.620 --> 01:00:32.060
 In this, yes, in this zero to five year window, I believe the biggest impact will be residential.

01:00:32.060 --> 01:00:39.220
 So along 380, those and possibly along I-35W as we get more industrial building development

01:00:39.220 --> 01:00:45.580
 coming along, that is somewhat of a saving grace, as it were, because you're betting

01:00:45.580 --> 01:00:53.860
 on the expense of the residential and yet the industrial warehouses would not be such

01:00:53.860 --> 01:00:58.100
 a demand, so it's a trade off, or would that be a fair statement?

01:00:58.100 --> 01:01:02.900
 It can be, depending on the type of industrial use, so for example, warehousing has a much

01:01:02.900 --> 01:01:09.300
 smaller impact than, for example, food processing or a different industrial use.

01:01:09.300 --> 01:01:12.500
 So it really depends on the type of use that we see.

01:01:12.500 --> 01:01:13.500
 Yeah.

01:01:13.500 --> 01:01:14.500
 Thank you.

01:01:14.500 --> 01:01:15.500
 Pretty good.

01:01:15.500 --> 01:01:20.500
 There doesn't appear to be any other questions.

01:01:20.500 --> 01:01:24.180
 I'm pulling, there are, Mr. Ryback.

01:01:24.180 --> 01:01:27.780
 I just wish to move approval.

01:01:27.780 --> 01:01:29.760
 Move approval?

01:01:29.760 --> 01:01:35.580
 This is not, yeah, I think he's messing with us a little bit there, but right?

01:01:35.580 --> 01:01:36.580
 We don't have to give it.

01:01:36.580 --> 01:01:37.580
 There's no action.

01:01:37.580 --> 01:01:38.580
 No, this is just an update.

01:01:38.580 --> 01:01:43.100
 We'll bring it forward for approval after, before we review it with council.

01:01:43.100 --> 01:01:46.060
 It was just a Q&A for us then.

01:01:46.060 --> 01:01:47.540
 Appreciate your optimism, Mr. Ryback.

01:01:47.540 --> 01:01:50.900
 I assume we had to recommend, I apologize.

01:01:50.900 --> 01:01:51.900
 Thank you.

01:01:51.900 --> 01:01:52.900
 Thank you.

01:01:52.900 --> 01:01:58.500
 Mr. Chair, can I ask one question?

01:01:58.500 --> 01:02:03.860
 The meeting tomorrow, city council right away impact fees, and it has, it's talking about

01:02:03.860 --> 01:02:13.140
 water, wastewater and such, does this come under our preview at all or is this just straight?

01:02:13.140 --> 01:02:19.100
 So that presentation is specific to roadway impact fees that the board does not have oversight

01:02:19.100 --> 01:02:25.140
 over when, when the water wastewater impact fees renewal comes forward to you.

01:02:25.140 --> 01:02:30.500
 Those will come to you, but there should not be any changes to water wastewater impact fees

01:02:30.500 --> 01:02:31.740
 as part of that conversation.

01:02:31.740 --> 01:02:32.980
 That's general fund stuff, right?

01:02:32.980 --> 01:02:33.980
 Yeah.

01:02:33.980 --> 01:02:34.980
 That's what I was curious about.

01:02:34.980 --> 01:02:35.980
 I appreciate it.

01:02:35.980 --> 01:02:36.980
 Thank you.

01:02:36.980 --> 01:02:37.980
 All right.

01:02:37.980 --> 01:02:38.980
 Worth the question.

01:02:38.980 --> 01:02:39.980
 That's for sure.

01:02:39.980 --> 01:02:40.980
 Any other questions?

01:02:40.980 --> 01:02:43.220
 If not, we stand adjourned.

01:02:43.220 --> 01:02:45.300
 Since I don't get to make the motion, we're just going to adjourn.