Feb 26, 2024 Public Utilities Board on 2024-02-26 9:00 AM

- Okay, it is nine o'clock and we do have a quorum. So a call to order the public utilities board for the city of Denton on Monday, February 26th, 2024. First item on the agenda is presentation for members of the public. Did anyone, nobody who wishes to speak. Next item is the consent item. Does any board member wish to pull an item from A through G? - Yes, ma'am, I'd like to pull item A. - Mr. Rybeck's pulling item A, any others? All right, do we have a motion to approve items B through G? - So moved. - Second. - Okay, Mr. Cheek, Mr. Rybeck, all in favor say aye. - Aye. - Consider approval of the January 22nd, 2024 minutes. They were. - So moved. - Okay, and do we have a second? Mr. Rybeck seconds, all in favor say aye. - Aye. - Oh, I'm sorry, missed item A. - I'm out of order. - Item A. - You're out of order. (laughing) - You need to slap me. - We can do it after, that's okay. - Okay, we'll do it now. Item A. - Mr. Manager, just to speak a little bit about the process that we do to pre-qualify the engineers before the department comes and answers most of your questions. We recommend that we get these pre-qualified lists because per state law and our purchasing policy that was approved by council, that we have to formally solicit with a request for qualification all engineers. By pre-qualifying them, it speeds up the process when we need an engineer. They've already combed through, as you can see, they've got lots of submittals and qualified the top. So if we had to do that each project, it would add time. So this way, this allows it when they need one, when one comes up, when a project gets passed through CIP and budget and everything, they can go to that list, they can use the qualifications that were submitted now or they can, if it's a specific project, request more projects from them to evaluate and they evaluate them each time for every project and then they start negotiating with the top. So I just wanted to let you know why we recommend to do these pre-qualified lists. - I understand why you're pre-qualified. - Yeah. - I mean, I appreciate the process and that wasn't really my question. My question is really about all these pre-qualifications. In some of the categories, we have multiple firms and in one category, we had only one firm or in a couple, we only had a couple. I was just curious if there was a need for more engineering horsepower in a given category or why there were more in some and fewer in others? - Well, they were asked to select what category they wanted to be qualified for. So once it closes, we can't add more to it. - I was asking about that, so I'm just saying. - Yeah. - You recommended, for instance, in one category, four engineering firms, another category, one engineering firm out of that. Was that only because of the scoring or because you're gonna have more need for them? - It was mostly for the scoring. I mean, they're supposed to score per what was put out in the solicitation and they each do it individually just to make sure that it's done fairly and competitively based on what qualifications they see. And even though we have this qualified list, if there is a project out there that we don't feel anyone on the qualified list can do it, then they can do a request for qualifications at that point. - Specific to that project. - Specific to that project, yeah. They're not required to have to use this for every project. They can still go out. - Well, I must say, I don't know what category you left untouched. (laughing) - They did have a lot. They had a lot to review. - Okay, thank you. - One further question on the process here. So once there's a category that has four qualified firms, are they given projects kind of in rotation or based on? - Every project, they get evaluated. So yeah, they can reach out to the four that are qualified and ask for more qualifications and tell them the project, like we have a water plant that needs something done to it. They would reach out to them, ask for more qualifications if they didn't feel they had enough already given to us with this solicitation. And then they evaluate them based on that project, specific, those four. So their scores reset for every project. - Okay. So this isn't like an IDIQ where they could just, here's the task, here's the task. Okay, thank you. - Yep. - Question. - Yep. - So notice that your cutoff seems to be 80. - Yes. - Right. Apparently it was not taken into consideration that, okay, well, cutoff's 80 and we only got three folks and maybe that's not competitive enough. Is there a consideration to go down that list a little? - They did. - They actually evaluated this one twice. So the very first time they didn't have as many above 80. So then after they discussed and talked individually, we have them evaluate them individually and then they get together in a group setting and go over the scores and then can reevaluate. - So was the experience of the firm and some of these other items, is the consideration with the firm only or did they, let's say, I'm just gonna take these, no specific burkoff. Let's say they've got a lower experience score, adequacy and availability, key personnel and project team. Let's say they go and hire a bunch of Corolla engineers guys. Do you take that into consideration? - If they didn't make the qualified list, we wouldn't on projects. But if they made, like if they made the qualified list and then-- - Well, during that process of making the qualified list. - Stephen Gates, director of water utilities. I believe you're asking if they were to add resources to their team, would we take that in consideration? It's basically, the evaluation is based off of what they presented, right? So we published the request for qualifications, they respond, we evaluate their information. If they were to have indicated that they had this additional horsepower, yes, it would have been taken into consideration. If they didn't, there's no way the evaluation team could take that into consideration. - Okay, that's good, 'cause you know, the point being, you never get off the low list unless you improve your company in the eyes of this assessment, at least, right? - Yes. - In the eyes of your assessment. But that always needs to be a possibility, I think. - It does, and that's why-- - Didn't they have the same employees that they had 15 years ago? So, I mean, you know. - Well, and that's why we continue to republish the list. So we revisit this every three to five years to update the list, and to your point about the limited number of companies in a given category, as Lori mentioned, we went back and we reevaluated that, 'cause we recognized in the first pass that we didn't have a lot of companies qualified in specific areas, and we wanted to at least have three, and so we reevaluated it, and we actually added a significant number of companies to the list based off of that process. - So let's say, and I'm not going to, let's say I start an engineering firm, and you've never done business with that engineering firm, and that engineering firm comes up and says, well, we just hired Joe Blow with 30 years of experience with water supply planning, and he brought a guy with him that had 20 years of experience, so that would be taken into effect, right? - When we're doing our evaluation, yes. We're in the three to five years. - Yeah, in the three to five, yes, yes, ma'am. - I mean, I like pre-qualification. I think that's really the way to go. I think there's some jobs that would go different that we've discussed current, I mean, recently, that may have gone another way had that been the case. Not specifically with wastewater, but anyway. Okay, that's all I got, thank you. - Other questions? Do we have a motion to approve item A? - She was gonna say something. - Oh, you were gonna say something, sorry. - I was gonna add to Billy, just so you know, all these firms that do not get qualified, they in a lot do ask for a debrief, and we go over and let them know why they weren't qualified. - Oh, yeah, I'm familiar with that. - That's excellent, I compliment you on doing that. I think a lot of firms would like to know. I had further questions about the engineering services regarding project impact and planning over time. I'm assuming if you want this much engineering horsepower, you got a lot of stuff you want them to do in terms of either bond projects, capital, or, you know, maintenance and repair. - I'm Nick Damp, good morning board. I'm the senior engineer with water utilities. Can you repeat the question, sorry? - I'd be happy to. - Thank you. - Since you're going out for so much engineering services, I wanted to find out if these services are attached to large scale planning projects. The last time I saw a prequel this big, it was for a $300 million bond project. So I'm assuming you have some demand for their services. I'd like to have some context for that. - Well, we have the Ray Roberts expansion. We have, you know, the expansion of our Pecan Creek water rec plant. We're gonna bring on two new rec plants in the near future. That's not really in the five year right now, but yeah, we have lots of large projects. - Okay, could you give us an overall dollar volume, time frame? I mean, just for the sake of discussion, I'm not asking for hard specifics, but just a general idea. - So, Mr. Rybeck, Stephen Gay, director of water utilities. We, as you're aware, we're going through the budget process right now. So we have a significant number of projects in the capital plan. Depending on how that unfolds with regards to the rates and different funding mechanisms and bonds, that's gonna really drive what projects get approved in the five year plan. Right now, we have a current one from the last fiscal 23-24 budget cycle. It was a total, in the five year plan between water and wastewater was roughly $738 million of capital investment. So if that gives you, kind of paints that landscape for you. - That's kind of what I was looking for, some context to the demand for service. It's quite significant. - I thought so. - Yes, sir. (laughs) - Is there a component to that that is also planned maintenance and repair projects? You know, replacing aging equipment and that sort of thing? - Well, this is more for water and wastewater treatment vertical processes, like for instance, water rights, plant construction, you know, planning, emergency planning. So the list is more focused on, excuse me, the list is more focused on like, let me think here, sorry. Sorry, go ahead. (laughs) - That's okay, that's okay. So to answer your question, Mr. Rybeck, the projects do include some R&R. So as we're going through and say we're doing a plant, the plant expansion, part of that, we've taken a look at the condition of the existing facilities and say, is there an opportunity while we're mobilized to do this expansion to address some of our more critical needs at that site? So we do fold those into the capital plan. - Okay, 'cause it seemed like we recently approved something that was a repair project, a filter media replacement or something, it was reasonably substantial. - Yes, sir, yes, sir. - Okay. Well, very good, thank you. That's kind of what I wanted, some context for the request for service. - Thank you. - Understood. - Any further questions? Okay, do we have a motion to approve item A? - So moved. - Thank you, Mr. Rybeck. And seconded by Mr. Cheek. All in favor, say aye. - Aye. - All right, now onto PUB 24-046. - 41. - 41. No, 40, no, we did the approval. - We already did minutes? - We already did minutes, yeah. - Y'all are too fancy, you got two votes in there. (laughing) - You're up. - Good morning, members of the PUB. I'm Randy Key, Tate Municipal Electric, electric engineering supervisor. All right, bringing forward a contract for distribution manual and automated equipment. This RFP is for the supply of medium voltage, manual and automated equipment. It's for our trip savers, reclosers, switch gears. These items are critical for our daily operation. This equipment allows DME to switch distribution load and isolate faults. The main things that I wanna go over is, everybody knows the supply chain. These items have been hit. We do see a one to anywhere from five years for lead times. Along with the 50% increase in price, these items are funded from our warehouse capital budget and these assets are managed in-house at DME. These are our estimated spend. We're looking at 5.4 million a year. With a total of 30 million, we did add a three million contingency. And we recommend approving this contract with ERBY. And at this time, I'll take any questions you have. - Questions. Mr. Rybick. - I noticed in your pricing evaluation sheet that's a little bit more than the 5.4 million a year. (laughs) I was curious how you divided that up. - We estimated our 5.4 million on years past and we went up a little bit just because of, if we need it for the next two physical years, we need to purchase it this year. So that's where our 5.4 came from. - Okay, well, I just noticed some of these items were a little bit more expensive than that. - They are. - Yeah. That has been our life since 2020. - That way your budget carries over to this year and the next year. - Yes, sir. - Any further questions? Do we have a motion to approve this item? Mr. Rybick's moving. - Thank you. - Mr. Taylor seconds. All in favor? - Aye. - And it's reading the courts. - Thank you. - So Madam Chair, members of the PUB, so we do have a few items for you. The first item is just a listing of the items that had come to the PUB, but as you know, we didn't have a quorum. I did talk with the Chair and we did push those forward to the City Council. We've listed those out for you. The backup is online, both on the archive information for the PUB and also for the Council. If you have any questions, Lori and her team are here. I think we still have some staff members here if there's any questions on any of those items. But they were all approved by the City Council. - All right. No questions. - We don't blame you, Billy. - Life happens. - So the next item is just future agenda items. We did list on here for March 11th, we will be coming to the PUB per the Council's direction. We also had a riveting presentation ready for you at the last meeting and we didn't have a quorum. So we went forward to the Council, we presented. - It was riveting. - It was riveting. So we did present to the City Council on the DME budget, received direction from the Council basically on three items. One is to finance a little bit over $31 million over five years. This was related to purchase power expenses in the summer. And also a recommendation to kind of get back to managing the fund the way it was intended with an ECA and a TCRF that recovers appropriately. We'll be bringing that particular item on the ECA and TCRF back to the Board here with a revision to the rate ordinance that will then go to Council for further consideration approval on the 19th. And so that's what we have for you today. Obviously we have a number of items, budgetary items that will be coming to you as part of the normal course of the budget process. And then the next item is just new business. We've completed the very first item that you have on here on the third party software, still kind of working through the cost analysis on some information that was requested on the criteria manuals, we'll be working with the Post Development Services to provide you a memorandum on that particular topic. And then the item on relate to fleet, obviously we still have some time on that to continue to evaluate that. And before I kind of turn over for any questions, just have a couple of other items wanted to kind of inform you about. One, just a request and just a reminder about TOMA. If you are sending emails to staff or to each other, please make sure that you blind copy each other so that we don't get into any kind of TOMA violations. I don't have any questions about that. Marcel, I can certainly talk about that some more. The other item that also went to Council last week was related to an RFP that we did related to a Bitcoin miner, the Council did give us approval to proceed, the specific RFP award, PPA lease, we'll be coming to the board when that is ready. And so I didn't wanna let you know that that was an item that did go to the Council. Was that originally coming here for a variety of reasons, but Council gave us direction to continue to negotiate. Once that is ready, we will bring that to you. So with that, that's the update that I have, certainly happy to answer any questions you may have. - Go ahead. - So with the Bitcoin going to the Council, then they're gonna be bringing back the lease. Is this gonna be a foregone conclusion as far as us to just give it the vote and go on, or can there be changes made at that point, or are we gonna be stepping on some toes with the Council? - No, I think the Council, like with all the other items, wants the board to provide them advice. And so certainly they'll take that into consideration on their final decision, whether or not to approve the PPA or the lease. - Thank you. - Yes, sir. - So, excuse me, I've got a comment, and it's mostly on the ECA, the way we, I like the direction that we've gone. I think it's more open, which is what everybody says they're trying to get. There's a huge discussion going on with neighborhoods and HOAs from people who don't understand the difference between the prices. And so if our mainline price seems much higher than everyone else's, the other guys aren't telling them that the ECA rate is variable, right? I mean, it varies. And I hope we can continue to get education out there and talk to people. Are you seeing a lot of feedback from folks about costs? - No, I'm not. And certainly there's a number of other things that may be kind of eclipsing that. But I'll tell you, we try to present the information in terms of an average user of 1,000 kilowatts, and then we back into what the cents per kilowatt is. Currently, we're at 10.7 cents per kilowatt. Our review in the private sector, you're looking at a 12-month contract north of 15 cents. And so where we are today compared to where other providers are, certainly other MOUs, we're certainly the cheapest, where we will be, just from the changes on the ECA TCRF, by fiscal year '25, we'll be at 13 cents per kilowatt hours. We're still considerably less than where those other providers are currently at. We're not even assuming other increase that they're gonna continue to be doing. They certainly are faced with the same type of escalating prices on power, and as you've seen, even with equipment. And so we anticipate that they'll continue to increase as well, just like they have over the last almost seven years where DME has been flat on its rates. - Well, the other guys don't have to follow the same rules that we do, or they don't, even if they're supposed to, but you know what I'm saying? I mean, in the past, we have done some things in ECA that I think shouldn't have been there, and I think you're trying to correct those things, and I appreciate that. But the other folks, you know, I mean, they're calling on the phone to make a sales job, and so we don't get to compete with that. So dumbing it down a little bit, I'm sorry for that expression, but I need things dumbed down for me, a lot of things. I mean, just for the general public to understand. - Yeah, make it understandable to the general public. - They're being more transparent, and that's the right way to do things, and I mean, anyway. - It's out there, it's a lot of social media going on, a lot of people in discussion, and I try not to jump in the middle of it unless I know the person, so. - I received more emails in the last few days about Bitcoin mining than I have about our rates, and so, so yeah, so, and I may have more today, but-- - Yeah, I'm sure you will. - I promise you, mining, it's here to stay. - All right, any other discussion? Yes, go ahead. - I do would like clarification on the comment about the emails, just for my own understanding. So if I send an email to the chair, I copy other folks, I should be blind copying them? I mean, was that the implication? - So the idea of blind copying is so that you don't accidentally reply all, 'cause that's the problem, is when you have public officials who are on an email that you reply all to, you're creating a walking quorum. - A walking quorum? - Yes, so when you email me and you copy Tony and Kim, no violation, none. If you do a reply to all, and we're all included on that email. - Okay. - Most of the time, it's innocent, but-- - Yeah. - Sometimes it hasn't been. - Yeah. - Well, let me just, that's the next question, I've done this multiple times. If I send an email to you, I always copy Billy since he's the vice chair, and I think that's appropriate in case you're not available, don't get it. And then of course, Tony and Kim, so that they can alert or coordinate or whatever needs to be done with the question at hand. So is that appropriate? - So that is three members. The minute it gets to four, it creates a walking quorum. - Oh, okay. - So the concern is that if you were to add someone later on in the chain, or you were to reply all and add another commissioner, then you would create that walking quorum. - Okay, well that helps me understand that. Thank you very much. - You're welcome, all right. - Just for instance, like I went, Arts and Jazz Festival year, I remember walking up and there was three council members standing there trying to get up Shinerbock, and one more walked up behind me, and they were like, "Whoa, we can't be here." (all laughing) - So that fourth one had to wait for his Shinerbock. - That's right. - Or hers, yeah, okay. That would be a problem. - Yeah, oh my gosh. Only if Shinerbock is public business. (all laughing) - Yeah, just for clarification, Mr. Rybak, that wasn't directed at your emails. And so we see that-- - You can raise the question in my mind. - Yes, sir, yes, sir. - You know, process-wise, am I doing this correctly? Now that I understand the concern that it's the walking quorum, it makes sense. - Right. Madam Chair, that's all I have. - All right, any other discussion? On to concluding items. Does any board member wish to say anything to the public or add something to a future agenda? Seeing none. Billy, do we have a motion to adjourn? 924. - Adjourned. - All right, we're adjourned. - Do we have any questions?