WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.140 (indistinct) 00:00:02.140 --> 00:00:05.360 - Okay, it is nine o'clock and we do have a quorum. 00:00:05.360 --> 00:00:08.500 So we'll call to order the public utilities board 00:00:08.500 --> 00:00:12.260 for the city of Denton on Monday, July 8th, 2024. 00:00:12.260 --> 00:00:14.620 We do have a presentation from the public today. 00:00:14.620 --> 00:00:18.380 Mr. Ed Soph has requested to speak on the work item 00:00:18.380 --> 00:00:20.300 for the value of solar. 00:00:20.300 --> 00:00:22.960 So if you'd like to step up. 00:00:22.960 --> 00:00:25.340 He's a former PUB board member. 00:00:25.340 --> 00:00:28.460 - Is this mic working? 00:00:28.460 --> 00:00:29.300 - It should. 00:00:30.700 --> 00:00:33.420 (papers rustling) 00:00:33.420 --> 00:00:35.200 - And you have four minutes. 00:00:35.200 --> 00:00:36.040 - Okay. 00:00:36.040 --> 00:00:37.840 Thanks. 00:00:37.840 --> 00:00:38.680 Good morning. 00:00:38.680 --> 00:00:39.520 My name's Ed Soph. 00:00:39.520 --> 00:00:42.480 I live at 1620 Victoria Drive here in Denton. 00:00:42.480 --> 00:00:45.000 Lived here about over 30 years. 00:00:45.000 --> 00:00:48.860 I'm sure you know that by 2050, 00:00:48.860 --> 00:00:53.860 Denton County's population is projected to exceed two million 00:00:53.860 --> 00:00:58.880 and the electricity demand is expected to double by 2050. 00:01:00.240 --> 00:01:05.240 Texas's energy output must increase 26 to 59% by 2050. 00:01:05.240 --> 00:01:10.340 We are in a dire situation. 00:01:10.340 --> 00:01:13.300 Long-term decisions driven by societal, 00:01:13.300 --> 00:01:17.340 environmental and economic interests are essential 00:01:17.340 --> 00:01:20.480 if we are to have a livable and stable future. 00:01:20.480 --> 00:01:23.860 The value of solar study before you 00:01:23.860 --> 00:01:27.700 does not adequately address the long-term. 00:01:27.700 --> 00:01:30.820 It does not factor in the long-term societal benefits 00:01:30.820 --> 00:01:33.620 of rooftop solar for the environment, 00:01:33.620 --> 00:01:35.860 our health and wellbeing, 00:01:35.860 --> 00:01:40.140 and for the resilience of Denton's infrastructure and economy. 00:01:40.140 --> 00:01:46.700 By such omissions, it tacitly endorses current policies, 00:01:46.700 --> 00:01:50.300 gutting greensense incentives for solar installations, 00:01:50.300 --> 00:01:53.820 and future policies, should you endorse this study, 00:01:53.820 --> 00:01:56.040 that will kill net metering 00:01:56.040 --> 00:01:58.040 and further drastically discourage 00:01:58.040 --> 00:02:00.760 residential distributed generation. 00:02:00.760 --> 00:02:04.780 In 2023, 60% of ERCOT's power 00:02:04.780 --> 00:02:07.380 was generated with fossil fuels. 00:02:07.380 --> 00:02:09.420 Renewable energy returned to the grid 00:02:09.420 --> 00:02:12.740 by Denton's rooftop solar owners 00:02:12.740 --> 00:02:17.740 contributes to that remaining 40% of non-fossil fuel power. 00:02:17.740 --> 00:02:23.280 A grid-tied system is an investment in the grid itself. 00:02:23.900 --> 00:02:26.900 It's an investment in a livable future. 00:02:26.900 --> 00:02:29.520 The more solar distributed generation, 00:02:29.520 --> 00:02:31.600 the less DME will have to spend 00:02:31.600 --> 00:02:35.100 on infrastructure and electricity. 00:02:35.100 --> 00:02:39.140 Solar can reduce the economic impact of peak demand 00:02:39.140 --> 00:02:41.660 when electricity is most expensive, 00:02:41.660 --> 00:02:44.700 and the more solar power returned to the grid, 00:02:44.700 --> 00:02:46.400 the greener the grid becomes. 00:02:46.400 --> 00:02:50.980 The short-sighted solar compensation policies 00:02:50.980 --> 00:02:54.140 of non-competitive monopoly utilities 00:02:54.140 --> 00:02:59.140 have limited ERCOT's total installed rooftop solar capacity 00:02:59.140 --> 00:03:04.260 to less than 3% of its technical potential. 00:03:04.260 --> 00:03:07.700 To ensure that rooftop solar continues, 00:03:07.700 --> 00:03:09.260 pardon me, to contribute 00:03:09.260 --> 00:03:14.740 to ERCOT's reliability, 00:03:14.740 --> 00:03:18.140 utilities must provide fair compensation 00:03:18.140 --> 00:03:21.620 for the societal benefits that rooftop solar provides 00:03:21.620 --> 00:03:23.940 to the grid and the community. 00:03:23.940 --> 00:03:28.940 The VOS study before you denies any societal benefits 00:03:28.940 --> 00:03:33.400 of rooftop solar energy generation on the premise 00:03:33.400 --> 00:03:37.100 that DME already provides 100% renewable energy 00:03:37.100 --> 00:03:40.980 because it purchases renewable energy certificates 00:03:40.980 --> 00:03:44.340 and power purchase agreements to cover Denton's load. 00:03:45.260 --> 00:03:48.900 That renewable generated power is not directly transmitted 00:03:48.900 --> 00:03:52.700 to DME's customers from a solar or wind installation, 00:03:52.700 --> 00:03:56.340 but from the 60% fossil-fueled ERCOT grid. 00:03:56.340 --> 00:04:00.140 Do those recs and PPAs actually make 00:04:00.140 --> 00:04:02.860 Denton's air cleaner and healthier? 00:04:02.860 --> 00:04:05.300 Do they really combat the climate change 00:04:05.300 --> 00:04:08.540 that is costing us more and more to live? 00:04:08.540 --> 00:04:09.580 No, they don't. 00:04:09.580 --> 00:04:15.060 Not when the 12 natural gas-fired reciprocating generators 00:04:15.060 --> 00:04:19.020 of the DEC, the Denton Energy Center, are fired up. 00:04:19.020 --> 00:04:22.460 The DEC has admitted into our air between 2018, 00:04:22.460 --> 00:04:27.460 when it started, and 2023, over 1.5 billion, 00:04:27.460 --> 00:04:33.480 that's with a B, 1.5 billion pounds of CO2e emissions. 00:04:33.480 --> 00:04:38.420 That's the equivalent of emissions from 166,000 00:04:38.420 --> 00:04:42.420 gasoline-powered vehicles driven for one year. 00:04:42.420 --> 00:04:47.020 You'd have to burn 767 million pounds of coal 00:04:47.020 --> 00:04:50.420 to match the DEC's CO2e emissions. 00:04:50.420 --> 00:04:54.780 DME's rooftop solar customers are consistently reducing 00:04:54.780 --> 00:04:56.460 greenhouse gas emissions. 00:04:56.460 --> 00:04:58.740 - Excuse me, Mr. Sulf, that was the timer. 00:04:58.740 --> 00:04:59.560 - Pardon me? 00:04:59.560 --> 00:05:00.580 - That was the timer going off. 00:05:00.580 --> 00:05:01.500 - Oh, I didn't hear it. 00:05:01.500 --> 00:05:02.620 Can I have 30 seconds? 00:05:02.620 --> 00:05:03.460 - You can have 30 seconds. 00:05:03.460 --> 00:05:04.280 - Thank you. 00:05:04.280 --> 00:05:06.220 These massive emissions don't go away. 00:05:06.220 --> 00:05:07.820 They will continue to warm the planet 00:05:07.820 --> 00:05:10.100 for tens of thousands of years. 00:05:10.100 --> 00:05:12.100 That's the real long-term. 00:05:12.100 --> 00:05:15.140 And this VOS study in discounting the societal, 00:05:15.140 --> 00:05:17.380 economic, and environmental benefits 00:05:17.380 --> 00:05:20.520 of rooftop solar in Denton does not expedite 00:05:20.520 --> 00:05:21.980 what should be done. 00:05:21.980 --> 00:05:25.860 More equitably incentivized and fairly compensated 00:05:25.860 --> 00:05:28.940 residential, community, and commercial distributed 00:05:28.940 --> 00:05:32.540 generation, as well as battery storage. 00:05:32.540 --> 00:05:37.060 I urge you to recommend to the City Council 00:05:37.060 --> 00:05:40.380 that net metering be maintained for all customers, 00:05:40.380 --> 00:05:43.420 and that the societal benefits of solar be recognized 00:05:43.420 --> 00:05:47.460 and included in the computation of a value of solar rate 00:05:47.460 --> 00:05:51.340 based upon the policy, neutral, and non-biased 00:05:51.340 --> 00:05:53.300 National Standard Practice Manual 00:05:53.300 --> 00:05:57.180 for Benefit Cost Analysis of Distributed Energy Resources. 00:05:57.180 --> 00:05:58.540 Thank you for your time. 00:05:58.540 --> 00:05:59.380 - Thank you. 00:05:59.380 --> 00:06:05.060 All right, then we'll move into the consent agenda. 00:06:05.060 --> 00:06:08.580 Does any board member wish to pull agenda items A through E? 00:06:11.380 --> 00:06:13.740 Okay, which one would you like to pull, Billy? 00:06:13.740 --> 00:06:18.460 E as in Edward. 00:06:18.460 --> 00:06:21.300 All right, any others? 00:06:21.300 --> 00:06:23.760 Do we have a motion to approve items A through D? 00:06:23.760 --> 00:06:27.080 - So moved. 00:06:27.080 --> 00:06:28.580 - Second. 00:06:28.580 --> 00:06:30.100 - All in favor say aye. 00:06:30.100 --> 00:06:30.940 - Aye. 00:06:30.940 --> 00:06:32.820 - Opposed? 00:06:32.820 --> 00:06:33.640 Motion carries. 00:06:33.640 --> 00:06:34.480 Item E. 00:06:34.480 --> 00:06:38.240 Here she comes. 00:06:41.380 --> 00:06:43.860 (dial tone) 00:06:43.860 --> 00:06:44.700 - Good morning. 00:06:44.700 --> 00:06:54.860 (dial tone) 00:06:54.860 --> 00:06:57.100 - And your question. 00:06:57.100 --> 00:07:03.100 - And if you have a question, 00:07:03.100 --> 00:07:05.020 I'm Tracy Beck, project manager, 00:07:05.020 --> 00:07:06.420 and would love to hear. 00:07:06.420 --> 00:07:08.740 I was gonna prep in case you needed a presentation. 00:07:08.740 --> 00:07:10.220 - I'd like to see that. 00:07:10.220 --> 00:07:11.300 - Excellent. 00:07:11.300 --> 00:07:13.860 And do you have a specific question while I pull it up? 00:07:13.860 --> 00:07:15.540 Might be able to answer the question 00:07:15.540 --> 00:07:17.260 and pull it up at the same time. 00:07:17.260 --> 00:07:18.100 - You first. 00:07:18.100 --> 00:07:20.340 - All right, you are very welcome. 00:07:20.340 --> 00:07:22.000 I might be able to pull it up at the same time. 00:07:22.000 --> 00:07:22.840 Let's see. 00:07:22.840 --> 00:07:26.320 There we go. 00:07:26.320 --> 00:07:27.140 Yeah, I did that twice, 00:07:27.140 --> 00:07:28.860 but I think I had something overlaying. 00:07:28.860 --> 00:07:31.060 All right, good morning, everybody. 00:07:31.060 --> 00:07:33.060 I'm Tracy Beck. 00:07:33.060 --> 00:07:36.500 I am the project manager for the CMAR Mingo project. 00:07:36.500 --> 00:07:38.380 And about a month or so ago, 00:07:38.380 --> 00:07:40.780 maybe two months at this point, time's flying. 00:07:40.780 --> 00:07:42.880 You have also seen the presentation 00:07:42.880 --> 00:07:45.140 for the design contract for Kimley-Horn. 00:07:45.140 --> 00:07:47.340 And this is for the pre-construction services 00:07:47.340 --> 00:07:49.400 for that project. 00:07:49.400 --> 00:07:51.660 This is the Mingo Riddell Quiet Zone project. 00:07:51.660 --> 00:07:52.580 It's a mouthful to say, 00:07:52.580 --> 00:07:55.300 so we're just kind of blending all the words together. 00:07:55.300 --> 00:07:57.020 The project background. 00:07:57.020 --> 00:07:58.960 It's a railroad quiet zone. 00:07:58.960 --> 00:08:01.220 It's an old bond program that you've seen before. 00:08:01.220 --> 00:08:03.120 We're adding one new railroad crossing, 00:08:03.120 --> 00:08:04.180 which is at Riddell. 00:08:04.180 --> 00:08:07.260 And then we're also impacting six additional 00:08:07.260 --> 00:08:09.240 existing railroad crossings. 00:08:09.240 --> 00:08:11.840 That includes removing two crossings more than likely. 00:08:11.840 --> 00:08:13.500 We'll take the direction of UPRR, 00:08:13.500 --> 00:08:15.020 the Union Pacific Railroad, 00:08:15.020 --> 00:08:16.740 and then improving the other ones 00:08:16.740 --> 00:08:18.560 for quiet zone components. 00:08:18.560 --> 00:08:21.980 The road, pedestrian, bike drainage portion of the project 00:08:21.980 --> 00:08:25.260 includes approximately 1,500 linear feet of roadway, 00:08:25.260 --> 00:08:27.020 bicycle, pedestrian facilities, 00:08:27.020 --> 00:08:29.800 as well as some photometric studies 00:08:29.800 --> 00:08:31.400 for lighting installation. 00:08:31.400 --> 00:08:33.580 Drainage study improvements for the area, 00:08:33.580 --> 00:08:36.560 because we also have some impacts to the service center. 00:08:36.560 --> 00:08:39.540 And we also have a service center project that's ongoing. 00:08:39.540 --> 00:08:40.940 So we want to watch what we're doing 00:08:40.940 --> 00:08:44.740 with the roadway projects overlapping with the other CIPs. 00:08:44.740 --> 00:08:46.980 And then utilities for what we're here for today 00:08:46.980 --> 00:08:48.240 is a public utilities board, 00:08:48.240 --> 00:08:51.460 is the 8,600 linear feet of water main replacement, 00:08:51.460 --> 00:08:56.460 about 5,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer. 00:08:56.460 --> 00:08:58.900 And part of what you're seeing here on the graphic is, 00:08:58.900 --> 00:09:00.620 let's see if I've got a pointer. 00:09:00.620 --> 00:09:03.580 We have roughly four components to the project. 00:09:03.580 --> 00:09:07.700 The Riddell widening, which is adjacent to TWU. 00:09:07.700 --> 00:09:09.020 The Riddell extension, 00:09:09.020 --> 00:09:10.340 which comes around the service center, 00:09:10.340 --> 00:09:11.580 if you're familiar from Texas, 00:09:11.580 --> 00:09:13.980 it's gonna be a new extension realignment 00:09:13.980 --> 00:09:15.820 that'll go around the new service center. 00:09:15.820 --> 00:09:18.700 And that's going to eliminate the withers crossing 00:09:18.700 --> 00:09:20.860 that currently gets you into the service center 00:09:20.860 --> 00:09:24.100 and make a really nice four-legged intersection. 00:09:24.100 --> 00:09:27.500 And then the green is going to be the mingo widening. 00:09:27.500 --> 00:09:28.620 And that's gonna be where you're gonna see 00:09:28.620 --> 00:09:31.080 the pedestrian improvements, water, utilities, 00:09:31.080 --> 00:09:32.700 are throughout all of these sections. 00:09:32.700 --> 00:09:35.440 And then the dots are gonna be the railroad crossings. 00:09:35.440 --> 00:09:39.140 The contract that we have for the pre-construction services 00:09:39.140 --> 00:09:41.020 is approximately, is not approximately, 00:09:41.020 --> 00:09:44.100 it's exactly now, $495,000. 00:09:44.100 --> 00:09:46.540 And this is for the lump sum services 00:09:46.540 --> 00:09:48.480 that come through cost modeling 00:09:48.480 --> 00:09:51.200 and the background work that the CMRs provide. 00:09:51.200 --> 00:09:53.860 That's an assistance with the engineering contract. 00:09:53.860 --> 00:09:55.500 So we take a look at the project, 00:09:55.500 --> 00:09:57.320 understand better of what can be designed, 00:09:57.320 --> 00:09:58.660 and then we work with the contractor 00:09:58.660 --> 00:10:01.200 to better understand how that construction 00:10:01.200 --> 00:10:02.220 can make more sense. 00:10:02.220 --> 00:10:04.420 And just do it wisely. 00:10:04.420 --> 00:10:07.800 See how their suggestions from construction frequently 00:10:07.800 --> 00:10:09.260 is we wouldn't have built it that way. 00:10:09.260 --> 00:10:13.180 So how would we build it better in cost savings? 00:10:13.180 --> 00:10:14.900 The additional hourly service, 00:10:14.900 --> 00:10:16.260 typically when you have a CMR, 00:10:16.260 --> 00:10:19.660 you have a GMP, the guaranteed maximum price. 00:10:19.660 --> 00:10:22.460 And several of our CMRs that you've seen come through 00:10:22.460 --> 00:10:25.560 and that are ongoing will have multiple packages. 00:10:25.560 --> 00:10:27.540 And this particular project, 00:10:27.540 --> 00:10:29.600 we're not sure how many packages we want. 00:10:29.600 --> 00:10:31.080 In order to look at cost savings, 00:10:31.080 --> 00:10:34.740 what we've asked is to reduce the main contract 00:10:34.740 --> 00:10:37.580 that originally came in at $585,000 00:10:37.580 --> 00:10:40.540 back out at GMP and save $90,000 00:10:40.540 --> 00:10:42.540 if we didn't need that GMP. 00:10:42.540 --> 00:10:44.060 So this additional services 00:10:44.060 --> 00:10:45.900 is just kind of a cost savings effort. 00:10:45.900 --> 00:10:48.820 If we decide to build it all in one package, 00:10:48.820 --> 00:10:50.940 we've saved the $90,000. 00:10:50.940 --> 00:10:53.940 Otherwise, the whole contract will be $585,000. 00:10:53.940 --> 00:10:58.120 To date, we're on schedule. 00:10:58.120 --> 00:11:00.300 We selected the design firm back in May. 00:11:00.300 --> 00:11:01.740 Today is the bolded area. 00:11:01.740 --> 00:11:03.900 We're here asking Public Utilities Board 00:11:03.900 --> 00:11:05.140 for the approval to move forward 00:11:05.140 --> 00:11:06.900 with the pre-construction project. 00:11:06.900 --> 00:11:09.300 We'll be taking it to city council as well. 00:11:09.300 --> 00:11:11.100 The design is gonna start 00:11:11.100 --> 00:11:13.180 as soon as we have approval for the engineering. 00:11:13.180 --> 00:11:15.020 We have not started with the engineering services. 00:11:15.020 --> 00:11:17.300 We did contract them earlier. 00:11:17.300 --> 00:11:20.660 They're out doing pre-data collection. 00:11:20.660 --> 00:11:22.260 So if you see any activity out there, 00:11:22.260 --> 00:11:25.260 just get in survey right away, things, but no design. 00:11:25.260 --> 00:11:27.460 And then we'll move into the real estate construction 00:11:27.460 --> 00:11:28.620 and then final closeout. 00:11:28.620 --> 00:11:31.340 We're looking at it taking approximately three years. 00:11:31.340 --> 00:11:32.700 No telling because we are working 00:11:32.700 --> 00:11:34.220 with Texas Women's University 00:11:34.220 --> 00:11:36.180 as well as the Union Pacific Railroad. 00:11:36.180 --> 00:11:38.700 Both of those can be a little complicated, 00:11:38.700 --> 00:11:40.200 but not impossible. 00:11:40.200 --> 00:11:42.420 So today's request would be the approval 00:11:42.420 --> 00:11:47.420 to take this to council for the amount of $585,000. 00:11:47.420 --> 00:11:48.940 And the team that we selected 00:11:48.940 --> 00:11:52.780 through our procurement review was Sunt Construction. 00:11:52.780 --> 00:11:53.980 We've worked with them in the past. 00:11:53.980 --> 00:11:56.000 There were four groups that applied 00:11:56.000 --> 00:11:58.780 and they came out on top with our evaluation. 00:11:58.780 --> 00:12:02.500 Questions? 00:12:02.500 --> 00:12:03.820 - Questions, Mr. Chief. 00:12:03.820 --> 00:12:06.940 - Okay, so I was hoping we had some detail 00:12:06.940 --> 00:12:11.940 of the 490, was it 490, 495, whatever it was. 00:12:11.940 --> 00:12:17.600 - What would you like to know? 00:12:17.600 --> 00:12:22.020 - The breakdown? - The breakdown, yeah. 00:12:22.020 --> 00:12:24.240 - I do not have that today, 00:12:24.240 --> 00:12:25.980 but I'll be glad to share that with you. 00:12:25.980 --> 00:12:29.580 But is it based on hours and people? 00:12:29.580 --> 00:12:32.500 And I guess probably pickups 00:12:32.500 --> 00:12:35.100 would be your only equipment cost. 00:12:35.100 --> 00:12:37.700 - Yeah, so Seth Garcia, Deputy Director of Capital Projects. 00:12:37.700 --> 00:12:41.020 So in the RFP, we do request their estimated hours 00:12:41.020 --> 00:12:41.860 for each phase. 00:12:41.860 --> 00:12:44.500 So at each deliverable, they'll give us hours 00:12:44.500 --> 00:12:46.880 estimated for their pre-construction team, 00:12:46.880 --> 00:12:48.940 for estimating, scheduling, 00:12:48.940 --> 00:12:51.100 putting together the construction management plan, 00:12:51.100 --> 00:12:52.320 quality plan. 00:12:52.320 --> 00:12:54.320 We've got all that broken out in the RFP 00:12:54.320 --> 00:12:55.420 that we could provide. 00:12:56.820 --> 00:13:00.300 - Okay, it's not in here, in our backup. 00:13:00.300 --> 00:13:03.300 - Correct, so our RFPs have two pieces. 00:13:03.300 --> 00:13:06.100 It's the cost proposal and the technical proposal. 00:13:06.100 --> 00:13:07.380 In the cost proposal, 00:13:07.380 --> 00:13:10.140 we get a breakout of those pre-construction services, 00:13:10.140 --> 00:13:13.300 we get a breakout of estimated general conditions costs, 00:13:13.300 --> 00:13:15.180 and then we get our construction fee. 00:13:15.180 --> 00:13:18.020 Two of those things are tied into the contract. 00:13:18.020 --> 00:13:20.860 Of course, this pre-con fee and our construction fee, 00:13:20.860 --> 00:13:23.460 the general conditions cost is just their early estimate 00:13:23.460 --> 00:13:26.580 that we work through and negotiate during our pre-construction 00:13:26.580 --> 00:13:27.420 process. 00:13:27.420 --> 00:13:29.660 - Okay. 00:13:29.660 --> 00:13:34.460 Yeah, I like to see those things, but 00:13:34.460 --> 00:13:37.660 I don't know why they're not part of it, 00:13:37.660 --> 00:13:39.220 they were part of the bid package that could have been 00:13:39.220 --> 00:13:40.660 attached to this, right? 00:13:40.660 --> 00:13:44.460 - I would leave that to procurement if, 00:13:44.460 --> 00:13:46.740 I don't know that historically we've ever attached 00:13:46.740 --> 00:13:50.540 portions of the cost proposal to our presentations. 00:13:50.540 --> 00:13:52.340 We do receive that information. 00:13:52.340 --> 00:13:54.940 I know specifically for Sunt, 00:13:54.940 --> 00:13:56.300 I believe there was almost, 00:13:56.300 --> 00:14:00.700 there were hundreds if not thousands of hours 00:14:00.700 --> 00:14:03.460 that they were not billing us that they call free con. 00:14:03.460 --> 00:14:05.500 So basically we were covering the cost of a couple 00:14:05.500 --> 00:14:08.300 estimators and their senior project manager 00:14:08.300 --> 00:14:10.140 for the duration of the project, 00:14:10.140 --> 00:14:12.140 but that breakout does show. 00:14:12.140 --> 00:14:14.620 - I would imagine that cost is in there. 00:14:14.620 --> 00:14:15.460 - Yes, sir. 00:14:15.460 --> 00:14:19.140 - They'll recoup that at some point. 00:14:21.020 --> 00:14:23.100 - Hi, Lori Hill, purchasing manager. 00:14:23.100 --> 00:14:24.620 Yeah, we have not included that. 00:14:24.620 --> 00:14:27.780 We would just include what's in the contract, 00:14:27.780 --> 00:14:30.380 but we can easily send it to you. 00:14:30.380 --> 00:14:32.020 - It doesn't matter today. 00:14:32.020 --> 00:14:34.540 I mean, it's going to the council after us, 00:14:34.540 --> 00:14:37.900 so there's no reason to supply it now. 00:14:37.900 --> 00:14:44.540 Back to the engineering side of it, 00:14:44.540 --> 00:14:46.460 qualifications and experiences. 00:14:46.460 --> 00:14:48.820 You got experience of the firm. 00:14:49.740 --> 00:14:54.740 You've got Sunt at 17.6, Arch Western at 20, 00:14:54.740 --> 00:14:58.940 McCarthy at 15, Flatiron at 12.8. 00:14:58.940 --> 00:15:04.620 These are all four large companies, 00:15:04.620 --> 00:15:07.260 which I am confident have the experience 00:15:07.260 --> 00:15:09.940 and qualification to perform this project. 00:15:09.940 --> 00:15:14.100 I'm curious as to how a company like Flatiron 00:15:14.100 --> 00:15:16.580 gets a 12.8. 00:15:16.580 --> 00:15:19.500 You don't have the details, so I have to ask you. 00:15:19.500 --> 00:15:20.340 - Yeah, absolutely. 00:15:20.340 --> 00:15:21.380 So when we look at these, 00:15:21.380 --> 00:15:23.140 we're looking at the specific information 00:15:23.140 --> 00:15:24.220 provided in the RFP. 00:15:24.220 --> 00:15:25.860 So qualifications and experience 00:15:25.860 --> 00:15:28.580 also ties to the proposed personnel. 00:15:28.580 --> 00:15:30.860 A lot of those folks that were on, 00:15:30.860 --> 00:15:33.060 for instance, say the Flatiron or the Sunt, 00:15:33.060 --> 00:15:37.020 had much more significant at grade crossing 00:15:37.020 --> 00:15:39.220 and work with Union Pacific Railroad, 00:15:39.220 --> 00:15:41.420 which was one of the key items that we pointed out 00:15:41.420 --> 00:15:43.820 that we wanted to see in the RFP. 00:15:43.820 --> 00:15:46.060 - You said Flatiron, did you mean Sunt? 00:15:46.060 --> 00:15:47.140 - No, Flatiron. 00:15:47.140 --> 00:15:48.740 - You said Flatiron had more experience 00:15:48.740 --> 00:15:50.140 working with the railroad? 00:15:50.140 --> 00:15:51.820 - I'm sorry, Sunt did. 00:15:51.820 --> 00:15:53.860 Flatiron did not have the experience 00:15:53.860 --> 00:15:55.540 of Sunt and Archer-Western. 00:15:55.540 --> 00:15:59.100 I think Archer-Western's RFP had over 200 at grade crossings 00:15:59.100 --> 00:16:02.220 that they had worked on with that proposed project team. 00:16:02.220 --> 00:16:03.980 Sunt was right behind that. 00:16:03.980 --> 00:16:05.740 Flatiron's proposed project team 00:16:05.740 --> 00:16:08.340 did not have near the experience or qualification 00:16:08.340 --> 00:16:09.540 working with the railroad. 00:16:09.540 --> 00:16:11.420 - Okay, neither did, 00:16:11.420 --> 00:16:13.740 well, Archer looks like they had the most. 00:16:13.740 --> 00:16:14.580 - Correct. 00:16:14.580 --> 00:16:18.420 - But their price was crazy. 00:16:18.420 --> 00:16:20.380 I appreciate you looking at the price. 00:16:20.380 --> 00:16:22.140 - Yes, sir. 00:16:22.140 --> 00:16:24.060 And that is something that we talked through significantly 00:16:24.060 --> 00:16:29.060 with Archer-Western during their interview. 00:16:29.060 --> 00:16:31.980 And for them, it was the personnel 00:16:31.980 --> 00:16:33.220 that they felt they needed 00:16:33.220 --> 00:16:37.140 to be able to manage the project adequately. 00:16:37.140 --> 00:16:39.140 That was really driving up that cost. 00:16:39.140 --> 00:16:42.300 They had a third party or a subcontractor 00:16:42.300 --> 00:16:43.180 that they were gonna bring in 00:16:43.180 --> 00:16:45.900 to help with the railroad coordination. 00:16:45.900 --> 00:16:48.700 - Does some of that item, when it says experience 00:16:48.700 --> 00:16:51.820 of the firm have something to do with our, 00:16:51.820 --> 00:16:54.940 the city's experience with the firm? 00:16:54.940 --> 00:16:56.420 - So currently we don't have anything 00:16:56.420 --> 00:16:59.660 that allows us to bring in that direct, 00:16:59.660 --> 00:17:01.420 to tie it to points, if you will. 00:17:01.420 --> 00:17:05.180 So we're specifically basing it off of the proposed RFP. 00:17:05.180 --> 00:17:07.580 - Gotcha. 00:17:07.580 --> 00:17:12.260 Okay, so it's what they put on the RFP. 00:17:13.420 --> 00:17:16.980 - That is correct, is what we're basing it off of. 00:17:16.980 --> 00:17:19.180 And so we do have different page limits 00:17:19.180 --> 00:17:21.220 that go into those RFPs. 00:17:21.220 --> 00:17:24.780 I think for this one, we were at 25 or 30 pages. 00:17:24.780 --> 00:17:27.140 So again, that's what we're using to evaluate. 00:17:27.140 --> 00:17:28.660 And then we go through the interview process 00:17:28.660 --> 00:17:30.660 with up to the top three firms. 00:17:30.660 --> 00:17:34.580 - So it's all based on what they've submitted? 00:17:34.580 --> 00:17:35.420 - Correct. 00:17:35.420 --> 00:17:41.340 - I guess it's hard to verify some of those things, right? 00:17:41.340 --> 00:17:43.140 - It is, so we do call references. 00:17:43.140 --> 00:17:43.980 We do check around. 00:17:43.980 --> 00:17:46.380 And of course we do use the interview process 00:17:46.380 --> 00:17:48.820 to be able to ask questions. 00:17:48.820 --> 00:17:51.660 I believe for your son and Archer Western, 00:17:51.660 --> 00:17:54.180 we had an hour and a half long interview process 00:17:54.180 --> 00:17:55.940 that we went through these technical proposals 00:17:55.940 --> 00:17:57.500 and were able to ask questions 00:17:57.500 --> 00:17:59.180 with the full evaluation team. 00:17:59.180 --> 00:18:03.020 - And who's on the evaluation team? 00:18:03.020 --> 00:18:05.420 Is it engineering, procurement? 00:18:05.420 --> 00:18:07.540 - Yeah, so typically we make it up 00:18:07.540 --> 00:18:11.580 of capital project staff and then other stakeholders. 00:18:11.580 --> 00:18:13.820 So for this one, we had CIP staff 00:18:13.820 --> 00:18:18.020 as well as some streets traffic folks and utilities. 00:18:18.020 --> 00:18:20.980 - Other questions? 00:18:20.980 --> 00:18:21.820 Oh, yes, Mr. Williams. 00:18:21.820 --> 00:18:25.300 - If I could ask on, and it might've been discussed, 00:18:25.300 --> 00:18:26.700 as you said two months ago, 00:18:26.700 --> 00:18:30.460 the water and the sewer lines, 00:18:30.460 --> 00:18:33.100 are they gonna be the same size they are now? 00:18:33.100 --> 00:18:34.780 Are they gonna be larger? 00:18:34.780 --> 00:18:38.260 Do you, is it too early to ask for that number? 00:18:38.260 --> 00:18:39.940 - It's not too early to ask for that. 00:18:39.940 --> 00:18:42.780 We reached out to our stakeholders asking 00:18:42.780 --> 00:18:46.220 what utilities are out there do you need replaced, upsized? 00:18:46.220 --> 00:18:48.700 And we worked closely with our utilities department. 00:18:48.700 --> 00:18:50.940 They went through, scrutinized what they have internally 00:18:50.940 --> 00:18:52.100 in their long range plans, 00:18:52.100 --> 00:18:54.780 and then they came back and provided us with the limits 00:18:54.780 --> 00:18:56.460 of what those utilities, 00:18:56.460 --> 00:18:59.260 what ones they wanted to be included in this project, 00:18:59.260 --> 00:19:02.700 as well as any upsizing and any abandonments. 00:19:02.700 --> 00:19:05.500 So that was part of our scoping with the project. 00:19:05.500 --> 00:19:08.060 And that's where these numbers came from. 00:19:08.060 --> 00:19:10.540 - And what was the size if I could recall? 00:19:10.540 --> 00:19:12.620 - A variety of sizes. 00:19:12.620 --> 00:19:14.380 All four roads have different sizes. 00:19:14.380 --> 00:19:15.940 The majority of the sewer lines are eight inches. 00:19:15.940 --> 00:19:17.540 - But I'm thinking the residential would be lower, 00:19:17.540 --> 00:19:19.500 but I was wondering if eight or larger, 00:19:19.500 --> 00:19:20.340 that's what I was curious. 00:19:20.340 --> 00:19:22.220 - Correct, there's some that are 12 inches 00:19:22.220 --> 00:19:23.700 that are going through there. 00:19:23.700 --> 00:19:25.540 It's their master plan is what they were looking at 00:19:25.540 --> 00:19:27.060 is to see what their long-term vision, 00:19:27.060 --> 00:19:29.060 it wasn't just replacing like with like, 00:19:29.060 --> 00:19:31.300 they took a look at what they needed 00:19:31.300 --> 00:19:32.620 and then partnered with us. 00:19:32.620 --> 00:19:35.820 And those fees will be part of the utilities project 00:19:35.820 --> 00:19:38.300 is us working with them to design it, 00:19:38.300 --> 00:19:39.940 as well as other utilities 00:19:39.940 --> 00:19:41.100 that we're gonna be working with. 00:19:41.100 --> 00:19:42.460 - Wonderful, and then one other thing. 00:19:42.460 --> 00:19:43.300 - Yes, sir. 00:19:43.300 --> 00:19:44.120 - And I know it's not really ours, 00:19:44.120 --> 00:19:47.100 but I was just curious as you cross the railroad Ruedel, 00:19:47.100 --> 00:19:49.060 is it gonna stay a two lane all the way down 00:19:49.060 --> 00:19:50.740 to be connected or? 00:19:50.740 --> 00:19:51.940 - Crossing the road. 00:19:51.940 --> 00:19:52.780 - And the railroad that-- 00:19:52.780 --> 00:19:55.060 - On the south side of the service center. 00:19:55.060 --> 00:19:57.580 The intention is to make it as wide as possible 00:19:57.580 --> 00:19:59.420 so that we get into the railroad crossing 00:19:59.420 --> 00:20:01.620 with an ultimate crossing section. 00:20:01.620 --> 00:20:03.540 So it'll probably more than likely be four lanes. 00:20:03.540 --> 00:20:04.740 Nothing's designed at this point. 00:20:04.740 --> 00:20:05.820 We're gonna see what we can fit 00:20:05.820 --> 00:20:07.900 and what makes the best sense in drainage. 00:20:07.900 --> 00:20:10.860 But the intent is to have it widened out to be four lanes, 00:20:10.860 --> 00:20:13.340 two lanes in each direction, or turn lanes, 00:20:13.340 --> 00:20:15.820 or whatever we need to use those extra lanes for. 00:20:15.820 --> 00:20:18.500 And then it'll feather back into a two lane section 00:20:18.500 --> 00:20:20.580 as it continues back to the Texas 00:20:20.580 --> 00:20:24.220 existing Ruedel intersection. 00:20:24.220 --> 00:20:26.060 - Okay, so if you're coming-- 00:20:26.060 --> 00:20:26.900 - Going south-- 00:20:26.900 --> 00:20:28.460 - You're going south, it's two lane. 00:20:28.460 --> 00:20:31.340 Once we cross Mingo, then it's gonna go to a four lane. 00:20:31.340 --> 00:20:34.180 And then it's gonna feather back down to a two lane 00:20:34.180 --> 00:20:36.060 when it gets to McKinney? 00:20:36.060 --> 00:20:38.860 - We won't go all the way to McKinney. 00:20:38.860 --> 00:20:39.700 - Okay. 00:20:39.700 --> 00:20:41.580 - We're just getting around the service center 00:20:41.580 --> 00:20:44.220 at this point, so right to about Texas Avenue. 00:20:44.220 --> 00:20:45.780 - But then it'll be pinched back down to a two lane. 00:20:45.780 --> 00:20:47.620 - Correct, because we're meeting like with like 00:20:47.620 --> 00:20:49.020 at that point. 00:20:49.020 --> 00:20:50.660 No, that's fine, it's a good question. 00:20:50.660 --> 00:20:51.660 - Thank you. 00:20:51.660 --> 00:20:53.180 Thank you, Madam Chair. 00:20:53.180 --> 00:20:54.180 - Further questions? 00:20:54.180 --> 00:20:59.860 All right, do we have a motion to approve item E? 00:21:04.460 --> 00:21:06.300 - A motion to approve item E? 00:21:06.300 --> 00:21:07.460 - Oh, well I will. 00:21:07.460 --> 00:21:08.300 Ralph second. 00:21:08.300 --> 00:21:12.180 - Okay, all right, so it's gonna be Mr. Neuquist motioning 00:21:12.180 --> 00:21:14.060 and Mr. Rayner seconding. 00:21:14.060 --> 00:21:15.860 All in favor, say aye. 00:21:15.860 --> 00:21:16.700 - Aye. 00:21:16.700 --> 00:21:17.540 - Opposed? 00:21:17.540 --> 00:21:19.340 - Aye. 00:21:19.340 --> 00:21:20.460 - Okay, one opposed. 00:21:20.460 --> 00:21:24.740 Next item is consider the approval of the June 24th, 00:21:24.740 --> 00:21:26.340 2024 minutes. 00:21:26.340 --> 00:21:28.300 Were there any changes or corrections? 00:21:28.300 --> 00:21:33.420 Okay, seeing none, do we have a motion to approve the minutes? 00:21:35.180 --> 00:21:36.460 - So moved. 00:21:36.460 --> 00:21:37.540 - Mr. Pluck moved. 00:21:37.540 --> 00:21:38.580 Do we have a second? 00:21:38.580 --> 00:21:40.500 - Second. 00:21:40.500 --> 00:21:41.460 - Mr. Cheek second. 00:21:41.460 --> 00:21:42.820 All in favor say aye. 00:21:42.820 --> 00:21:43.660 - Aye. 00:21:43.660 --> 00:21:44.820 - Opposed? 00:21:44.820 --> 00:21:45.660 Carries. 00:21:45.660 --> 00:21:50.220 Okay, the next item, consider recommending the adoption 00:21:50.220 --> 00:21:51.940 of an ordinance for the city of Denton, 00:21:51.940 --> 00:21:54.580 establishing the schedule of rates for electric service 00:21:54.580 --> 00:21:58.540 to be effective August 1st, 2024 and the ECA. 00:22:04.180 --> 00:22:05.020 - Okay. 00:22:05.020 --> 00:22:21.740 - Good morning. 00:22:21.740 --> 00:22:22.580 - Good morning. 00:22:22.580 --> 00:22:23.900 - Good morning, PEB. 00:22:23.900 --> 00:22:25.860 This is the Pantamong ADF Finance 00:22:25.860 --> 00:22:30.020 and I'm here to talk about Corley Energy Cost Adjustment. 00:22:35.020 --> 00:22:40.020 So just to recap, I wanted to talk about 00:22:40.020 --> 00:22:41.380 kind of what happened in the past. 00:22:41.380 --> 00:22:44.620 So March 19th, we went to city council 00:22:44.620 --> 00:22:47.300 with the ordinance that gave DME 00:22:47.300 --> 00:22:49.860 or the DME General Manager Authority 00:22:49.860 --> 00:22:53.220 to move up and down the ECA rate. 00:22:53.220 --> 00:22:55.780 And that balance can go basically up and down 00:22:55.780 --> 00:22:58.100 plus our $5 million. 00:22:58.100 --> 00:23:01.820 Changes to the ECA rate will be effective 00:23:01.820 --> 00:23:05.940 the following month once notified by two city council 00:23:05.940 --> 00:23:08.420 by consent agenda item. 00:23:08.420 --> 00:23:11.060 So what we looked at this time around 00:23:11.060 --> 00:23:13.140 was two months worth of actuals 00:23:13.140 --> 00:23:17.180 and projected seven months of projected energy costs. 00:23:17.180 --> 00:23:21.780 So here's, so this next slide here is a discussion 00:23:21.780 --> 00:23:26.780 or a graph of what the rates would look like. 00:23:26.780 --> 00:23:31.180 And the first one we looked at was 0.0515 00:23:31.180 --> 00:23:34.860 with the projected of $2.7 million under collected 00:23:34.860 --> 00:23:37.300 if you look at the next few months. 00:23:37.300 --> 00:23:40.500 And we also looked at 0.0495 00:23:40.500 --> 00:23:44.300 with the projected of under collection of 4.3 million. 00:23:44.300 --> 00:23:47.540 So looking at these two charts, 00:23:47.540 --> 00:23:51.780 the current rate is at 0.0447 cents per kilowatt. 00:23:51.780 --> 00:23:56.700 We recommend going up to 0.0515 cents per kilowatt, 00:23:56.700 --> 00:23:59.460 which will get us to about $2.8 million 00:23:59.460 --> 00:24:01.060 under collected by December. 00:24:01.060 --> 00:24:06.860 And again, here is kind of the same picture 00:24:06.860 --> 00:24:08.740 of at the two different rates 00:24:08.740 --> 00:24:11.260 that we looked at earlier in the previous slide. 00:24:11.260 --> 00:24:16.260 So when you look at residential at a thousand kilowatt, 00:24:16.260 --> 00:24:18.300 for average user, it's gonna increase 00:24:18.300 --> 00:24:21.420 about their monthly bill about $6.80. 00:24:21.420 --> 00:24:23.580 And there's some other non-residential, 00:24:23.580 --> 00:24:26.720 small, medium and large just for y'all to see there also. 00:24:28.580 --> 00:24:30.460 And that's it, any questions? 00:24:30.460 --> 00:24:35.380 Mr. Rayner first. 00:24:35.380 --> 00:24:36.980 - Could you go back one slide? 00:24:36.980 --> 00:24:37.820 - Yes, sir. 00:24:37.820 --> 00:24:40.020 - Could you give me a definition of, 00:24:40.020 --> 00:24:42.420 is that, oh my goodness, sorry. 00:24:42.420 --> 00:24:44.180 Just wonder who's obnoxious phone. 00:24:44.180 --> 00:24:49.260 So could you give me a breakdown on the, 00:24:49.260 --> 00:24:52.920 what is a non-residential, small, medium and large? 00:24:52.920 --> 00:24:57.880 - So I think I'll have to defer that to Bill. 00:24:57.880 --> 00:24:58.720 - Great. 00:24:58.720 --> 00:25:06.140 - Good morning, Madam Chair, 00:25:06.140 --> 00:25:08.420 PB members, Bill Sheppard, GME. 00:25:08.420 --> 00:25:11.180 So the small, medium and large breaks down 00:25:11.180 --> 00:25:15.140 as a small as 20 KW or smaller in size. 00:25:15.140 --> 00:25:19.140 So think of June's Beauty Supply or Barber, okay. 00:25:19.140 --> 00:25:26.760 And then a medium customer goes up to 200 KW. 00:25:26.760 --> 00:25:31.760 So think of that as a auto parts store or a convenience store. 00:25:31.760 --> 00:25:35.380 And then above 200 KW, 00:25:35.380 --> 00:25:39.920 think of that as a Walmart Supercenter or a hospital or a UNT. 00:25:39.920 --> 00:25:43.860 - So question, so where would a bank fall in? 00:25:43.860 --> 00:25:46.620 - Either in the small or the medium, 00:25:46.620 --> 00:25:48.460 most likely the medium if it's a large bank. 00:25:48.460 --> 00:25:50.180 - And offices and such, pretty much, 00:25:50.180 --> 00:25:52.340 I'm just trying to get an idea on. 00:25:52.340 --> 00:25:55.340 Small retail centers of 15,000 square feet 00:25:55.340 --> 00:25:57.540 probably fall within the medium and small, 00:25:57.540 --> 00:25:59.040 closer to the small maybe. 00:25:59.040 --> 00:25:59.880 - Yes. 00:25:59.880 --> 00:26:00.700 - Okay, thank you. 00:26:00.700 --> 00:26:04.260 - Mr. Cheek, you had a question? 00:26:04.260 --> 00:26:05.780 - No, not Bill. 00:26:05.780 --> 00:26:06.620 - Okay. 00:26:06.620 --> 00:26:12.340 - Could we go to the, you have this price projection here. 00:26:12.340 --> 00:26:16.780 I don't know that we have enough information yet 00:26:16.780 --> 00:26:19.980 as we've just started this process in, I think, March. 00:26:19.980 --> 00:26:24.060 I noticed that the chart plunges pretty rapidly 00:26:24.060 --> 00:26:27.900 in the third quarter from June with a positive balance 00:26:27.900 --> 00:26:31.620 of about two million to August, September, 00:26:31.620 --> 00:26:33.100 a negative balance of about seven million. 00:26:33.100 --> 00:26:37.700 So we have seven million excess cost 00:26:37.700 --> 00:26:40.860 above what we collect in that three month period. 00:26:40.860 --> 00:26:43.260 And then it turns flat. 00:26:43.260 --> 00:26:45.980 It's kind of flat through September, through December. 00:26:45.980 --> 00:26:49.740 It was rising from April through June at a lower rate. 00:26:50.660 --> 00:26:55.660 So are we expecting to see this seasonality every summer? 00:26:55.660 --> 00:27:00.940 - Yes, I think Terry is coming up with that question. 00:27:00.940 --> 00:27:01.780 - Crystal Ball. 00:27:01.780 --> 00:27:08.140 - Good morning, Terry Nolte, Assistant General Manager, DME. 00:27:08.140 --> 00:27:12.380 Yeah, so what you see, Mr. Taylor, 00:27:12.380 --> 00:27:15.500 is the fact that the prices are seasonal. 00:27:15.500 --> 00:27:18.540 So we have much higher prices in the summer 00:27:18.540 --> 00:27:21.820 than we do in the rest of the year. 00:27:21.820 --> 00:27:26.820 And consequently, as we hold our ECA rate flat, 00:27:26.820 --> 00:27:29.100 we're going to under-collect in the summer 00:27:29.100 --> 00:27:33.040 the high demand, high price periods. 00:27:33.040 --> 00:27:36.140 The reason why we use a seven month forecast 00:27:36.140 --> 00:27:40.420 is to try to average out those costs 00:27:40.420 --> 00:27:44.060 so we don't see a lot of fluctuation in the ECA cost. 00:27:44.060 --> 00:27:49.060 Yes, we will expect to see fluctuations like this. 00:27:49.060 --> 00:27:50.900 Excuse me. 00:27:50.900 --> 00:27:54.860 However, our recommendation here is to set a rate 00:27:54.860 --> 00:27:58.860 that as we look forward, it should be pretty flat. 00:27:58.860 --> 00:28:03.260 As part of the budget process that we're working on now 00:28:03.260 --> 00:28:06.060 that will be for you in the next month, 00:28:06.060 --> 00:28:09.300 this is about the rate that we expect it to stay at 00:28:09.300 --> 00:28:11.540 for at least the next year or so. 00:28:12.500 --> 00:28:14.300 Hopefully that answers your question. 00:28:14.300 --> 00:28:15.180 - Yeah, I think so. 00:28:15.180 --> 00:28:17.860 And so just think this through, 00:28:17.860 --> 00:28:20.640 we could either try and aim for a seasonal rate, 00:28:20.640 --> 00:28:23.340 which means, and this is kind of a decision for the board, 00:28:23.340 --> 00:28:25.740 would be rates are higher in the summer 00:28:25.740 --> 00:28:29.980 and then lower in off seasons, winter and spring, 00:28:29.980 --> 00:28:34.980 or we will probably have a path where come August, 00:28:34.980 --> 00:28:38.540 the fund is negative five million, 00:28:38.540 --> 00:28:42.100 and then we wanna be positive five million or so by April 00:28:42.100 --> 00:28:43.660 for the next summer 00:28:43.660 --> 00:28:47.140 where we're gonna spend eight or 10 million extra dollars. 00:28:47.140 --> 00:28:48.980 So just kind of thinking through this 00:28:48.980 --> 00:28:51.340 is our first time seeing this. 00:28:51.340 --> 00:28:56.340 - And we did purposely when we adjusted the ECA last time, 00:28:56.340 --> 00:28:58.740 we didn't move it up all the way 00:28:58.740 --> 00:29:01.900 to where we thought the true cost would be 00:29:01.900 --> 00:29:06.640 in order to minimize the amount of rate shock immediately. 00:29:06.640 --> 00:29:10.460 So this level that we're recommending here 00:29:10.460 --> 00:29:12.860 is really a good approximation of where we think 00:29:12.860 --> 00:29:16.980 a good baseline is gonna be for at least the next 12 months. 00:29:16.980 --> 00:29:20.180 - And so if this forecast were to continue out, 00:29:20.180 --> 00:29:21.860 we would expect it to recover back 00:29:21.860 --> 00:29:24.580 into a positive fund balance by next spring, 00:29:24.580 --> 00:29:25.420 and then next summer-- 00:29:25.420 --> 00:29:28.140 - Yeah, that's the goal is to stay right around zero. 00:29:28.140 --> 00:29:28.980 - Yeah, okay. 00:29:28.980 --> 00:29:31.580 Thank you. 00:29:31.580 --> 00:29:32.560 - Other questions? 00:29:32.560 --> 00:29:38.160 All right, do we have a motion to approve the ECA adjustment? 00:29:39.300 --> 00:29:41.420 Mr. Cheek moved, do we have a second? 00:29:41.420 --> 00:29:43.980 Mr. Pluck seconds, all in favor say aye. 00:29:43.980 --> 00:29:46.260 - Aye. - Opposed? 00:29:46.260 --> 00:29:47.940 Carries, management reports. 00:29:47.940 --> 00:29:52.360 - Madam Chair, members of the PV, 00:29:52.360 --> 00:29:56.020 no changes to the future agenda items or the new business. 00:29:56.020 --> 00:29:58.740 So if there's any questions about what's on there 00:29:58.740 --> 00:30:01.020 or anything else, happy to respond. 00:30:01.020 --> 00:30:04.220 - Budget manager handed us a piece of paper 00:30:04.220 --> 00:30:06.500 that explained the first year budget 00:30:06.500 --> 00:30:09.080 for the miscellaneous item under wastewater. 00:30:09.080 --> 00:30:15.380 Like to see something on a memo 00:30:15.380 --> 00:30:18.100 that shows that entire five year projection 00:30:18.100 --> 00:30:20.500 and what those dollar amounts are. 00:30:20.500 --> 00:30:24.320 We were told that these are all related to the same items. 00:30:24.320 --> 00:30:27.500 Also like to see something on the memo 00:30:27.500 --> 00:30:31.080 that says what these items fall under our budget. 00:30:31.080 --> 00:30:34.020 - Yeah, we can get on the schedule 00:30:34.020 --> 00:30:35.540 and get that to you for the next meeting. 00:30:35.540 --> 00:30:37.220 - Okay, I realize it's going to council, 00:30:37.220 --> 00:30:38.920 but I'd like to see them. 00:30:38.920 --> 00:30:40.180 - Sure, we can do that. 00:30:40.180 --> 00:30:44.720 - Brings us to concluding items. 00:30:44.720 --> 00:30:47.220 Does a board member wish to have something added 00:30:47.220 --> 00:30:50.720 to a future agenda item or have anything to say to the public? 00:30:50.720 --> 00:30:56.640 All right, seeing none, we will go into work session. 00:30:56.640 --> 00:30:59.360 The first item is to receive a report, hold a discussion 00:30:59.360 --> 00:31:02.540 and give staff direction regarding the value of solar study. 00:31:05.540 --> 00:31:06.380 Okay. 00:31:06.380 --> 00:31:16.020 - I don't recall the answer, 00:31:16.020 --> 00:31:19.100 but are we using that microphone now or, okay. 00:31:19.100 --> 00:31:23.420 Good morning, Madam Chair, Bill Sheppard again, 00:31:23.420 --> 00:31:25.820 DME and POV members. 00:31:25.820 --> 00:31:29.540 So we've been discussing our solar net billing program 00:31:29.540 --> 00:31:33.800 for quite some time now, starting last February. 00:31:35.140 --> 00:31:39.980 And we've brought the conversation to the SFAC, 00:31:39.980 --> 00:31:42.520 the Sustainability Framework Advisory Committee, 00:31:42.520 --> 00:31:45.540 this body, as well as the city council. 00:31:45.540 --> 00:31:48.980 And now we're coming back to you after some comments 00:31:48.980 --> 00:31:53.260 and conversation about conducting a value of solar study. 00:31:53.260 --> 00:31:58.180 So we've engaged with NUGEN, 00:31:58.180 --> 00:32:00.420 who is the company that did the value of solar study 00:32:00.420 --> 00:32:02.020 for Austin Energy. 00:32:02.020 --> 00:32:05.500 And I've got Jill Schupach here that's gonna present 00:32:05.500 --> 00:32:07.340 her findings from that study. 00:32:07.340 --> 00:32:09.500 And then I'll come back at the end of that presentation 00:32:09.500 --> 00:32:11.780 for staff's recommendations. 00:32:11.780 --> 00:32:18.220 - Good morning, thank you for having me. 00:32:18.220 --> 00:32:23.340 So I'm gonna walk through the presentation. 00:32:23.340 --> 00:32:25.580 We'll talk about the methodology we used. 00:32:25.580 --> 00:32:27.660 Like Bill said, this is parallel to the methodology 00:32:27.660 --> 00:32:29.220 we used with Austin Energy. 00:32:29.220 --> 00:32:31.920 We'll talk about the findings of the study 00:32:31.920 --> 00:32:33.620 and our recommendations. 00:32:33.620 --> 00:32:36.900 We'll talk about billing impacts and how these changes 00:32:36.900 --> 00:32:38.860 and rates will affect customers. 00:32:38.860 --> 00:32:41.800 And then Bill will come up to discuss 00:32:41.800 --> 00:32:43.220 his recommendation again. 00:32:43.220 --> 00:32:48.500 So before we jump in, I just wanna talk about terminology 00:32:48.500 --> 00:32:49.340 a little bit. 00:32:49.340 --> 00:32:53.820 So for Austin Energy, they use a value of solar methodology. 00:32:53.820 --> 00:32:55.580 They use a value of solar rate. 00:32:55.580 --> 00:33:00.000 It includes an avoided cost and they also include 00:33:00.000 --> 00:33:02.260 additional compensation for the customers 00:33:02.260 --> 00:33:04.040 for societal benefits. 00:33:04.040 --> 00:33:10.180 They do a buy all, sell all billing and metering structures. 00:33:10.180 --> 00:33:12.860 So the customer buys all of their energy 00:33:12.860 --> 00:33:14.380 as if they didn't have solar. 00:33:14.380 --> 00:33:17.500 And then the utility buys back whatever energy 00:33:17.500 --> 00:33:19.900 the customer generates at this value of solar rate. 00:33:19.900 --> 00:33:22.300 So most often when you hear value of solar, 00:33:22.300 --> 00:33:24.940 it's usually associated with this buy all, sell all 00:33:24.940 --> 00:33:27.820 metering and billing model. 00:33:27.820 --> 00:33:30.460 There's a lot of different rate designs out there 00:33:30.460 --> 00:33:34.220 when it comes to distributed generation. 00:33:34.220 --> 00:33:36.340 And that's the one Austin Energy uses. 00:33:36.340 --> 00:33:40.820 Denton uses a net billing, metering and billing model. 00:33:40.820 --> 00:33:45.100 The net billing model is not changing. 00:33:45.100 --> 00:33:47.140 We're keeping the same model. 00:33:47.140 --> 00:33:51.120 What's changing or the information that's presented 00:33:51.120 --> 00:33:55.660 is the rate that customers are compensated for their energy. 00:33:55.660 --> 00:33:58.660 But the actual billing and model structure is not changing. 00:33:58.660 --> 00:34:00.020 It's still net billing. 00:34:00.020 --> 00:34:03.420 It's just what rate is the utility paying the customers 00:34:03.420 --> 00:34:04.260 for their energy. 00:34:04.260 --> 00:34:11.260 So for the value of solar study, 00:34:11.260 --> 00:34:13.220 the methodology includes three components. 00:34:13.220 --> 00:34:15.340 That's these three columns here. 00:34:15.340 --> 00:34:17.740 If you're avoided costs, your societal benefits 00:34:17.740 --> 00:34:19.700 and your policy driven incentives. 00:34:19.700 --> 00:34:23.420 The avoided cost is just what it says. 00:34:23.420 --> 00:34:25.260 Every time a customer generates energy, 00:34:25.260 --> 00:34:27.420 the utility does not have to buy that energy 00:34:27.420 --> 00:34:29.740 from the market or generate that energy. 00:34:29.740 --> 00:34:31.980 So there's a cost savings to the utility. 00:34:31.980 --> 00:34:35.820 It's the cost avoided by the customer generating. 00:34:35.820 --> 00:34:39.020 There's a lot of different ways to measure that. 00:34:39.020 --> 00:34:42.600 You can use the market if you're in a market like ERCOT. 00:34:42.600 --> 00:34:45.300 If you have power purchase agreements or you've gone out 00:34:45.300 --> 00:34:47.340 for a request for power purchase agreements, 00:34:47.340 --> 00:34:49.240 you can use that methodology. 00:34:50.580 --> 00:34:55.580 You know, five, 10 years ago, utilities used to use 00:34:55.580 --> 00:34:57.980 like a peaker methodology where you would say, 00:34:57.980 --> 00:35:00.380 oh, well, if we had to build a natural gas plant, 00:35:00.380 --> 00:35:01.860 here's the cost that we're avoiding. 00:35:01.860 --> 00:35:04.320 And so that's the cost the customer gets paid. 00:35:04.320 --> 00:35:08.160 So we did it two different ways. 00:35:08.160 --> 00:35:10.920 We did it based on Denton's power purchase agreements 00:35:10.920 --> 00:35:14.700 because they're actually purchasing solar contracts. 00:35:14.700 --> 00:35:17.700 And then we also did it based on ERCOT 00:35:17.700 --> 00:35:20.260 because you guys are in an organized market. 00:35:20.260 --> 00:35:23.540 And that analysis was an hourly analysis 00:35:23.540 --> 00:35:26.820 to capture the value of solar when it is generating. 00:35:26.820 --> 00:35:30.520 Societal benefits. 00:35:30.520 --> 00:35:35.520 This one, this is the estimated savings 00:35:35.520 --> 00:35:40.920 for reducing emissions. 00:35:40.920 --> 00:35:43.220 You're avoiding greenhouse gases. 00:35:43.220 --> 00:35:45.140 And there's multiple different ways 00:35:45.140 --> 00:35:48.300 that that has been estimated. 00:35:48.300 --> 00:35:50.860 The federal government has an estimate that they use. 00:35:50.860 --> 00:35:53.620 There's a market in the Northeast that they use. 00:35:53.620 --> 00:35:55.460 There's a lot of different markets 00:35:55.460 --> 00:35:57.540 and ways to estimate that. 00:35:57.540 --> 00:36:01.720 There is not a market in Texas for this, 00:36:01.720 --> 00:36:05.980 but there are different ways to estimate it. 00:36:05.980 --> 00:36:09.640 And so in the report, it includes all the different ways 00:36:09.640 --> 00:36:11.940 that it's estimated and what those amounts are. 00:36:11.940 --> 00:36:15.540 Generally, it varies from one cent to eight cents 00:36:15.540 --> 00:36:17.760 depending on whose study you're looking at. 00:36:17.760 --> 00:36:19.660 You know, the higher end is the EPA. 00:36:19.660 --> 00:36:22.100 They recently came out with an estimate 00:36:22.100 --> 00:36:24.820 that averages about eight cents kilowatt hour. 00:36:24.820 --> 00:36:28.820 But as I said, there's no federal or state market 00:36:28.820 --> 00:36:30.880 for greenhouse gases in Texas. 00:36:30.880 --> 00:36:34.260 And the greenhouse gases, 00:36:34.260 --> 00:36:36.100 because of prior city council policy, 00:36:36.100 --> 00:36:38.060 Denton is already 100% renewable. 00:36:38.060 --> 00:36:41.580 So they have already balanced out the greenhouse gases 00:36:41.580 --> 00:36:44.460 that they would be producing to serve their customer load. 00:36:44.460 --> 00:36:46.900 And then the last one is policy-driven incentives. 00:36:46.900 --> 00:36:49.340 There's federal policies, state policies 00:36:49.340 --> 00:36:52.580 all to promote renewables. 00:36:52.580 --> 00:36:56.420 Local policy, this third component is, 00:36:56.420 --> 00:37:00.640 is there a local policy to support rooftop solar? 00:37:00.640 --> 00:37:02.740 In Denton right now, there is not. 00:37:02.740 --> 00:37:06.500 And so for this one, you know, 00:37:06.500 --> 00:37:10.140 the value of solar rate is not being adjusted 00:37:10.140 --> 00:37:11.600 to promote rooftop solar, 00:37:11.600 --> 00:37:14.440 but there are other incentives offered by the utility. 00:37:15.780 --> 00:37:17.280 All right, so the first, this first, 00:37:17.280 --> 00:37:18.580 that first column, this first component, 00:37:18.580 --> 00:37:19.860 avoid a cost findings. 00:37:19.860 --> 00:37:24.580 As I said, we did an hourly analysis. 00:37:24.580 --> 00:37:27.100 So on this graph, the green line represents 00:37:27.100 --> 00:37:28.460 when solar is generating. 00:37:28.460 --> 00:37:31.080 It peaks around noon, which makes sense. 00:37:31.080 --> 00:37:32.940 That's when the sun is the strongest, right? 00:37:32.940 --> 00:37:36.340 The blue line represents ERCOT, 00:37:36.340 --> 00:37:39.060 the Organized Energy Market that Denton is in. 00:37:39.060 --> 00:37:41.060 That represents when the market is peaking. 00:37:41.060 --> 00:37:42.860 And you can see it tends to peak 00:37:44.220 --> 00:37:46.460 late afternoon and early evening, which makes sense. 00:37:46.460 --> 00:37:48.460 Everybody comes home, they turn on their air conditioner, 00:37:48.460 --> 00:37:50.500 they make dinner, right? 00:37:50.500 --> 00:37:52.120 And so we did an hourly analysis 00:37:52.120 --> 00:37:54.220 to look at how much solar is producing 00:37:54.220 --> 00:37:56.260 at the time of those ERCOT peaks 00:37:56.260 --> 00:37:57.860 and what the value of solar is 00:37:57.860 --> 00:37:59.940 in all those different hours. 00:37:59.940 --> 00:38:03.900 So on this table, the left column is the, 00:38:03.900 --> 00:38:05.540 if you calculate the avoided costs 00:38:05.540 --> 00:38:07.740 based on ERCOT market pricing, 00:38:07.740 --> 00:38:10.980 you can see it totals about seven cents, 00:38:10.980 --> 00:38:13.020 seven cents kilowatt hour. 00:38:13.020 --> 00:38:18.020 If you look at the amount that Denton pays 00:38:18.020 --> 00:38:22.980 for their solar purchase power agreements, 00:38:22.980 --> 00:38:25.340 that averages out to about four cents, 00:38:25.340 --> 00:38:27.180 which you can see in that bottom line. 00:38:27.180 --> 00:38:29.900 So the avoided cost, depending on how you wanna measure it 00:38:29.900 --> 00:38:33.840 or your point of view, is between four cents and seven cents. 00:38:33.840 --> 00:38:37.860 This does account for ancillary services 00:38:37.860 --> 00:38:39.740 in the ERCOT market that you're avoiding. 00:38:39.740 --> 00:38:41.660 It also accounts for line losses 00:38:41.660 --> 00:38:43.660 when the customers are generating, 00:38:43.660 --> 00:38:46.380 they're generating the power at the source. 00:38:46.380 --> 00:38:47.940 It's not being generated somewhere else 00:38:47.940 --> 00:38:49.860 and transmitted across transmission lines 00:38:49.860 --> 00:38:51.740 and distribution lines because there are losses, 00:38:51.740 --> 00:38:53.860 energy losses for that. 00:38:53.860 --> 00:38:56.760 So these numbers have been adjusted to account for losses. 00:38:56.760 --> 00:39:01.460 For societal benefits, as I said, 00:39:01.460 --> 00:39:04.360 there's a lot of different ways it's been measured. 00:39:04.360 --> 00:39:07.820 It's about $15 to $190 per ton of carbon, 00:39:07.820 --> 00:39:10.000 depending on the study that you look at. 00:39:10.000 --> 00:39:11.780 When you convert that into energy, 00:39:11.780 --> 00:39:14.740 it's about one cent to eight cents per kilowatt hour. 00:39:14.740 --> 00:39:18.760 So Denton, as I said, already is 100% renewable 00:39:18.760 --> 00:39:22.120 based on prior city council policy. 00:39:22.120 --> 00:39:25.020 So the cost of carbon for Denton is already being mitigated 00:39:25.020 --> 00:39:27.300 just with that power supply strategy. 00:39:27.300 --> 00:39:31.560 So as far as moving forward with the value of solar rate, 00:39:31.560 --> 00:39:34.580 because the carbon has already been balanced, 00:39:34.580 --> 00:39:38.900 we've recommended that it be set at $0 per kilowatt hour 00:39:38.900 --> 00:39:41.180 as part of the value of solar rate. 00:39:41.180 --> 00:39:44.700 Now, city council can change that, they can increase it. 00:39:44.700 --> 00:39:47.800 That is a policy decision by them, 00:39:47.800 --> 00:39:51.360 but as far as a cost basis, 00:39:51.360 --> 00:39:54.220 this requirement for balancing your carbon 00:39:54.220 --> 00:39:55.320 has already been met. 00:39:55.320 --> 00:40:00.380 Policy-driven incentives, like I said, 00:40:00.380 --> 00:40:02.220 there's federal policy, state policy, 00:40:02.220 --> 00:40:06.100 state has some property tax exemptions and things like that. 00:40:06.100 --> 00:40:08.500 Right now, the city and Denton policies 00:40:08.500 --> 00:40:11.140 do not require local solar. 00:40:11.140 --> 00:40:14.060 So we have not recommended any inclusion 00:40:14.060 --> 00:40:15.340 in the value of solar for that, 00:40:15.340 --> 00:40:17.700 because there's not a policy to support it. 00:40:17.700 --> 00:40:21.300 Obviously that can change, city council can change policies. 00:40:21.300 --> 00:40:27.360 Other ways that you can support local solar, 00:40:27.360 --> 00:40:30.020 it doesn't have to be through a value of solar rate 00:40:30.020 --> 00:40:31.540 that the customer is paid every month. 00:40:31.540 --> 00:40:34.980 You can also support it by streamlining 00:40:34.980 --> 00:40:38.260 the installation process, permits, inspections, 00:40:38.260 --> 00:40:40.780 waive some of the fees to help customers 00:40:40.780 --> 00:40:43.260 be able to afford it. 00:40:43.260 --> 00:40:47.420 You can provide grants or rebates to customers, 00:40:47.420 --> 00:40:50.380 and I've also seen some utilities provide low-cost loans. 00:40:50.380 --> 00:40:54.900 So in summary, the range of avoided costs, 00:40:54.900 --> 00:40:57.100 like I said, is about 4 cents to 7 cents. 00:40:57.100 --> 00:41:00.620 That's the actual real cost that the utility can avoid. 00:41:00.620 --> 00:41:05.620 The societal benefits and policy-driven benefits, 00:41:05.620 --> 00:41:08.580 we have set at zero, but that can be adjusted 00:41:08.580 --> 00:41:10.340 or changed by city council. 00:41:10.340 --> 00:41:14.000 Those are policy decisions that city council can make. 00:41:14.000 --> 00:41:16.200 The actual avoided measurable costs 00:41:16.200 --> 00:41:19.980 that Denton saves immediately is the 4 to 7 cents. 00:41:19.980 --> 00:41:26.220 So what does this look like for customers? 00:41:26.220 --> 00:41:29.560 So this first column, well, so on the left 00:41:29.560 --> 00:41:31.740 is the title of all the different rates. 00:41:33.940 --> 00:41:36.380 And you have a facility charge and energy charges, 00:41:36.380 --> 00:41:39.500 and then you also have your fuel pass through the ECA, 00:41:39.500 --> 00:41:42.500 which you guys just discussed, and then RCA, 00:41:42.500 --> 00:41:45.860 which is an additional compensation 00:41:45.860 --> 00:41:47.760 to the customer for solar. 00:41:47.760 --> 00:41:49.820 So the first column is a non-solar customer. 00:41:49.820 --> 00:41:54.820 Let's say you're using 1,365 kilowatt hours a month. 00:41:54.820 --> 00:41:57.180 Your bill would be about $181. 00:41:57.180 --> 00:42:01.380 This does have the, this does have a 5.8 cent 00:42:02.680 --> 00:42:04.940 ECA and TCRF. 00:42:04.940 --> 00:42:07.940 It has not been updated for the 5.15 that just passed. 00:42:07.940 --> 00:42:15.020 And that billing customer under the current rates 00:42:15.020 --> 00:42:17.140 is that second column over. 00:42:17.140 --> 00:42:20.940 And so you can see the rates that are included in there, 00:42:20.940 --> 00:42:24.860 and the rate that the customer is paid 00:42:24.860 --> 00:42:29.080 for the energy they produce is that 6.8 cents 00:42:29.080 --> 00:42:30.620 and that 3.8 cents. 00:42:30.620 --> 00:42:32.220 It's around 11 cents. 00:42:33.180 --> 00:42:36.520 So remember, like we said, the actual cost avoided, 00:42:36.520 --> 00:42:38.740 if you're looking at a purchase power agreement is 4 cents, 00:42:38.740 --> 00:42:40.780 if you're looking at the market is 7 cents. 00:42:40.780 --> 00:42:44.740 And currently the customers are being paid around 11 cents. 00:42:44.740 --> 00:42:48.820 And so if city council decides to go with an approach 00:42:48.820 --> 00:42:50.620 that's more related to avoided costs, 00:42:50.620 --> 00:42:52.740 the cost the utility is actually avoiding, 00:42:52.740 --> 00:42:55.300 then the 11 cents will go down, 00:42:55.300 --> 00:42:58.040 somewhere between 7 cents and 4 cents. 00:42:58.040 --> 00:43:00.780 If city council decides they want to incentivize 00:43:00.780 --> 00:43:03.780 people building solar and support solar, 00:43:03.780 --> 00:43:05.540 then they can make that decision 00:43:05.540 --> 00:43:07.740 as to how much they want to increase it. 00:43:07.740 --> 00:43:10.520 But right now the customer is receiving about 11 cents 00:43:10.520 --> 00:43:12.420 for every kilowatt hour they produce. 00:43:12.420 --> 00:43:18.660 If the rate that the customer is compensated 00:43:18.660 --> 00:43:21.940 is set at the avoided cost 00:43:21.940 --> 00:43:25.540 using the power purchase agreements, that 4 cents, 00:43:25.540 --> 00:43:30.540 you can see that currently the bill would be $139.94, 00:43:31.540 --> 00:43:36.060 moving forward, it would be the $166.70. 00:43:36.060 --> 00:43:40.060 And then if you use the ERCOT market price, excuse me, 00:43:40.060 --> 00:43:42.740 their bill would be about $154. 00:43:42.740 --> 00:43:44.660 So that is how it would affect a customer 00:43:44.660 --> 00:43:47.540 that uses about 1,400 kilowatt hours a month. 00:43:47.540 --> 00:43:50.980 The very last line, this is annual savings 00:43:50.980 --> 00:43:53.500 from the current rate. 00:43:53.500 --> 00:43:57.740 So because the customers are paying more money 00:43:57.740 --> 00:43:58.620 for their total bill, 00:43:58.620 --> 00:44:02.700 because they're being compensated less for their energy, 00:44:02.700 --> 00:44:07.400 that brings in another $463,000 00:44:07.400 --> 00:44:09.260 if we use the purchase power agreement rate, 00:44:09.260 --> 00:44:11.220 the solar purchase power agreement rate. 00:44:11.220 --> 00:44:16.500 And then for the ERCOT market rate, it's about $236,000. 00:44:16.500 --> 00:44:18.980 And the recommendation, these numbers will come up again 00:44:18.980 --> 00:44:21.420 because the recommendation from staff is gonna be 00:44:21.420 --> 00:44:24.900 to take that difference in revenue that Denton is receiving 00:44:24.900 --> 00:44:28.100 'cause the utility is receiving more revenue now 00:44:28.100 --> 00:44:30.300 and put that into their green sense program. 00:44:30.300 --> 00:44:38.060 - Thank you, Jill. 00:44:38.060 --> 00:44:40.260 So we've made this same presentation to ESFAC 00:44:40.260 --> 00:44:44.580 and you'll see in your AIS that ESFAC came back 00:44:44.580 --> 00:44:48.720 and asked us to, or recommended a blended rate 00:44:48.720 --> 00:44:53.020 between that PPA rate of DME and the ERCOT market rate. 00:44:53.020 --> 00:44:56.080 Staff, however, is continuing with our recommendation 00:44:56.080 --> 00:45:01.080 that we made to them, which is to make the value of solar 00:45:01.080 --> 00:45:05.740 the same as the avoided PPA cost of DME, 00:45:05.740 --> 00:45:10.740 which is the 3.79 cents and take the offset, that savings, 00:45:10.740 --> 00:45:14.060 and apply that to what we're already funding 00:45:14.060 --> 00:45:16.620 for energy incentives of the million dollars. 00:45:16.620 --> 00:45:18.140 So that'll bring the million dollars 00:45:18.140 --> 00:45:21.260 up to 1.46 million moving forward. 00:45:21.260 --> 00:45:24.580 So that is staff's recommendation to this body. 00:45:27.080 --> 00:45:29.600 - All right, questions? 00:45:29.600 --> 00:45:35.140 - Remind me of ESFAC. 00:45:35.140 --> 00:45:37.740 - Sustainability Framework Advisory Committee. 00:45:37.740 --> 00:45:39.660 - And that's ours? 00:45:39.660 --> 00:45:40.500 - Yes. - City of Denton. 00:45:40.500 --> 00:45:42.220 - They just asked for it, right? 00:45:42.220 --> 00:45:43.060 - Correct. 00:45:43.060 --> 00:45:48.340 - Which side are we gonna start on? 00:45:48.340 --> 00:45:49.780 Mr. Newquist, you go first. 00:45:49.780 --> 00:45:53.220 - What do we have or use to measure up 00:45:53.220 --> 00:45:55.820 and monitor engagement with green sense 00:45:55.820 --> 00:45:57.460 and the money that we have in there 00:45:57.460 --> 00:46:00.580 and how people use it and how we let them know to use it 00:46:00.580 --> 00:46:01.580 and things like that? 00:46:01.580 --> 00:46:05.100 - Sure, so the sustainability group tracks those rebates, 00:46:05.100 --> 00:46:09.700 how they give rebates based on air conditioning upgrades, 00:46:09.700 --> 00:46:12.500 installation upgrades, window upgrades. 00:46:12.500 --> 00:46:15.660 It is going very well this year, is my understanding. 00:46:15.660 --> 00:46:17.300 That's a different group than DME. 00:46:17.300 --> 00:46:18.700 We just provide the funding source, 00:46:18.700 --> 00:46:23.100 but they do track the efficacy of those programs. 00:46:23.100 --> 00:46:25.620 As a matter of fact, I do have a slide 00:46:25.620 --> 00:46:28.820 that shows, so one of the things that have come up 00:46:28.820 --> 00:46:31.540 in the past is on a dollar for dollar, 00:46:31.540 --> 00:46:34.220 which is sort of the better bang for the buck, 00:46:34.220 --> 00:46:39.220 and we did some analysis on that last year, 00:46:39.220 --> 00:46:43.540 and this will give you that, sort of the bottom line is, 00:46:43.540 --> 00:46:47.620 for every dollar spent in energy efficiency programs, 00:46:47.620 --> 00:46:50.740 there's about a 19 kilowatt hour reduction 00:46:50.740 --> 00:46:53.040 of usage across the city, 00:46:53.040 --> 00:46:57.660 versus every dollar spent for solar rebates at that time, 00:46:57.660 --> 00:47:00.900 it was 3.5 kilowatt hours per dollar spent. 00:47:00.900 --> 00:47:04.120 So again, from a bang for the buck, 00:47:04.120 --> 00:47:06.660 we felt that the Green Sense programs 00:47:06.660 --> 00:47:10.620 are a much wiser avenue to spend those dollars. 00:47:10.620 --> 00:47:13.360 So we took that to the next level, 00:47:13.360 --> 00:47:15.500 and the savings that we're recommending 00:47:15.500 --> 00:47:16.740 coming back from this change 00:47:16.740 --> 00:47:20.420 also fund those energy efficiency programs. 00:47:20.420 --> 00:47:22.840 - And Mr. Newquist, just because you're new, 00:47:22.840 --> 00:47:25.540 but so right now, it's about a million dollars, 00:47:25.540 --> 00:47:29.460 a million dollars that DME's sending to these programs 00:47:29.460 --> 00:47:31.160 used to be half a million. 00:47:31.160 --> 00:47:33.380 Once we eliminated the solar rebates, 00:47:33.380 --> 00:47:35.900 that additional half a million went to energy programs, 00:47:35.900 --> 00:47:39.080 so it's a total of a million dollars currently. 00:47:39.080 --> 00:47:41.740 Certainly, depending on the recommendation here, 00:47:41.740 --> 00:47:44.140 if the board, certainly also if the council 00:47:44.140 --> 00:47:45.580 wants to shift any of those savings, 00:47:45.580 --> 00:47:47.540 that would be added to that million dollars. 00:47:47.540 --> 00:47:49.860 And just as a reminder, that million dollars 00:47:49.860 --> 00:47:53.900 is available to all residents, all DME customers 00:47:53.900 --> 00:47:55.180 in our service territory, 00:47:55.180 --> 00:47:57.100 not just those that have rooftop solar. 00:47:57.100 --> 00:48:02.820 - Other questions? 00:48:02.820 --> 00:48:05.780 Billy? 00:48:05.780 --> 00:48:11.760 - Okay, so we don't do the solar rebate program anymore, 00:48:11.760 --> 00:48:13.620 right? 00:48:13.620 --> 00:48:14.460 - Correct. 00:48:14.460 --> 00:48:18.360 - So how long ago did we start the solar rebate program? 00:48:20.340 --> 00:48:23.740 - I believe it was 2009, is when that program started. 00:48:23.740 --> 00:48:24.940 Kat, do you remember? 00:48:24.940 --> 00:48:26.460 - About 15 years ago. 00:48:26.460 --> 00:48:28.180 - It was quite-- 00:48:28.180 --> 00:48:29.020 - Yeah. 00:48:29.020 --> 00:48:30.900 Was it closer? 00:48:30.900 --> 00:48:32.800 Yeah, I thought we did it real early, but. 00:48:32.800 --> 00:48:39.420 I'm gonna kick myself for asking this question. 00:48:39.420 --> 00:48:41.940 Has any consideration been given to the fact 00:48:41.940 --> 00:48:43.860 that we've made a commitment to some of these people 00:48:43.860 --> 00:48:45.220 that have already done this? 00:48:45.220 --> 00:48:48.060 - So that has come up. 00:48:48.060 --> 00:48:51.260 Grandfathering is the terminology for that. 00:48:51.260 --> 00:48:56.260 So there is no guarantee that those customers received 00:48:56.260 --> 00:48:58.400 when they signed their interconnection agreement 00:48:58.400 --> 00:49:00.500 that rates were gonna stay level forever, 00:49:00.500 --> 00:49:04.460 or their incentive, or our programs were not gonna change. 00:49:04.460 --> 00:49:08.660 It's just not feasible for the utility to do that. 00:49:08.660 --> 00:49:11.740 However, those customers that did install back when 00:49:11.740 --> 00:49:16.140 have been taking advantage of a very lucrative program, 00:49:16.140 --> 00:49:19.660 a very lucrative credit they received for that generation 00:49:19.660 --> 00:49:21.420 that they had, as well as most likely 00:49:21.420 --> 00:49:23.020 a rebate for their system. 00:49:23.020 --> 00:49:26.700 So that certainly factors into their economics, 00:49:26.700 --> 00:49:28.940 but we cannot make a guarantee in anybody 00:49:28.940 --> 00:49:31.300 that signs back then or now, moving forward, 00:49:31.300 --> 00:49:32.180 that nothing's gonna change. 00:49:32.180 --> 00:49:33.020 - Well, of course, yeah. 00:49:33.020 --> 00:49:35.100 I mean, they made a decision, 00:49:35.100 --> 00:49:38.100 and it was kind of a business decision, if you will. 00:49:38.100 --> 00:49:41.700 They're probably not in business. 00:49:43.780 --> 00:49:46.340 But you are cutting, basically you're looking at their 00:49:46.340 --> 00:49:49.580 savings or their refund, however you wanna look at it. 00:49:49.580 --> 00:49:51.460 You're cutting it in less than half, 00:49:51.460 --> 00:49:55.000 about 40% of what they were being refunded. 00:49:55.000 --> 00:50:00.700 - Yeah, so what we really need to keep in mind is, 00:50:00.700 --> 00:50:03.660 out of the 1,200 systems that we have rooftop currently, 00:50:03.660 --> 00:50:06.500 and they're still moving forward, by the way. 00:50:06.500 --> 00:50:10.340 They haven't stopped, and we're not stopping them 00:50:10.340 --> 00:50:13.380 from putting rooftop solar on their homes. 00:50:13.380 --> 00:50:16.540 But we also have to think of the other 64,000 customers 00:50:16.540 --> 00:50:18.580 that we have and the amount of money 00:50:18.580 --> 00:50:20.260 that we spend for energy. 00:50:20.260 --> 00:50:21.740 And we need to spend it wisely, 00:50:21.740 --> 00:50:24.700 and to keep their rates as reasonable as possible. 00:50:24.700 --> 00:50:28.340 And to Mr. So's comment about growth in the city, 00:50:28.340 --> 00:50:29.900 I mean, we just signed a PPA 00:50:29.900 --> 00:50:31.940 for another 100 megawatts of solar, 00:50:31.940 --> 00:50:34.860 which is much more cost effective 00:50:34.860 --> 00:50:36.640 than the rate that we're paying now, 00:50:36.640 --> 00:50:41.020 or even the rate moving forward, if this is to get approved. 00:50:41.020 --> 00:50:45.500 But again, it's an effort to try to make an equitable payment 00:50:45.500 --> 00:50:47.780 for that energy coming back to us. 00:50:47.780 --> 00:50:50.540 Quite honestly, every kilowatt hour that they use 00:50:50.540 --> 00:50:52.700 on their side of the meter is 100% offset. 00:50:52.700 --> 00:50:55.500 So if you think about it, that's 100% retail credit 00:50:55.500 --> 00:50:57.140 for that amount of energy they're using. 00:50:57.140 --> 00:50:59.420 So it may encourage customers 00:50:59.420 --> 00:51:01.600 to maybe look into a battery system. 00:51:01.600 --> 00:51:03.620 So instead of sending that energy to us, 00:51:03.620 --> 00:51:04.940 they're storing it and using it back. 00:51:04.940 --> 00:51:06.920 - We've already had a discussion about battery system. 00:51:06.920 --> 00:51:08.940 I didn't think you liked it. 00:51:08.940 --> 00:51:12.780 - Oh, no, it's perfectly fine for the battery. 00:51:12.780 --> 00:51:16.580 So there's nothing that DME has proposed 00:51:16.580 --> 00:51:18.500 and move it forward other than paying 00:51:18.500 --> 00:51:20.340 a more equitable rate for that energy. 00:51:20.340 --> 00:51:22.740 - I agree that the money is better, 00:51:22.740 --> 00:51:25.140 more sensibly spent in the Greensense program. 00:51:25.140 --> 00:51:27.040 I don't think there's any question about that. 00:51:27.040 --> 00:51:31.500 I'm just worried about maybe the past, like I said, 00:51:31.500 --> 00:51:36.340 sort of a commitment that we might have ethically made 00:51:36.340 --> 00:51:37.800 to them, and I don't mean you. 00:51:37.800 --> 00:51:40.500 I mean the city as a whole. 00:51:40.500 --> 00:51:43.940 Anyway, okay, well, that answers my question. 00:51:43.940 --> 00:51:44.780 Thanks, Phil. 00:51:44.780 --> 00:51:47.140 - Yeah, and if I may add one more thing to that too, 00:51:47.140 --> 00:51:51.160 and back in 2009, again, I think it was around that time, 00:51:51.160 --> 00:51:54.660 DME wasn't 100% renewable. 00:51:54.660 --> 00:51:55.500 - No. 00:51:55.500 --> 00:51:56.720 - A lot has changed. 00:51:56.720 --> 00:51:58.100 There's been a lot of investment 00:51:58.100 --> 00:52:01.420 to make us 100% renewable and the city's 00:52:01.420 --> 00:52:03.320 in a different spot right now than it was then. 00:52:03.320 --> 00:52:06.420 So again, we don't wanna disincentivize folks 00:52:06.420 --> 00:52:08.960 from putting rooftop solar on, they can still do that. 00:52:08.960 --> 00:52:10.340 And if they do it properly, 00:52:10.340 --> 00:52:13.660 then they use the energy inside their four walls. 00:52:13.660 --> 00:52:17.620 But our portfolio looking forward is 100% renewable. 00:52:17.620 --> 00:52:21.140 So that's a huge thing we need to be proud of. 00:52:21.140 --> 00:52:23.900 - Like you said, paying them 11 cents 00:52:23.900 --> 00:52:26.900 when our avoided cost isn't even close 00:52:26.900 --> 00:52:27.740 - Correct. 00:52:27.740 --> 00:52:31.080 - Is not fair to the other 60,000 customers that we have. 00:52:31.080 --> 00:52:33.380 Mr. Taylor. 00:52:33.380 --> 00:52:34.220 - Thank you. 00:52:34.220 --> 00:52:35.040 Thank you, Madam Chair. 00:52:35.040 --> 00:52:40.040 I'm trying to think of how to put all this. 00:52:40.040 --> 00:52:45.140 I have a few, I guess I'll start with your grandfathered, 00:52:45.140 --> 00:52:49.220 question about grandfathering and people who made a 20 year, 00:52:49.220 --> 00:52:52.540 perhaps got a 20 year loan to do a home improvement 00:52:52.540 --> 00:52:55.580 with an expected kind of return. 00:52:55.580 --> 00:52:59.980 And I'm sure anybody that did that got a 20 or 30 00:52:59.980 --> 00:53:02.900 or $40,000 solar array, they did the math 00:53:02.900 --> 00:53:05.100 on what it would cost them 00:53:05.100 --> 00:53:07.220 and how it would pencil out payback. 00:53:07.220 --> 00:53:11.560 COSR, for example, has a grandfathered rate. 00:53:11.560 --> 00:53:16.220 I think they, 2022, if you installed before like June 2022, 00:53:16.220 --> 00:53:19.100 you have your solar buyback is one rate. 00:53:19.100 --> 00:53:23.100 If it's after that, it has a different dollar value. 00:53:23.100 --> 00:53:27.120 And I know other rural utilities in Texas do. 00:53:27.120 --> 00:53:30.620 You know, I was just looking at the benchmarks 00:53:30.620 --> 00:53:34.940 in the value of solar report on page five dash four. 00:53:34.940 --> 00:53:38.300 You know, we're showing this staff is recommending 00:53:38.300 --> 00:53:43.300 about a three and a half cent value for energy generated, 00:53:43.300 --> 00:53:47.740 but Austin energy is 9.9 cents. 00:53:47.740 --> 00:53:51.660 Pet analysis, 6.96, six, seven point, 00:53:51.660 --> 00:53:52.500 just running through these. 00:53:52.500 --> 00:53:56.880 They're all somewhere between six and a half and 10 cents 00:53:56.880 --> 00:54:00.620 except Georgetown and DME. 00:54:00.620 --> 00:54:04.340 And DME's recommendation of 3.8 00:54:04.340 --> 00:54:07.300 is the lowest pretty substantially. 00:54:07.300 --> 00:54:12.420 And this doesn't show that COSR 00:54:12.420 --> 00:54:15.060 and several of these others have a grandfathered rate. 00:54:15.060 --> 00:54:20.940 I think that it would be best for our rate payers 00:54:20.940 --> 00:54:23.860 who followed our green sense program 00:54:23.860 --> 00:54:27.900 and made this commitment, this 20 year commitment potentially 00:54:27.900 --> 00:54:34.300 to not have a sudden shock going from 11 cents to 3 cents 00:54:34.300 --> 00:54:37.380 or 3.8 or whatever it is. 00:54:37.380 --> 00:54:42.060 But it would be more correct to have a grandfathered rate 00:54:42.060 --> 00:54:44.420 maybe with a taper down over five years 00:54:44.420 --> 00:54:46.060 or something like that. 00:54:46.060 --> 00:54:49.360 So that existing systems before a date, 00:54:49.360 --> 00:54:52.420 whether that's today or, you know, I don't know. 00:54:52.420 --> 00:54:55.460 I don't know how retroactively we could go. 00:54:55.460 --> 00:54:58.300 I don't know when the last solar installs were 00:54:58.300 --> 00:55:03.460 that they have a five year period of adjustment 00:55:03.460 --> 00:55:08.340 down to whatever this value of solar rate is. 00:55:08.340 --> 00:55:11.380 I think that would be fair, more fair 00:55:11.380 --> 00:55:13.780 so that they can adjust their, you know, 00:55:13.780 --> 00:55:16.880 they can realize their bill is basically gonna be going up 00:55:16.880 --> 00:55:19.480 slowly for the next five years as opposed to a shock. 00:55:20.660 --> 00:55:25.540 The second, this, I understand that we have signed 00:55:25.540 --> 00:55:30.200 some really good PPAs with a really good effective rate. 00:55:30.200 --> 00:55:34.420 Just looking at this comparison, 00:55:34.420 --> 00:55:39.300 and these are all munis or regulated co-ops. 00:55:39.300 --> 00:55:44.300 They're valuing, they're kind of sore at the high end, 00:55:44.300 --> 00:55:49.080 like at the basically the ERCOT market rate. 00:55:50.480 --> 00:55:53.420 Or very similar or a little bit higher even. 00:55:53.420 --> 00:55:57.620 And I think it's, if we are really able 00:55:57.620 --> 00:56:01.580 to keep signing PPAs for three and a half cents solar 00:56:01.580 --> 00:56:06.020 and sell it for seven cents, then, you know, 00:56:06.020 --> 00:56:09.700 we wouldn't be having the discussion we had 30 minutes ago 00:56:09.700 --> 00:56:12.780 about having a $10 million seasonality 00:56:12.780 --> 00:56:14.660 and needing to raise our ECA 00:56:16.580 --> 00:56:21.300 because we, 5.5 cents per the energy rate 00:56:21.300 --> 00:56:25.060 when we're saying we can buy it at 3.7 or whatever it was. 00:56:25.060 --> 00:56:28.600 So I think, I really feel like this is, 00:56:28.600 --> 00:56:34.800 this is pushing for the conclusion of a 3.8 cent rate. 00:56:34.800 --> 00:56:40.480 But we see evidence on this board 00:56:40.480 --> 00:56:45.380 that that's a artificially low rate for energy in ERCOT. 00:56:47.580 --> 00:56:49.140 - You look like you have a response. 00:56:49.140 --> 00:56:50.300 - Yeah, so a couple of things 00:56:50.300 --> 00:56:53.680 that I'm gonna defer to Marcella here in a second. 00:56:53.680 --> 00:56:56.860 I think when you're looking at those comparative utilities, 00:56:56.860 --> 00:56:57.880 I think it's important to understand 00:56:57.880 --> 00:57:00.980 that they don't have a 100% mandate 00:57:00.980 --> 00:57:03.780 that we have here in the city of Denton, right? 00:57:03.780 --> 00:57:06.340 That makes it inherently different. 00:57:06.340 --> 00:57:08.360 And so I would just point that out 00:57:08.360 --> 00:57:10.880 when you're looking at those, just kind of remember, 00:57:10.880 --> 00:57:12.260 I think at the end of the day-- 00:57:12.260 --> 00:57:15.220 - As a former Georgetown electric customer, 00:57:15.220 --> 00:57:17.340 Georgetown's 100% renewable as well. 00:57:17.340 --> 00:57:20.500 - Yeah, and that's the other exception is Georgetown, 00:57:20.500 --> 00:57:21.940 and I think he pointed that out, 00:57:21.940 --> 00:57:24.580 and that's why the rate is where there is. 00:57:24.580 --> 00:57:28.820 And so again, I would just kind of float that out there. 00:57:28.820 --> 00:57:31.060 Staff's making a recommendation, ultimately. 00:57:31.060 --> 00:57:32.780 We know that the board's gonna make a recommendation 00:57:32.780 --> 00:57:35.460 to the council, just like the SFAC did as well. 00:57:35.460 --> 00:57:38.540 We'll communicate it to the council. 00:57:38.540 --> 00:57:42.060 Again, this is purely based on our consultants' 00:57:42.060 --> 00:57:45.700 recommendations and how they look at our total energy 00:57:45.700 --> 00:57:49.060 portfolio and how we arrive to the recommendation. 00:57:49.060 --> 00:57:52.340 Ultimately, the council will set the final priority. 00:57:52.340 --> 00:57:55.460 So, but you had some questions about grandfathering. 00:57:55.460 --> 00:57:56.660 I'll kind of defer to Marcella to see 00:57:56.660 --> 00:57:58.460 how she wants to answer that. 00:57:58.460 --> 00:58:00.820 - Yeah, so we're happy to send you a memo 00:58:00.820 --> 00:58:02.900 with some more information on this, confidentially, 00:58:02.900 --> 00:58:05.620 but we did receive an opinion from our legal council 00:58:05.620 --> 00:58:07.780 that grandfathering in our circumstance 00:58:07.780 --> 00:58:09.820 and not making a comment on anyone else 00:58:09.820 --> 00:58:12.180 who does potentially use grandfathering 00:58:12.180 --> 00:58:15.140 is a discriminatory rate for our rate payers. 00:58:15.140 --> 00:58:17.740 So their opinion is that we would be unable 00:58:17.740 --> 00:58:20.060 to implement a grandfathered rate 00:58:20.060 --> 00:58:21.380 because of the legal restrictions. 00:58:21.380 --> 00:58:24.300 So again, I'll send a memo with some more details on that, 00:58:24.300 --> 00:58:27.020 but there is that opinion that we have 00:58:27.020 --> 00:58:28.860 from our outside council. 00:58:28.860 --> 00:58:29.940 - That's good to know. 00:58:29.940 --> 00:58:31.300 - Appreciate that, but you know, 00:58:31.300 --> 00:58:32.940 sometimes when you shake somebody's hand 00:58:32.940 --> 00:58:34.660 and say you're gonna do something, you gotta do it, 00:58:34.660 --> 00:58:36.660 and I don't really care what y'all say. 00:58:39.540 --> 00:58:42.220 - Two more points I just wanted to cover. 00:58:42.220 --> 00:58:44.820 So we do say we have 100% renewable. 00:58:44.820 --> 00:58:47.140 We have a 100% renewable plan, 00:58:47.140 --> 00:58:51.940 but we also at the same time buy energy from ERCOT, 00:58:51.940 --> 00:58:54.820 which is, you know, has emissions portion, 00:58:54.820 --> 00:58:57.620 and we overproduce green energy. 00:58:57.620 --> 00:59:00.140 I don't know if it's exactly 110, 115% 00:59:00.140 --> 00:59:02.860 of our total debt and load is, 00:59:02.860 --> 00:59:06.220 we buy that in wind and solar and put it into ERCOT, 00:59:06.220 --> 00:59:09.220 and then we take back what our 100% we need, 00:59:09.220 --> 00:59:11.780 and then we also run the Denton Energy Center, 00:59:11.780 --> 00:59:13.420 which emits as well. 00:59:13.420 --> 00:59:15.940 So we keep saying, oh, it's 100%, 00:59:15.940 --> 00:59:17.620 but there's 100% with an asterisk, 00:59:17.620 --> 00:59:19.580 and I understand why the asterisk is there. 00:59:19.580 --> 00:59:21.860 We don't currently have the capability 00:59:21.860 --> 00:59:24.540 of 100% minute per minute matched, 00:59:24.540 --> 00:59:27.420 but there's still that asterisk. 00:59:27.420 --> 00:59:30.060 So saying that like, it's the same, 00:59:30.060 --> 00:59:32.820 it's clean energy, it's not necessarily 00:59:32.820 --> 00:59:37.940 a behind the meter renewable generator 00:59:37.940 --> 00:59:42.940 does, is 100% of that generation is greenhouse gas, 00:59:42.940 --> 00:59:45.460 where whenever it's coming off of the ERCOT grid, 00:59:45.460 --> 00:59:46.620 it may or may not be. 00:59:46.620 --> 00:59:50.620 And finally, this isn't, I wish 00:59:50.620 --> 00:59:53.860 that this could have included, 00:59:53.860 --> 00:59:55.300 and Greensense could include 00:59:55.300 --> 00:59:59.580 behind the meter storage as a value. 00:59:59.580 --> 01:00:01.780 That's, it's its own topic, 01:00:01.780 --> 01:00:05.180 but it's often interwoven with solar, 01:00:05.180 --> 01:00:08.420 because a lot of times you get solar and a battery, 01:00:08.420 --> 01:00:11.980 a storage unit to go with your solar unit. 01:00:11.980 --> 01:00:16.980 And I think we know DME has looked at grid scale storage 01:00:16.980 --> 01:00:19.180 and the prices are not there yet. 01:00:19.180 --> 01:00:21.140 It's not cost effective. 01:00:21.140 --> 01:00:24.020 But for customers that wanna have solar 01:00:24.020 --> 01:00:28.460 and their own storage, that does benefit. 01:00:28.460 --> 01:00:32.460 It doesn't have the same peak distribution expectation, 01:00:32.460 --> 01:00:37.140 perhaps, it has, if we look at 01:00:37.140 --> 01:00:39.860 the more forward thinking REPs, 01:00:39.860 --> 01:00:41.780 which not in the regulated side, 01:00:41.780 --> 01:00:44.060 but in the deregulated market, 01:00:44.060 --> 01:00:46.900 they are, they have agreements with their customers 01:00:46.900 --> 01:00:50.100 to manage those storage resources. 01:00:50.100 --> 01:00:53.740 They pay the customers to use the energy 01:00:53.740 --> 01:00:56.660 out of those batteries at much less than 01:00:56.660 --> 01:00:59.260 whatever the ERCOT price is, but much more than, 01:00:59.260 --> 01:01:03.060 like it's enough of a reward that customers willingly 01:01:03.060 --> 01:01:05.940 let their utilities cycle their batteries 01:01:05.940 --> 01:01:09.660 to save them money or get a check or things like that. 01:01:09.660 --> 01:01:13.060 And so I think the next phase of this, 01:01:13.060 --> 01:01:15.180 and currently Greensense has no incentives at all 01:01:15.180 --> 01:01:16.420 for battery storage. 01:01:16.420 --> 01:01:19.820 So I think the next phase of this would be 01:01:19.820 --> 01:01:21.500 battery storage in Greensense. 01:01:21.500 --> 01:01:26.060 And then is DME capable of implementing their own 01:01:26.060 --> 01:01:27.420 or partnering with somebody to do 01:01:27.420 --> 01:01:29.460 some of this smart resource, 01:01:29.460 --> 01:01:34.460 smart demand reduction, storage management? 01:01:34.460 --> 01:01:39.620 - Yeah, I think the short answer is yes to all that, right? 01:01:39.620 --> 01:01:42.740 So the sustainability group is looking at 01:01:42.740 --> 01:01:45.540 how to incorporate incentivizing batteries 01:01:45.540 --> 01:01:46.700 within the dollars that they have. 01:01:46.700 --> 01:01:49.300 Certainly, any additional dollars that go there 01:01:49.300 --> 01:01:52.660 can certainly help that, but I think what they've seen 01:01:52.660 --> 01:01:56.100 is they've seen a lot of interest in HVAC systems 01:01:56.100 --> 01:01:59.780 and weatherization, you know, insulation. 01:01:59.780 --> 01:02:01.140 I think that's where a lot of the dollars 01:02:01.140 --> 01:02:03.380 are going to currently, and there's a lot of people 01:02:03.380 --> 01:02:04.940 in the community that have that need 01:02:04.940 --> 01:02:06.780 versus people that need battery storage, right? 01:02:06.780 --> 01:02:08.860 But again, that is something that's there. 01:02:08.860 --> 01:02:10.180 As far as using battery storage 01:02:10.180 --> 01:02:12.260 in a demand side type of program, 01:02:12.260 --> 01:02:14.460 it is something that we're looking at. 01:02:14.460 --> 01:02:17.660 Bill's working on an RFP to try to implement 01:02:17.660 --> 01:02:20.340 some type of program that targets some level 01:02:20.340 --> 01:02:23.380 of our total load to try to reduce. 01:02:23.380 --> 01:02:26.180 So those are ongoing projects that we have, 01:02:26.180 --> 01:02:28.220 and we hope to bring that back to the board 01:02:28.220 --> 01:02:29.420 here in the near future. 01:02:29.420 --> 01:02:34.900 - I'm probably the biggest advocate 01:02:34.900 --> 01:02:37.380 for green energy that there is. 01:02:37.380 --> 01:02:40.140 However, the main problem that we have with green energy 01:02:40.140 --> 01:02:42.780 and even the programs that we had in the past 01:02:42.780 --> 01:02:44.820 is that everybody, regardless of income, 01:02:44.820 --> 01:02:48.740 is subsidizing the program for those that may not need 01:02:48.740 --> 01:02:50.940 or may not see the benefits. 01:02:52.060 --> 01:02:54.380 Wealthier customers tend to be the ones that get solar, 01:02:54.380 --> 01:02:55.940 tend to be the ones that get EVs, 01:02:55.940 --> 01:02:58.580 and they're often subsidized through programs 01:02:58.580 --> 01:02:59.860 that all of us are paying for, 01:02:59.860 --> 01:03:01.700 even those that can't afford it. 01:03:01.700 --> 01:03:07.460 So I understand the importance of solar energy. 01:03:07.460 --> 01:03:10.060 I think it's a good thing to have, 01:03:10.060 --> 01:03:11.220 but we have to do it correctly. 01:03:11.220 --> 01:03:13.100 And I think that the Greensense program 01:03:13.100 --> 01:03:16.820 is capable of benefiting more customers 01:03:16.820 --> 01:03:18.620 at various income levels. 01:03:18.620 --> 01:03:23.620 And until we can properly democratize the distribution 01:03:23.620 --> 01:03:27.420 of the green energy savings, 01:03:27.420 --> 01:03:29.420 I think that we have to be much more considerate 01:03:29.420 --> 01:03:30.260 of that fact. 01:03:30.260 --> 01:03:32.300 Who's benefiting from solar? 01:03:32.300 --> 01:03:34.100 And it's not our customers 01:03:34.100 --> 01:03:35.460 who need to benefit from it the most. 01:03:35.460 --> 01:03:37.940 It's the wealthier customers who don't see the benefits, 01:03:37.940 --> 01:03:40.500 or who don't see as much of a benefit 01:03:40.500 --> 01:03:42.580 as our lower income customers would. 01:03:42.580 --> 01:03:44.700 Just my two cents. 01:03:47.620 --> 01:03:49.700 - Yes, go ahead. - To dovetail with that. 01:03:49.700 --> 01:03:52.460 Well put, my concern was, 01:03:52.460 --> 01:03:54.740 so it's a net billing, so everybody's paying. 01:03:54.740 --> 01:04:00.660 What savings do the non-solar people get? 01:04:00.660 --> 01:04:02.260 Are they subsidizing those? 01:04:02.260 --> 01:04:03.900 So the question I have is, 01:04:03.900 --> 01:04:05.820 right now we're looking at about a million dollars, 01:04:05.820 --> 01:04:10.820 roughly, so that's with this number of solars. 01:04:10.820 --> 01:04:14.500 Do you have a projection, or is that fair to say? 01:04:14.500 --> 01:04:18.740 This is my concern, a projection for five years from now, 01:04:18.740 --> 01:04:20.860 I doubt if it'll be a million dollars, 01:04:20.860 --> 01:04:22.300 because to offset that, 01:04:22.300 --> 01:04:23.900 we're gonna have to have rate increases, 01:04:23.900 --> 01:04:25.700 or am I wrong with that? 01:04:25.700 --> 01:04:28.300 Possibly. - 1.46. 01:04:28.300 --> 01:04:33.580 - That's what I'm asking, is that number 01:04:33.580 --> 01:04:34.420 going to stay the same? 01:04:34.420 --> 01:04:35.260 Is it going to increase? 01:04:35.260 --> 01:04:39.700 And if it does, does that mean more cost for the, 01:04:39.700 --> 01:04:43.500 that's my question. 01:04:43.500 --> 01:04:46.060 It's a caveat, let's look at the crystal ball. 01:04:46.060 --> 01:04:47.980 What are we looking at further down the road? 01:04:47.980 --> 01:04:48.980 This looks nice now, 01:04:48.980 --> 01:04:52.300 but are we gonna have to increase it because of all of this? 01:04:52.300 --> 01:04:57.300 And if we do, we've gotta be careful how we do that. 01:04:57.300 --> 01:04:58.580 - Right. 01:04:58.580 --> 01:05:01.700 - So, give me a crystal ball, please. 01:05:01.700 --> 01:05:04.100 - Well, I can't give you the crystal ball, 01:05:04.100 --> 01:05:06.980 but I can tell you when we came back last year 01:05:06.980 --> 01:05:09.340 having this conversation, we did have some projections 01:05:09.340 --> 01:05:11.860 on what continuing down the path we were on 01:05:11.860 --> 01:05:13.220 was gonna cost us. 01:05:13.220 --> 01:05:16.420 We can retool that now with these new assumptions in there 01:05:16.420 --> 01:05:18.980 and come back to you with some information, 01:05:18.980 --> 01:05:20.940 but I can tell you anecdotally, 01:05:20.940 --> 01:05:22.740 we sort of draw the line in the sand 01:05:22.740 --> 01:05:27.580 with giving this differential to the Greensense programs, 01:05:27.580 --> 01:05:30.860 and it socializes that benefit across more customers 01:05:30.860 --> 01:05:33.260 versus just a small amount for the solar customers. 01:05:33.260 --> 01:05:36.180 So, to answer your question specifically, 01:05:36.180 --> 01:05:40.580 right now, it doesn't benefit our current rate payers 01:05:40.580 --> 01:05:41.940 by doing this shift. 01:05:41.940 --> 01:05:44.660 What it does benefit is those future systems 01:05:44.660 --> 01:05:47.820 that come online that we're paying more equitably 01:05:47.820 --> 01:05:50.820 will no longer have an upward impact on their rates. 01:05:50.820 --> 01:05:51.820 Does that make sense? 01:05:51.820 --> 01:05:52.660 - Yes, I think. 01:05:52.660 --> 01:05:54.300 So, to come back with you, 01:05:54.300 --> 01:05:56.740 we were doing 0.3 cents versus the nine 01:05:56.740 --> 01:05:58.580 or whatever the number is, 01:05:58.580 --> 01:06:00.620 is that the conservative, and I'll call it that, 01:06:00.620 --> 01:06:03.540 the conservative number that you're using 01:06:03.540 --> 01:06:06.580 help keep the, I'll use the term inflation number 01:06:06.580 --> 01:06:10.660 of going up every year, even though it's not profitable now, 01:06:10.660 --> 01:06:14.580 but it could be something that we are being due diligent on 01:06:14.580 --> 01:06:19.580 in protecting our other clients with this low number, 01:06:19.580 --> 01:06:23.620 only because as we increase it, which we will have to, 01:06:23.620 --> 01:06:28.620 at least we'll be adult about it. 01:06:28.620 --> 01:06:31.380 - Yes, it's-- 01:06:31.380 --> 01:06:33.860 - Does that make sense, what I said? 01:06:33.860 --> 01:06:34.700 - I think so, yeah. 01:06:34.700 --> 01:06:36.420 - 'Cause sometimes my wife just doesn't know, 01:06:36.420 --> 01:06:37.820 and it's encouraging. 01:06:37.820 --> 01:06:40.300 All right, thank you very much. 01:06:40.300 --> 01:06:42.700 And I'm in the same boat with Mr. Plotkin. 01:06:42.700 --> 01:06:45.180 You know, exact same boat. 01:06:45.180 --> 01:06:47.940 - So, can we get that projected, then? 01:06:47.940 --> 01:06:48.980 You said that. 01:06:48.980 --> 01:06:50.260 - Yes, I'll work on it. 01:06:50.260 --> 01:06:54.580 - All right. 01:06:54.580 --> 01:06:57.220 - Yes, so just a matter of chairman of the board. 01:06:57.220 --> 01:07:00.700 So, what the SFAC recommended 01:07:00.700 --> 01:07:03.260 was about a five cent blended rate 01:07:03.260 --> 01:07:05.020 is what they recommended. 01:07:05.020 --> 01:07:07.980 In addition to that, they also recommended 01:07:07.980 --> 01:07:09.700 shifting the savings bill. 01:07:09.700 --> 01:07:13.660 It was about, what, 250 at that to half a million? 01:07:13.660 --> 01:07:15.380 Or 350? 01:07:15.380 --> 01:07:16.620 - It was 350, yes. 01:07:16.620 --> 01:07:19.380 - So, shifting that to energy programs. 01:07:19.380 --> 01:07:21.300 And of course, they also had, 01:07:21.300 --> 01:07:24.500 the other recommendation was to give some consideration 01:07:24.500 --> 01:07:26.500 to some type of grandfathering. 01:07:26.500 --> 01:07:28.900 They didn't necessarily specify what that needed to be, 01:07:28.900 --> 01:07:30.980 but those were really their three recommendations. 01:07:30.980 --> 01:07:32.340 And what we're asking the board today, 01:07:32.340 --> 01:07:35.060 certainly you have staff's recommendation. 01:07:35.060 --> 01:07:36.260 You have the SFAC's recommendation. 01:07:36.260 --> 01:07:38.340 We're looking for the board's recommendation 01:07:38.340 --> 01:07:40.060 to provide that to the council. 01:07:40.060 --> 01:07:42.220 - Yes. 01:07:42.220 --> 01:07:45.580 - To ask the attorney, and you can stop me in mid-sentence. 01:07:45.580 --> 01:07:48.500 When we talk about grandfather clause, 01:07:48.500 --> 01:07:53.020 how is that different from a grandfather clause 01:07:53.020 --> 01:07:54.300 on zoning issues? 01:07:54.300 --> 01:07:59.780 - So, there's just two different bodies that review those. 01:07:59.780 --> 01:08:02.260 So, rates are reviewed by the PUCT 01:08:02.260 --> 01:08:06.380 and by kind of that regulatory body, 01:08:06.380 --> 01:08:10.020 whereas zoning is under a statutory program, 01:08:10.020 --> 01:08:12.780 under Chapter 212, under the local government code. 01:08:12.780 --> 01:08:16.100 So, they're just, they're two very different concepts, 01:08:16.100 --> 01:08:19.540 legally, and the statute allows for grandfathering 01:08:19.540 --> 01:08:22.420 in the zoning case, but it does not, 01:08:22.420 --> 01:08:24.260 from our legal council's opinion, 01:08:24.260 --> 01:08:28.860 allow for that in the case of rates. 01:08:28.860 --> 01:08:29.700 - What a shame. 01:08:29.700 --> 01:08:31.820 - I have a question. 01:08:31.820 --> 01:08:35.700 If they recommended the five cents, 01:08:35.700 --> 01:08:40.700 the blended rate, why is staff opposed to that? 01:08:40.700 --> 01:08:50.420 - So, what we had was a target window. 01:08:50.420 --> 01:08:55.180 We had the amount that we already know is equitable 01:08:55.180 --> 01:08:58.100 from what we pay for our PPAs. 01:08:58.100 --> 01:09:01.020 So, we have a clear avoided cost for that. 01:09:01.020 --> 01:09:03.460 Now, our whole portfolio isn't solar. 01:09:03.460 --> 01:09:06.540 We have wind, we work in the market. 01:09:06.540 --> 01:09:11.540 We do what's best to be an overall value for our customers, 01:09:11.540 --> 01:09:15.620 but we do exactly know what we pay for PPAs for solar. 01:09:15.620 --> 01:09:17.340 So, we had that mark. 01:09:17.340 --> 01:09:20.660 Then, the other extreme is that ERCOT market, 01:09:20.660 --> 01:09:22.740 which is everything together blended. 01:09:22.740 --> 01:09:25.580 So, it would make sense to have a middle line there 01:09:25.580 --> 01:09:27.300 just for conversation purposes, 01:09:27.300 --> 01:09:31.300 but we feel, as DME, that the most equitable part 01:09:31.300 --> 01:09:36.300 to pay solar for solar is to use the PPA avoided cost. 01:09:36.300 --> 01:09:38.100 - I agree. 01:09:38.100 --> 01:09:40.540 - And just Madam Chair, 01:09:40.540 --> 01:09:45.540 so that avoided PPA is all of our PPAs together, right? 01:09:45.540 --> 01:09:50.220 Where we were, if we look at when our latest contract was, 01:09:50.220 --> 01:09:52.300 then that five cents probably closer 01:09:52.300 --> 01:09:55.220 to the latest contract that we signed. 01:09:55.220 --> 01:09:58.780 So, again, we're not opposed to that 01:09:58.780 --> 01:10:00.260 or any recommendation the council makes, 01:10:00.260 --> 01:10:02.060 but again, our recommendation is based 01:10:02.060 --> 01:10:04.460 on what our total portfolio is at currently 01:10:04.460 --> 01:10:06.220 and it's closer to that four cents. 01:10:06.220 --> 01:10:09.020 - Okay, go ahead. 01:10:09.020 --> 01:10:15.700 - So, my inclination is to go with the ERCOT market price 01:10:15.700 --> 01:10:18.700 simply because DME exists today. 01:10:18.700 --> 01:10:20.700 DME has 64,000 customers. 01:10:20.700 --> 01:10:22.500 They've made their power planning. 01:10:22.500 --> 01:10:26.700 Now, a single customer installs solar. 01:10:26.700 --> 01:10:31.700 They self-generate some and then they sell back excess. 01:10:31.700 --> 01:10:37.380 Just the counterfactual of that customer 01:10:37.380 --> 01:10:40.940 not installing solar versus installing solar for DME 01:10:40.940 --> 01:10:44.980 is now there's an extra 4KW or something 01:10:44.980 --> 01:10:48.820 coming back onto the grid for a few hours every afternoon. 01:10:48.820 --> 01:10:53.820 The net benefit is that approximately seven cents. 01:10:55.740 --> 01:11:00.260 So, and then allowing that 100% of that benefit 01:11:00.260 --> 01:11:02.260 to flow back to that customer 01:11:02.260 --> 01:11:06.300 is encourages that solar installation. 01:11:06.300 --> 01:11:07.980 If we go with the five cents 01:11:07.980 --> 01:11:12.980 and that customer adds that additional solar panel 01:11:12.980 --> 01:11:16.420 like the new customer installs that solar array, 01:11:16.420 --> 01:11:18.660 then DME is effectively collecting 01:11:18.660 --> 01:11:20.620 a little bit of additional profit there. 01:11:20.620 --> 01:11:23.220 Now, I understand there are other charges 01:11:23.220 --> 01:11:26.220 to having a customer, 01:11:26.220 --> 01:11:31.220 but to just ERCOT is not 100% renewable. 01:11:31.220 --> 01:11:36.420 So, even having that customer add their little 4KW array 01:11:36.420 --> 01:11:40.900 does have a benefit for the ERCOT system. 01:11:40.900 --> 01:11:43.620 So, that's why I think my recommendation 01:11:43.620 --> 01:11:47.340 would be to go with the ERCOT avoided cost. 01:11:47.340 --> 01:11:50.620 I also feel if we cannot have 01:11:50.620 --> 01:11:55.620 a separate customers installed before a date rate, 01:11:55.620 --> 01:12:00.700 then we apply a taper for a few years 01:12:00.700 --> 01:12:04.940 to bring existing customers down to that rate. 01:12:04.940 --> 01:12:07.940 And that'd be all customers, all solar. 01:12:07.940 --> 01:12:10.980 If we can't separate the rate cases 01:12:10.980 --> 01:12:15.620 of those installed before July 1st, 2024. 01:12:15.620 --> 01:12:17.460 - And with that, you think that would help? 01:12:17.460 --> 01:12:18.580 Oh, if I may. 01:12:18.580 --> 01:12:19.540 - Microphone, please. 01:12:19.540 --> 01:12:22.020 - So, you think that will help with the, 01:12:22.020 --> 01:12:23.900 what we were talking about, the grandfather, 01:12:23.900 --> 01:12:28.100 so that they understand the decrease is gradual? 01:12:28.100 --> 01:12:30.300 Is that what you're referring to, then? 01:12:30.300 --> 01:12:32.020 - Yeah, and so, like, if we're going, 01:12:32.020 --> 01:12:33.860 go one cent less per year. 01:12:33.860 --> 01:12:36.380 So, if we're currently at 11 and go 10, nine, eight, seven, 01:12:36.380 --> 01:12:37.460 I don't know, something like that. 01:12:37.460 --> 01:12:40.660 - Would council think that's within the boundaries 01:12:40.660 --> 01:12:43.300 of one of those committees? 01:12:43.300 --> 01:12:46.260 - I think the answer is that 01:12:47.220 --> 01:12:50.020 we can certainly try to set an ordinance, 01:12:50.020 --> 01:12:52.940 a rate ordinance that sets that out. 01:12:52.940 --> 01:12:55.060 But remember, today's council 01:12:55.060 --> 01:12:56.700 cannot bind a future council, right? 01:12:56.700 --> 01:12:59.500 So, that plan could be there, but it could change. 01:12:59.500 --> 01:13:00.740 So, yeah, so just be aware. 01:13:00.740 --> 01:13:02.500 But I think Terry did want to respond 01:13:02.500 --> 01:13:04.540 to a comment you made about the solar. 01:13:04.540 --> 01:13:05.380 Go ahead, Terry. 01:13:05.380 --> 01:13:07.220 - Yes, Terry Nalte, DME. 01:13:07.220 --> 01:13:12.220 So, I just want to remind the board here 01:13:12.220 --> 01:13:15.060 that one of the aspects of the study 01:13:15.060 --> 01:13:19.900 was to look at the avoided costs, excuse me. 01:13:19.900 --> 01:13:22.860 And I think, Mr. Taylor, one of the things that you said 01:13:22.860 --> 01:13:25.620 that kind of heightened my awareness 01:13:25.620 --> 01:13:26.700 was the fact that, you know, 01:13:26.700 --> 01:13:31.140 if someone builds another rooftop solar unit, 01:13:31.140 --> 01:13:36.140 that it lowers the cost to DME and to the ERCOT market, 01:13:36.140 --> 01:13:38.220 and it helps with the emission profile. 01:13:38.220 --> 01:13:41.860 I'm not disputing it reduces the emission profile. 01:13:41.860 --> 01:13:44.220 However, I would just remind you 01:13:44.220 --> 01:13:47.020 that if you build a home in Denton today, 01:13:47.020 --> 01:13:53.100 you must connect that home to the distribution system of DME. 01:13:53.100 --> 01:13:57.100 You can't get an occupational permit 01:13:57.100 --> 01:14:00.180 unless you're connected to the DME system. 01:14:00.180 --> 01:14:04.220 We, as a utility, have a fiduciary responsibility 01:14:04.220 --> 01:14:07.220 to provide energy to that home at all time 01:14:07.220 --> 01:14:09.540 based upon the demand of the home. 01:14:09.540 --> 01:14:13.940 So, when that solar unit is not running, 01:14:13.940 --> 01:14:16.900 during the peak, which Jill showed in one of her slides, 01:14:16.900 --> 01:14:19.500 which takes place three or four hours 01:14:19.500 --> 01:14:23.460 after the peak surplus energy generation 01:14:23.460 --> 01:14:26.420 that's taking place at around noon or one o'clock, 01:14:26.420 --> 01:14:29.100 and it's seven or eight o'clock at night, 01:14:29.100 --> 01:14:34.100 that solar facility has no value to the overall ERCOT grid 01:14:34.100 --> 01:14:37.980 because we still have to meet that demand. 01:14:37.980 --> 01:14:39.980 We still have that cost. 01:14:39.980 --> 01:14:43.980 And so, I think rightfully so, the study says, 01:14:43.980 --> 01:14:48.220 let's value solar for the true value that it provides. 01:14:48.220 --> 01:14:50.700 And it is not providing value to us 01:14:50.700 --> 01:14:55.700 from a power supply perspective when we need it the most. 01:14:55.700 --> 01:14:59.380 And we have to then go out and buy more energy, 01:14:59.380 --> 01:15:03.300 whether it's market energy or whether it's running the deck, 01:15:03.300 --> 01:15:06.540 which we do in what I'll characterize 01:15:06.540 --> 01:15:11.540 as the most responsible way to back up our renewable portfolio 01:15:11.540 --> 01:15:14.100 with the lowest emission profile 01:15:14.100 --> 01:15:17.860 of any type of fossil fuel generator that we can. 01:15:17.860 --> 01:15:22.860 And so, I think we all read a lot of stuff in the media, 01:15:22.860 --> 01:15:28.140 and we hear that, hey, this solar resource 01:15:28.140 --> 01:15:31.660 is going to avoid additional generation 01:15:31.660 --> 01:15:33.660 that would emit carbon. 01:15:33.660 --> 01:15:35.740 And that's just not the truth. 01:15:35.740 --> 01:15:39.140 I can tell you from someone who operates the system 01:15:39.140 --> 01:15:41.260 that it just doesn't work that way. 01:15:41.260 --> 01:15:46.020 - So, I just wanna, you've said, 01:15:46.020 --> 01:15:53.180 you said that this solar array doesn't have this value, 01:15:53.180 --> 01:15:57.980 but if the solar array, if you just ignore in your planning 01:15:57.980 --> 01:16:00.300 that there's a solar array on that roof, 01:16:00.300 --> 01:16:04.660 and you just, you buy power for it, you buy PPAs for it, 01:16:04.660 --> 01:16:05.980 you do all those things, 01:16:05.980 --> 01:16:10.140 and then it is, and you let those extra generation 01:16:10.140 --> 01:16:14.420 just be sold back on our COTS market, it's worth seven cents. 01:16:14.420 --> 01:16:19.020 So that's, I understand that there's more to a grid 01:16:19.020 --> 01:16:21.860 than just that net generation, 01:16:21.860 --> 01:16:25.220 and that you need to have the capability 01:16:25.220 --> 01:16:27.980 to meet those demands in off hours. 01:16:27.980 --> 01:16:30.140 - Yeah, those-- - But you just said, 01:16:30.140 --> 01:16:34.100 like, if you just plan as if that's not there, 01:16:34.100 --> 01:16:37.380 and then you sell back the excess to ERCOT, 01:16:37.380 --> 01:16:39.300 which in the past has been like the worst, 01:16:39.300 --> 01:16:42.460 least efficient, lowest value thing you could do, 01:16:42.460 --> 01:16:44.220 it's still worth seven cents. 01:16:44.220 --> 01:16:46.220 So, because that's the average price 01:16:46.220 --> 01:16:48.460 during a solar curve in ERCOT. 01:16:48.460 --> 01:16:52.100 Because, sure, in October, the peak's at eight p.m. 01:16:52.100 --> 01:16:55.260 In July, August, and September, 01:16:55.260 --> 01:16:57.860 the peak's at five p.m. or four p.m. 01:16:57.860 --> 01:16:59.700 And so that curve that shows that 50-- 01:16:59.700 --> 01:17:01.260 - Except seven p.m., seven or eight p.m. 01:17:01.260 --> 01:17:03.700 - Peak price, perhaps, not peak load. 01:17:03.700 --> 01:17:05.380 - Peak load. - And peak price. 01:17:05.380 --> 01:17:08.380 - The last four CPs for the last five years 01:17:08.380 --> 01:17:11.660 have all been between like four 30 and five 30 p.m. 01:17:11.660 --> 01:17:14.900 And that's the coincident peaks in the ERCOT grid. 01:17:14.900 --> 01:17:19.900 So, while the annual average hourly peak might be at eight p.m., 01:17:19.900 --> 01:17:25.180 the true peaks in summer are in daytime hours. 01:17:25.180 --> 01:17:30.180 - And fair enough, but that's because large industrials 01:17:31.220 --> 01:17:34.980 reduce their load during those peak demand times 01:17:34.980 --> 01:17:37.300 because the prices are so high. 01:17:37.300 --> 01:17:41.420 And so, you as a homeowner, a rooftop solar owner, 01:17:41.420 --> 01:17:44.540 you're not necessarily reducing your demand 01:17:44.540 --> 01:17:47.940 unless you own a battery and you've stored that energy 01:17:47.940 --> 01:17:49.780 for later use. 01:17:49.780 --> 01:17:52.620 So, I understand what you're saying. 01:17:52.620 --> 01:17:55.700 I'm just saying from a practical perspective, 01:17:55.700 --> 01:17:59.380 I still have to have sufficient resources 01:17:59.380 --> 01:18:01.700 that I've purchased. 01:18:01.700 --> 01:18:04.620 And so, it's not worth seven cents 01:18:04.620 --> 01:18:06.940 at one or two o'clock in the afternoon. 01:18:06.940 --> 01:18:11.500 It's worth probably one cent or two cent. 01:18:11.500 --> 01:18:14.820 I can show you the hourly curves that we, 01:18:14.820 --> 01:18:18.340 if we sell that back into the ERCOT market, 01:18:18.340 --> 01:18:19.180 that's what it'd be. 01:18:19.180 --> 01:18:22.060 So, if we have, let's just say we have a four cent 01:18:22.060 --> 01:18:25.540 average solar price from our long-term PPAs. 01:18:25.540 --> 01:18:28.100 At one or two o'clock in the afternoon, 01:18:28.100 --> 01:18:30.500 if we're in a surplus situation, 01:18:30.500 --> 01:18:33.500 we're selling that energy back for one cent. 01:18:33.500 --> 01:18:37.260 We're losing three cents on that energy. 01:18:37.260 --> 01:18:40.420 That's the reality of how the market works. 01:18:40.420 --> 01:18:43.100 So, when these rooftop solar units 01:18:43.100 --> 01:18:45.900 are producing surplus energy, 01:18:45.900 --> 01:18:47.420 pushing it back into our grid, 01:18:47.420 --> 01:18:51.420 it's worth the lease to us 01:18:51.420 --> 01:18:54.140 at any other time of the day. 01:18:54.140 --> 01:18:56.540 Now, we don't reflect that. 01:18:56.540 --> 01:18:59.860 Jill's analysis did look at hourly prices, 01:18:59.860 --> 01:19:01.060 but at the end of the day, 01:19:01.060 --> 01:19:04.020 it's looking at what the, as you compare it, 01:19:04.020 --> 01:19:09.020 to the price of our portfolio of solar resources, 01:19:09.020 --> 01:19:13.540 which benefits every customer in the service territory. 01:19:13.540 --> 01:19:17.260 And so, just from an economic perspective, 01:19:17.260 --> 01:19:21.420 if I'm debating on whether to build a solar resource 01:19:21.420 --> 01:19:24.980 on the top of my home or to buy it from DME, 01:19:24.980 --> 01:19:27.220 on a dollar per KW hour, 01:19:27.220 --> 01:19:30.780 DME can do it much cheaper 01:19:30.780 --> 01:19:34.380 than that resource can do it on its own. 01:19:34.380 --> 01:19:39.380 That homeowner still gets the full value 01:19:39.380 --> 01:19:43.260 of the 12 1/2 cents avoided payment 01:19:43.260 --> 01:19:45.860 it would have made to DME. 01:19:45.860 --> 01:19:48.820 But the surplus that it's pushing back to us 01:19:48.820 --> 01:19:53.420 is only worth one or two cents when it's pushing back. 01:19:53.420 --> 01:19:55.780 - So, it was my understanding the seven cents rate 01:19:55.780 --> 01:19:59.500 was the hour per hour matched, or caught price. 01:19:59.500 --> 01:20:02.060 - I don't know. - Was that not correct? 01:20:02.060 --> 01:20:03.460 - Yeah, it's an hourly, 01:20:03.460 --> 01:20:08.380 it's a full year's hourly analysis, 01:20:08.380 --> 01:20:12.900 and it looks at how much the solar's producing, 01:20:12.900 --> 01:20:16.180 and it ties it to the, or caught market price every hour, 01:20:16.180 --> 01:20:19.500 plus it accounts for ancillary services, 01:20:19.500 --> 01:20:22.700 plus it accounts for any credit 01:20:22.700 --> 01:20:27.700 for not being on peak for transmission at that time, 01:20:27.700 --> 01:20:30.020 and then it is adjusted for losses 01:20:30.020 --> 01:20:32.580 because there's the savings and losses 01:20:32.580 --> 01:20:34.580 'cause it's not going across the system. 01:20:34.580 --> 01:20:39.700 And also to follow up on your comment earlier, 01:20:39.700 --> 01:20:42.540 looking at that table five one, 01:20:42.540 --> 01:20:45.820 a lot of those avoided costs are right in that seven cent 01:20:45.820 --> 01:20:49.460 range because a lot of it is based on the or caught market. 01:20:50.620 --> 01:20:52.900 And Austin Energies is the same thing. 01:20:52.900 --> 01:20:55.580 It's a similar six, seven cent rate, 01:20:55.580 --> 01:20:57.540 and then they did include it in addition 01:20:57.540 --> 01:20:59.060 on their first societal benefits 01:20:59.060 --> 01:21:01.500 'cause they're not 100% renewable. 01:21:01.500 --> 01:21:03.380 - And we are. - Yes, and you are. 01:21:03.380 --> 01:21:06.420 And so, and again, so yes, so like on average, 01:21:06.420 --> 01:21:09.780 these utilities that are doing just the avoided costs 01:21:09.780 --> 01:21:12.620 are looking at or caught average of around seven cents. 01:21:12.620 --> 01:21:17.580 For Denton, the solar generating, 01:21:17.580 --> 01:21:21.900 if we go back to that graph, 01:21:21.900 --> 01:21:25.900 the power purchase agreements Denton's buying 01:21:25.900 --> 01:21:28.300 is this exact green profile. 01:21:28.300 --> 01:21:31.940 They're producing the most at noon around lunch. 01:21:31.940 --> 01:21:36.140 And so from an avoided cost perspective, 01:21:36.140 --> 01:21:37.580 that is the most comparable 01:21:37.580 --> 01:21:39.180 because it's the exact same resource. 01:21:39.180 --> 01:21:40.220 It produces the same way. 01:21:40.220 --> 01:21:42.340 It's all dependent on the sun. 01:21:42.340 --> 01:21:44.080 But these larger solar, 01:21:46.620 --> 01:21:47.500 not community solar, 01:21:47.500 --> 01:21:49.660 but like these larger solar installations 01:21:49.660 --> 01:21:53.620 are definitely much more economical than rooftop solar. 01:21:53.620 --> 01:21:56.180 So that's why it comes out to about four cents. 01:21:56.180 --> 01:21:57.220 - Thank you. 01:21:57.220 --> 01:21:59.220 - I'm not sure we're gonna come to consensus. 01:21:59.220 --> 01:22:02.380 So what direction do we want to go? 01:22:02.380 --> 01:22:09.500 I know for me, I wanna go with the cost of service 01:22:09.500 --> 01:22:11.460 for the PPAs. 01:22:11.460 --> 01:22:15.540 And I agree with going into green cents 01:22:15.540 --> 01:22:18.060 because the vast majority of the public 01:22:18.060 --> 01:22:22.220 will benefit from that versus the people 01:22:22.220 --> 01:22:24.820 that can afford to put a solar panel on their house. 01:22:24.820 --> 01:22:27.900 I'll go over to Aaron. 01:22:27.900 --> 01:22:35.700 - Yeah, I think that's one item we have to tackle on this. 01:22:35.700 --> 01:22:41.020 So yes, I feel similar to you on that. 01:22:43.140 --> 01:22:45.700 - I think I know where you're going. 01:22:45.700 --> 01:22:47.340 - Yeah, I agree with you. 01:22:47.340 --> 01:22:52.000 When solar is producing on a rooftop, 01:22:52.000 --> 01:22:54.780 it's producing everywhere else simultaneously. 01:22:54.780 --> 01:22:56.840 So the cost of solar, 01:22:56.840 --> 01:23:00.660 the benefit of solar is only occurring at that point. 01:23:00.660 --> 01:23:04.100 And that's the point in which the price savings 01:23:04.100 --> 01:23:06.220 for our perspective comes into play 01:23:06.220 --> 01:23:09.260 is when is at peak generation. 01:23:09.260 --> 01:23:12.900 We're not producing solar at 2 a.m. in the morning, 01:23:12.900 --> 01:23:14.700 but we're still paying people 01:23:14.700 --> 01:23:17.120 as if they are getting that 2 a.m. in the morning rate. 01:23:17.120 --> 01:23:18.440 So it doesn't make sense to me. 01:23:18.440 --> 01:23:20.500 So I have to agree. 01:23:20.500 --> 01:23:25.940 The model, the three cent model makes the most sense. 01:23:25.940 --> 01:23:26.980 - Almost four cents. 01:23:26.980 --> 01:23:28.940 - Yeah, 3.7, yeah. 01:23:28.940 --> 01:23:31.340 I think it makes the most sense for right now 01:23:31.340 --> 01:23:35.820 with the hope that more people benefit from green cents 01:23:35.820 --> 01:23:40.360 at varying income levels as opposed to what it is now. 01:23:40.360 --> 01:23:42.980 Maybe we could look at ways to lower the cost of solar 01:23:42.980 --> 01:23:45.260 for people in lower income brackets. 01:23:45.260 --> 01:23:46.780 That might be nice, 01:23:46.780 --> 01:23:49.060 but it still doesn't fundamentally solve the problem 01:23:49.060 --> 01:23:51.500 that we're not making solar at 2 a.m. in the morning. 01:23:51.500 --> 01:23:53.300 - Mr. Cheek. 01:23:53.300 --> 01:23:58.140 - Yeah, we talked at consideration about industries running, 01:23:58.140 --> 01:24:00.820 turning down their usage at peak hours, 01:24:00.820 --> 01:24:02.300 but we don't charge them any different. 01:24:02.300 --> 01:24:05.060 We charge them on 12 cents at six, 01:24:05.060 --> 01:24:08.960 and we charge them 12 cents at six o'clock in the morning. 01:24:08.960 --> 01:24:10.860 So, I mean, for us, 01:24:10.860 --> 01:24:12.960 we obviously measure that on our purchase, right? 01:24:12.960 --> 01:24:14.400 We're trying to get it cheap as we can, 01:24:14.400 --> 01:24:16.060 and we're always trying to get everything 01:24:16.060 --> 01:24:18.060 as cheap as we can, but anyway, 01:24:18.060 --> 01:24:20.180 I think Tony actually summed it up best 01:24:20.180 --> 01:24:22.420 at the beginning of this last conversation. 01:24:22.420 --> 01:24:24.860 We'll just, we'll bring forward to them. 01:24:24.860 --> 01:24:27.300 You know, some of the members of the PUB suggested 01:24:27.300 --> 01:24:29.700 that we make a consideration for people 01:24:29.700 --> 01:24:32.620 who have made this commitment 20 years ago, 01:24:32.620 --> 01:24:34.760 and others didn't. 01:24:37.900 --> 01:24:39.980 - Tony's sticking with it. 01:24:39.980 --> 01:24:46.100 - So the value of solar in the ERCOT market is seven cents. 01:24:46.100 --> 01:24:51.340 So for us to pay solar rooftop owners 01:24:51.340 --> 01:24:53.540 through three and a half cents 01:24:53.540 --> 01:24:56.180 means DME is profiting by about, you know, 01:24:56.180 --> 01:24:59.960 three point whatever cents per kilowatt 01:24:59.960 --> 01:25:03.140 that a customer chooses to put solar on their rooftop. 01:25:03.140 --> 01:25:05.540 You could talk about, oh, well, in 2019, 01:25:05.540 --> 01:25:08.740 we signed this deal for some $20 megawatt solar. 01:25:08.740 --> 01:25:11.080 Well, you can't buy that in ERCOT today. 01:25:11.080 --> 01:25:13.780 And so we got a really good price back then, 01:25:13.780 --> 01:25:18.780 but to offset your new solar roof today 01:25:18.780 --> 01:25:23.420 based on a PPA from six years ago at a really good price, 01:25:23.420 --> 01:25:25.460 to me just seems unfair. 01:25:25.460 --> 01:25:30.660 If we pay the market price, that just seems inherently fair 01:25:30.660 --> 01:25:35.660 and doesn't have a net added cost to DME. 01:25:35.660 --> 01:25:38.540 So that's why I stick with the seven cents. 01:25:38.540 --> 01:25:45.700 - Would you go back to the chart again with the seven foreign? 01:25:45.700 --> 01:25:50.460 No, next one. 01:25:50.460 --> 01:25:52.460 One we had broken down with it. 01:25:52.460 --> 01:25:54.700 - The one that shows the savings. 01:25:54.700 --> 01:25:55.540 - Oh. 01:25:55.540 --> 01:25:57.420 - And the blended. 01:25:57.420 --> 01:25:59.180 - Oh, the blended, hold on, sorry. 01:26:00.900 --> 01:26:01.920 - This one? 01:26:01.920 --> 01:26:02.760 - No, one more. 01:26:02.760 --> 01:26:05.540 - Thank you. - Okay. 01:26:05.540 --> 01:26:06.380 - That one. 01:26:06.380 --> 01:26:09.220 - I would agree with going with a PPA, 01:26:09.220 --> 01:26:12.460 the three cents or four cents has been brought up. 01:26:12.460 --> 01:26:14.980 But I'd like to ask, I'd like for that to go forward. 01:26:14.980 --> 01:26:17.500 But then I really would like the idea of, 01:26:17.500 --> 01:26:19.700 not the grandfather, but some kind of stair step. 01:26:19.700 --> 01:26:22.540 And I'm curious as to when can that be brought up? 01:26:22.540 --> 01:26:23.820 Can that be included in this 01:26:23.820 --> 01:26:25.380 or does it need to be separate? 01:26:28.860 --> 01:26:30.900 - It kind of depends on the direction 01:26:30.900 --> 01:26:34.860 the board would like to go and staff and council. 01:26:34.860 --> 01:26:39.060 I mean, ultimately I can only give, you know, 01:26:39.060 --> 01:26:42.640 an opinion and it's ultimately up to y'all's decision. 01:26:42.640 --> 01:26:44.260 - I'm in agreement with chair. 01:26:44.260 --> 01:26:46.940 - I'd be in agreement with that, yeah. 01:26:46.940 --> 01:26:47.760 - Thank you. 01:26:47.760 --> 01:26:50.380 - I think we have consensus on that, right? 01:26:50.380 --> 01:26:51.660 Yes, okay. 01:26:51.660 --> 01:26:55.380 Wow, this is the liveliest discussion 01:26:55.380 --> 01:26:56.740 we've had in a long time. 01:26:56.740 --> 01:26:57.840 It's been fun. 01:26:59.380 --> 01:27:00.900 Do you have what you need? 01:27:00.900 --> 01:27:01.740 - I think we do. 01:27:01.740 --> 01:27:02.560 - Okay. - Thank you. 01:27:02.560 --> 01:27:03.400 - All right. 01:27:03.400 --> 01:27:05.820 - Okay. 01:27:05.820 --> 01:27:08.420 - Did you have something else to say? 01:27:08.420 --> 01:27:12.980 - So just for my understanding, we're going with the, 01:27:12.980 --> 01:27:14.220 oh, sorry. 01:27:14.220 --> 01:27:15.220 - Microphone, yeah. 01:27:15.220 --> 01:27:21.020 - From my understanding, we're going with the 3.79 01:27:21.020 --> 01:27:24.700 with a conversation continuing on the grandfathering. 01:27:24.700 --> 01:27:25.540 - Yes. 01:27:25.540 --> 01:27:27.500 - And the savings also going towards-- 01:27:27.500 --> 01:27:28.840 - Green cents. - Green cents. 01:27:28.840 --> 01:27:29.680 - Yes. 01:27:29.680 --> 01:27:31.440 - Okay, thank you. 01:27:31.440 --> 01:27:33.960 - All right, thank you. 01:27:33.960 --> 01:27:35.180 - We'll get you that projection, thank you. 01:27:35.180 --> 01:27:37.220 - Yeah, thank you. 01:27:37.220 --> 01:27:40.140 Okay, next item, receive a report, hold a discussion 01:27:40.140 --> 01:27:43.100 and give staff direction on the proposed solid waste water, 01:27:43.100 --> 01:27:47.360 wastewater and electric rates for 2024, 2025. 01:27:47.360 --> 01:27:53.380 Hopefully it's not as long, but maybe it is. 01:27:53.380 --> 01:27:54.340 - It may be. 01:27:59.460 --> 01:28:00.900 - All right. 01:28:00.900 --> 01:28:02.840 Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board, 01:28:02.840 --> 01:28:04.940 Matt Hamilton, Budget Manager. 01:28:04.940 --> 01:28:07.580 Here to present this morning, 01:28:07.580 --> 01:28:12.260 the preliminary fiscal year 24, 25 utility rates. 01:28:12.260 --> 01:28:18.740 So today we'll talk a little bit about 01:28:18.740 --> 01:28:21.620 the rate change history and then get into 01:28:21.620 --> 01:28:24.600 the specific proposed utility rates 01:28:24.600 --> 01:28:26.140 for each of the four utilities 01:28:26.140 --> 01:28:29.340 and then talk a little bit about next steps 01:28:29.340 --> 01:28:32.080 and what the calendar looks like going forward. 01:28:32.080 --> 01:28:36.620 So this is a slide that we had brought forward, 01:28:36.620 --> 01:28:41.620 I believe last time, showing the history of rate increases 01:28:41.620 --> 01:28:44.860 for the four utilities and as we discussed, 01:28:44.860 --> 01:28:48.580 we really haven't had many rate increases 01:28:48.580 --> 01:28:50.540 over the last several years, 01:28:50.540 --> 01:28:54.980 in particular for water and solid waste. 01:28:54.980 --> 01:28:58.140 We haven't had rate increases in over five years. 01:28:58.140 --> 01:29:02.020 In fact, particularly for solid waste, 01:29:02.020 --> 01:29:07.020 we saw some significant decreases in 2019, 2020 and 2021. 01:29:07.020 --> 01:29:12.980 And during this time, as you know, 01:29:12.980 --> 01:29:16.180 what we've seen in the economy is an increase in prices, 01:29:16.180 --> 01:29:18.380 an increase in inflation, 01:29:18.380 --> 01:29:21.460 an increase in the cost of personnel and equipment. 01:29:21.460 --> 01:29:26.460 So what we are looking at for 2025 are rate increases 01:29:26.460 --> 01:29:33.180 for each of the four utilities 01:29:33.180 --> 01:29:37.940 to try and meet the revenue sufficiency requirements 01:29:37.940 --> 01:29:39.420 that we believe will be necessary 01:29:39.420 --> 01:29:41.900 going into the next fiscal year. 01:29:41.900 --> 01:29:46.700 So starting with solid waste and recycling, 01:29:46.700 --> 01:29:50.820 what we are proposing is a one and a half percent increase 01:29:50.820 --> 01:29:54.660 to residential service and commercial service. 01:29:54.660 --> 01:29:59.260 As you'll see the rate increase, 01:29:59.260 --> 01:30:02.140 whether you have a 65 gallon cart 01:30:02.140 --> 01:30:05.260 or a more typical 95 gallon cart, 01:30:05.260 --> 01:30:09.340 a residential bill would increase either 31 cents or 30, 01:30:09.340 --> 01:30:12.020 oh, sorry, 31 cents or 38 cents. 01:30:12.020 --> 01:30:17.260 Additionally, we're proposing an increase 01:30:17.260 --> 01:30:22.260 in the roll-off and compactor rates per poll of $25 for each 01:30:22.260 --> 01:30:25.580 and then a small increase 01:30:25.580 --> 01:30:29.460 in the monthly container rentals for each of those. 01:30:29.460 --> 01:30:35.220 When we did our analysis 01:30:35.220 --> 01:30:38.860 and we have received some preliminary information 01:30:38.860 --> 01:30:41.580 from our consultant who is conducting 01:30:41.580 --> 01:30:43.700 the solid waste cost of service study 01:30:44.580 --> 01:30:48.620 that the landfill is significantly under recovering. 01:30:48.620 --> 01:30:51.020 And so part of what we've looked at, 01:30:51.020 --> 01:30:53.140 not just with solid waste, but all the utilities 01:30:53.140 --> 01:30:58.140 is really trying to right size the rates 01:30:58.140 --> 01:31:05.540 to align with full cost recovery. 01:31:05.540 --> 01:31:09.180 And so when we looked at the landfill in particular, 01:31:09.180 --> 01:31:14.180 we felt that $1.50 across all utilities 01:31:15.100 --> 01:31:17.780 rates with the exception of shingles 01:31:17.780 --> 01:31:21.180 would be appropriate to increase the revenue 01:31:21.180 --> 01:31:25.380 to meet the expenditures associated with the landfill. 01:31:25.380 --> 01:31:29.460 One item that we are proposing to add 01:31:29.460 --> 01:31:34.460 is a non-resident electronics disposal fee. 01:31:34.460 --> 01:31:39.940 So currently, whether you are a resident or non-resident, 01:31:39.940 --> 01:31:42.820 you'll pay $10 per item. 01:31:42.820 --> 01:31:47.820 What we are proposing is a $20 non-resident fee. 01:31:47.820 --> 01:31:55.140 And then in regard to commercial trash, 01:31:55.140 --> 01:31:57.540 proposing a 1.5% increase. 01:31:57.540 --> 01:32:03.460 So in summary, a 1.5% increase 01:32:03.460 --> 01:32:05.660 for residential and commercial cart service, 01:32:05.660 --> 01:32:09.580 the $25 increase for the roll-off and compactor rates 01:32:09.580 --> 01:32:14.100 along with small increases for the rental of the containers 01:32:14.100 --> 01:32:15.120 and a flat. 01:32:39.580 --> 01:32:41.740 (silence) 01:33:09.580 --> 01:33:11.740 (silence) 01:33:39.780 --> 01:33:41.940 (silence) 01:34:09.580 --> 01:34:11.740 (silence) 01:34:11.740 --> 01:34:15.260 - It looks like it's back on. 01:34:15.260 --> 01:34:17.340 - Oh, looks like we're back on, okay. 01:34:17.340 --> 01:34:21.500 - Yeah, it doesn't look like it's still, yes. 01:34:21.500 --> 01:34:22.780 - Yeah, it's still not on. 01:34:22.780 --> 01:34:33.140 - Are you able to advance the slides? 01:34:33.140 --> 01:34:35.180 - I believe I am, I think at this point, 01:34:35.180 --> 01:34:37.300 we may just not be able to get the screen down. 01:34:37.300 --> 01:34:38.140 - That's okay. 01:34:38.140 --> 01:34:39.220 - You didn't say it's back on. 01:34:39.220 --> 01:34:42.620 - Okay, all right, well let's, we can see it just fine. 01:34:42.620 --> 01:34:43.460 - Okay. 01:34:43.460 --> 01:34:45.700 - I have a quick question on this slide. 01:34:45.700 --> 01:34:46.540 - Sure. 01:34:46.540 --> 01:34:49.580 - Were we on the next slide a second ago? 01:34:49.580 --> 01:34:50.840 - The previous? 01:34:50.840 --> 01:34:54.380 - We were on the summary. 01:34:54.380 --> 01:34:57.060 - We just finished up, yeah. 01:34:57.060 --> 01:34:58.900 - Does that $1.50 increase, 01:34:58.900 --> 01:35:03.900 is that expected to cover the cost of the length of operation? 01:35:03.900 --> 01:35:07.820 - We believe it will, 01:35:09.620 --> 01:35:12.060 get very close to covering the cost 01:35:12.060 --> 01:35:15.120 of the landfill operation next fiscal year. 01:35:15.120 --> 01:35:21.260 Looking forward, I think those details 01:35:21.260 --> 01:35:26.140 will be part of the full cost of service conclusions, 01:35:26.140 --> 01:35:28.900 but, yes. 01:35:28.900 --> 01:35:38.180 Okay, so just taking a look at, 01:35:39.380 --> 01:35:40.860 the preliminary rates in regard 01:35:40.860 --> 01:35:43.220 to residential solid waste and recycling bills. 01:35:43.220 --> 01:35:46.860 So as we look at 96 gallon cart rates 01:35:46.860 --> 01:35:50.420 for municipal providers in the Metroplex, 01:35:50.420 --> 01:35:54.620 what you'll see is Denton is kind of middle of the road, 01:35:54.620 --> 01:35:59.620 and the proposed 36 cent, I believe it was, increase, 01:35:59.620 --> 01:36:03.940 still keeps us in the middle. 01:36:03.940 --> 01:36:08.900 These preliminary rates for the other cities 01:36:08.900 --> 01:36:12.000 do not include any rate increase 01:36:12.000 --> 01:36:17.000 that they may be proposing in fiscal year 2025. 01:36:17.000 --> 01:36:23.700 And so we would anticipate that Denton would remain 01:36:23.700 --> 01:36:26.760 kind of middle of the road for municipal providers. 01:36:26.760 --> 01:36:35.740 Okay, taking a look at water and wastewater. 01:36:35.740 --> 01:36:39.900 Starting with water, we're proposing a 3% rate increase 01:36:39.900 --> 01:36:43.300 for residential water service and commercial water service. 01:36:43.300 --> 01:36:48.060 This does include the customers 01:36:48.060 --> 01:36:49.580 that are outside of the corporate limits, 01:36:49.580 --> 01:36:53.040 which would also see their rates increase 3% as well. 01:36:53.040 --> 01:36:56.100 You'll see in the percent change column there, 01:36:56.100 --> 01:37:01.100 2.8% to 3%, and really that's just due 01:37:01.100 --> 01:37:03.160 to rounding the pennies. 01:37:04.780 --> 01:37:07.680 But on average, a 3% increase. 01:37:07.680 --> 01:37:13.420 Additionally, we're proposing an increase 01:37:13.420 --> 01:37:16.620 in the wholesale raw water rates 01:37:16.620 --> 01:37:19.600 for the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. 01:37:19.600 --> 01:37:21.460 The rate is currently 90 cents. 01:37:21.460 --> 01:37:26.020 However, our agreement contract currently states 01:37:26.020 --> 01:37:31.020 that the rate should be 85% of Dallas's rate. 01:37:31.020 --> 01:37:33.700 And so by increasing it to 96 cents, 01:37:33.700 --> 01:37:36.820 it aligns with the existing contract, 01:37:36.820 --> 01:37:40.860 which would put the rate at 85% of the city of Dallas's rate. 01:37:40.860 --> 01:37:43.500 Yep. 01:37:43.500 --> 01:37:45.620 - So does that all fall within the 3% 01:37:45.620 --> 01:37:47.620 of what we saw in the slide before? 01:37:47.620 --> 01:37:48.900 - It does not. 01:37:48.900 --> 01:37:50.940 This would be-- - An addition. 01:37:50.940 --> 01:37:55.940 - Yes, yeah, each of these lines are specific rate, 01:37:55.940 --> 01:37:59.220 rate lines and rate book, yeah. 01:37:59.220 --> 01:38:01.020 - And just for these Upper Trinity rates, 01:38:01.020 --> 01:38:05.900 are these per 1,000 gallons to the Upper Trinity? 01:38:05.900 --> 01:38:07.500 - They are, yep. 01:38:07.500 --> 01:38:11.740 - And then the, is treated cheaper than-- 01:38:11.740 --> 01:38:16.020 - It is, and that's our next recommendation. 01:38:16.020 --> 01:38:21.020 And so as we took time and did an analysis 01:38:21.020 --> 01:38:26.460 of all our rates, what we found is that 01:38:26.460 --> 01:38:31.340 the current wholesale treated water rates to Upper Trinity 01:38:31.340 --> 01:38:36.340 is at 61 cents, which is lower than you'll notice, 01:38:36.340 --> 01:38:39.060 the wholesale raw water. 01:38:39.060 --> 01:38:42.740 And so the treated water includes the chemical, 01:38:42.740 --> 01:38:46.980 the energy, the infrastructure needed to treat the water, 01:38:46.980 --> 01:38:50.340 and we have been selling it at a price 01:38:50.340 --> 01:38:52.220 lower than the raw water. 01:38:52.220 --> 01:38:55.740 So our proposal is to raise that to $1.25, 01:38:55.740 --> 01:39:00.100 which we believe does cover the cost of treating the water, 01:39:00.100 --> 01:39:05.220 which would be a 64 cent increase to that rate. 01:39:05.220 --> 01:39:09.740 - Even that seems like a very low rate, 01:39:09.740 --> 01:39:12.780 especially with our multi-hundred million dollars 01:39:12.780 --> 01:39:14.740 in planned expenses. 01:39:14.740 --> 01:39:18.060 There's also a capital cost to deliver treated water, 01:39:18.060 --> 01:39:21.100 and we're paying a capital cost now to fill out our plan. 01:39:21.100 --> 01:39:26.100 So I just want to make sure that $1.25 per thousand gallons, 01:39:26.100 --> 01:39:31.100 I just want to keep an eye on that in the near future, 01:39:31.100 --> 01:39:33.180 'cause I feel that's a very low rate. 01:39:33.180 --> 01:39:35.460 - Yeah, and we-- - And is that also included 01:39:35.460 --> 01:39:40.180 in the cost of service study, the treated wholesale? 01:39:40.180 --> 01:39:43.060 - It will be reviewed, yeah. - Okay. 01:39:43.060 --> 01:39:46.540 - Next year. - Next year, okay. 01:39:46.540 --> 01:39:48.380 Thank you. - Yes. 01:39:48.380 --> 01:39:50.700 - I mean, the thing is, you have no maintenance on it, 01:39:50.700 --> 01:39:53.500 they're metering it themselves. 01:39:53.500 --> 01:39:55.260 - We were treating it, and we've got to-- 01:39:55.260 --> 01:39:56.540 - Well, yeah, but I mean, it's gonna come 01:39:56.540 --> 01:39:59.100 to all the fire hydrant treatment, unless you go to, 01:39:59.100 --> 01:40:02.900 it's more difficult to go find wholesale raw, right? 01:40:02.900 --> 01:40:05.860 For anybody. 01:40:05.860 --> 01:40:08.620 Yeah, I mean, yeah, if you're, okay, so in construction, 01:40:08.620 --> 01:40:10.500 you're only gonna use something that geographically 01:40:10.500 --> 01:40:12.660 makes sense, you're not gonna pump it out of the lake 01:40:12.660 --> 01:40:15.020 and send it through mouth of the road. 01:40:15.020 --> 01:40:17.620 - Well, just for the Upper Trinity Water District, 01:40:17.620 --> 01:40:20.580 which is another water district that purchases water from us. 01:40:20.580 --> 01:40:21.420 - Right. 01:40:21.420 --> 01:40:23.100 - So, if they're buying it out of the lake, 01:40:23.100 --> 01:40:23.940 they're just pumping it out of the lake. 01:40:23.940 --> 01:40:25.260 - Well, yeah, right. 01:40:25.260 --> 01:40:28.340 - But then, if they're tied into our system, 01:40:28.340 --> 01:40:31.620 they're paying a dollar per thousand gallons. 01:40:31.620 --> 01:40:35.180 It's a very good rate for treated water. 01:40:35.180 --> 01:40:40.900 - So, we do believe the dollar 20, oops. 01:40:40.900 --> 01:40:43.060 - They're all on, they won't go off. 01:40:43.060 --> 01:40:44.300 (audience laughing) 01:40:44.300 --> 01:40:45.140 - Do they go off now? 01:40:45.140 --> 01:40:45.980 - All off. 01:40:48.380 --> 01:40:52.020 - Okay, so we do believe that the dollar 25 01:40:52.020 --> 01:40:56.460 is sufficient for 2025, but we'll certainly keep an eye on. 01:40:56.460 --> 01:41:02.340 Additionally, we're recommending an increase 01:41:02.340 --> 01:41:07.340 in the fire hydrant meter deposit from $1,100 to $3,000. 01:41:07.340 --> 01:41:12.260 The current cost of replacing a fire hydrant meter 01:41:12.260 --> 01:41:14.620 is approximately $3,000. 01:41:14.620 --> 01:41:19.180 We have seen some fire hydrant meters not be returned, 01:41:19.180 --> 01:41:23.580 and those expenses are then eaten 01:41:23.580 --> 01:41:26.020 by the utility to replace those. 01:41:26.020 --> 01:41:29.380 So, we are recommending the $3,000 01:41:29.380 --> 01:41:32.740 just to be able to fully recover the cost 01:41:32.740 --> 01:41:34.380 if a meter is not returned. 01:41:34.380 --> 01:41:38.460 Backflow testing, we're proposing an increase 01:41:38.460 --> 01:41:42.260 of $9.05 to $25. 01:41:42.260 --> 01:41:45.340 This is really just to align the cost 01:41:45.340 --> 01:41:49.340 and labor associated with backflow testing. 01:41:49.340 --> 01:41:55.740 The backflow service fee is a proposed new monthly fee 01:41:55.740 --> 01:42:00.740 of $4.16 to those customers with backflow assemblies. 01:42:00.740 --> 01:42:06.980 And this $4.16 would recover the cost associated 01:42:06.980 --> 01:42:11.740 with the administration of backflow testing. 01:42:11.740 --> 01:42:16.740 So, sending notices, reviewing, tracking. 01:42:16.740 --> 01:42:19.700 - When you're through. 01:42:19.700 --> 01:42:23.740 - Okay, the backflow service. 01:42:23.740 --> 01:42:29.260 - So, who would fall into the backflow service fee? 01:42:29.260 --> 01:42:31.460 Example. 01:42:31.460 --> 01:42:38.500 - Good morning, Stephen Gay, Director of Water Utilities, 01:42:38.500 --> 01:42:39.780 not as tall as Matt. 01:42:41.300 --> 01:42:43.780 It's mainly commercial businesses. 01:42:43.780 --> 01:42:47.540 Any type of water use on the downstream side of the meter 01:42:47.540 --> 01:42:49.540 that could potentially cause a threat 01:42:49.540 --> 01:42:51.740 to the integrity of the water supply. 01:42:51.740 --> 01:42:53.620 - So, would this be irrigation only or? 01:42:53.620 --> 01:42:54.700 - Not just irrigation. 01:42:54.700 --> 01:42:56.580 Say, if you think of a mortuary 01:42:56.580 --> 01:42:58.700 who uses the water in their processes, 01:42:58.700 --> 01:43:01.940 we'd want to prevent that from coming back into our system. 01:43:01.940 --> 01:43:03.460 So, we put this mechanical device 01:43:03.460 --> 01:43:06.740 at the service connection and it's a requirement 01:43:06.740 --> 01:43:09.420 that it be tested and maintained on a regular basis. 01:43:09.420 --> 01:43:10.620 So, we have to monitor that. 01:43:10.620 --> 01:43:12.700 So, it would be those types of businesses. 01:43:12.700 --> 01:43:15.060 Chemical manufacturing or things like that. 01:43:15.060 --> 01:43:17.020 - Great example. 01:43:17.020 --> 01:43:18.340 - That's the best example I could think of. 01:43:18.340 --> 01:43:20.580 (laughing) 01:43:20.580 --> 01:43:27.540 - So, are residential customers impacted by this at all 01:43:27.540 --> 01:43:29.980 with backflow irrigation systems, things like that? 01:43:29.980 --> 01:43:32.540 - No, sir, those aren't covered under this currently. 01:43:32.540 --> 01:43:38.780 - Okay. 01:43:41.620 --> 01:43:44.100 - And finally, under meters, 01:43:44.100 --> 01:43:49.100 what we're proposing is a $25 meter test fee 01:43:49.100 --> 01:43:53.940 for any non-City of Denton water meters. 01:43:53.940 --> 01:43:57.540 And so, we do receive requests from other municipalities 01:43:57.540 --> 01:44:00.060 in the Metroplex to test meters 01:44:00.060 --> 01:44:02.900 because we have the equipment to do the testing. 01:44:02.900 --> 01:44:05.100 Currently, we provide that service for free. 01:44:05.100 --> 01:44:10.460 And so, we are proposing the $25 01:44:10.460 --> 01:44:13.700 to cover the labor associated with testing the meters. 01:44:13.700 --> 01:44:19.380 Turning to commercial irrigation rates. 01:44:19.380 --> 01:44:24.380 Currently, the rate is $6.61 for any amount of gallons. 01:44:24.380 --> 01:44:30.900 And what is being proposed is moving to a tiered structure. 01:44:30.900 --> 01:44:34.500 So, the 661, we are proposing to increase 3%. 01:44:34.500 --> 01:44:37.940 However, as you'll see here, 01:44:37.940 --> 01:44:42.940 adding three additional tiers of 7,000 to 20,000 gallons, 01:44:42.940 --> 01:44:46.060 20,000 to 40,000 gallons, 01:44:46.060 --> 01:44:50.940 and then a final tier of over 40,000 gallons, 01:44:50.940 --> 01:44:55.940 really to encourage conservation and, yeah. 01:44:55.940 --> 01:45:02.140 - And making sure your irrigation isn't on when it's raining. 01:45:02.140 --> 01:45:03.380 - Right, yeah. 01:45:08.100 --> 01:45:13.020 - Okay, meter, I'm sorry, water tap and meter fees. 01:45:13.020 --> 01:45:14.780 We are proposing an increase. 01:45:14.780 --> 01:45:18.940 Each of these increases are really just due 01:45:18.940 --> 01:45:22.660 to the actual costs of tapping. 01:45:22.660 --> 01:45:29.300 And so, as you'll see here, whether it's paved or unpaved, 01:45:29.300 --> 01:45:32.820 and the size of the tap, you know, 01:45:32.820 --> 01:45:37.340 it ranges from $441 up to an increase 01:45:37.340 --> 01:45:39.940 of $2,400. 01:45:39.940 --> 01:45:41.940 And then any taps four inches and larger, 01:45:41.940 --> 01:45:44.860 what we're proposing is to assess it 01:45:44.860 --> 01:45:47.020 on a per project basis. 01:45:47.020 --> 01:45:49.060 What we found is that it's very difficult 01:45:49.060 --> 01:45:54.060 just to assign a flat fee and have it recover the costs 01:45:54.060 --> 01:45:58.420 when every project may have different environmental 01:45:58.420 --> 01:46:01.420 conditions, depth of the pipes, groundwater, 01:46:01.420 --> 01:46:06.420 other factors that influence the expense 01:46:07.060 --> 01:46:10.060 associated with those larger taps. 01:46:10.060 --> 01:46:18.740 Okay, turning to wastewater, we're proposing 01:46:18.740 --> 01:46:22.220 an 11% increase to residential service, 01:46:22.220 --> 01:46:26.020 as well as an 11% increase for commercial service. 01:46:26.020 --> 01:46:32.660 We're proposing an increase from $1.67 to $2.50 01:46:32.660 --> 01:46:35.260 on the sale of treated effluent. 01:46:35.260 --> 01:46:40.020 And then just as we saw on the water tap fees, 01:46:40.020 --> 01:46:45.020 to assess the wastewater tap fees for taps greater 01:46:45.020 --> 01:46:48.100 than, you know, four inches to be assessed 01:46:48.100 --> 01:46:50.860 on a per project basis, just to be reflective 01:46:50.860 --> 01:46:55.020 of the actual cost associated with that work. 01:46:55.020 --> 01:46:59.540 And finally, we're proposing an increase 01:46:59.540 --> 01:47:02.340 in the waste transportation manifest. 01:47:02.340 --> 01:47:07.340 This is a printed book that the city produces. 01:47:07.340 --> 01:47:12.300 We print the books at a cost of $165, 01:47:12.300 --> 01:47:14.340 and we sell them for $40. 01:47:14.340 --> 01:47:17.380 And so this proposal would be to remove 01:47:17.380 --> 01:47:21.900 that $125 subsidy and recover the full cost 01:47:21.900 --> 01:47:24.300 of the waste transportation manifest books. 01:47:29.380 --> 01:47:32.420 So taking a look at water and sewer rates 01:47:32.420 --> 01:47:34.540 as a comparison to other metroplex cities, 01:47:34.540 --> 01:47:38.900 which you'll see is that we have, 01:47:38.900 --> 01:47:42.260 even with these increases, some of the lowest rates 01:47:42.260 --> 01:47:46.580 in the metroplex, both for water and for sewer. 01:47:46.580 --> 01:47:52.740 And then this is a table which outlines 01:47:52.740 --> 01:47:56.020 what those dollar amounts look like. 01:47:56.020 --> 01:48:01.020 So again, you know, based on 9,000 gallons for water 01:48:01.020 --> 01:48:05.100 and 6,000 gallons for wastewater, you know, 01:48:05.100 --> 01:48:07.740 we're still very competitive within the metroplex. 01:48:07.740 --> 01:48:12.740 And again, these comparison cities don't include 01:48:12.740 --> 01:48:17.420 any potential rate increases or, you know, 01:48:17.420 --> 01:48:20.140 rate increases for 2025. 01:48:20.140 --> 01:48:22.340 These are reflective of their current rates. 01:48:26.540 --> 01:48:30.660 - Any, before we move on to DMA, 01:48:30.660 --> 01:48:32.940 any questions on water or wastewater? 01:48:32.940 --> 01:48:39.060 - So who do you think in that, those bar charts, 01:48:39.060 --> 01:48:42.060 and I know we have a lot of agreements with Dallas, right? 01:48:42.060 --> 01:48:45.700 Or a lot of our capacity is based on agreements with Dallas. 01:48:45.700 --> 01:48:50.180 Who else would be a similar community or city 01:48:50.180 --> 01:48:53.220 that has the same type of agreements, you know, 01:48:53.220 --> 01:48:56.220 like we do with Louisville and Ray Roberts and? 01:48:56.220 --> 01:48:57.700 - Yeah. 01:48:57.700 --> 01:49:00.820 Stephen Gay, Director of Utilities. 01:49:00.820 --> 01:49:02.460 Can you restate the question? 01:49:02.460 --> 01:49:05.900 - So we've always kind of based our rates on Dallas' rates. 01:49:05.900 --> 01:49:07.140 - That's the raw water rate. 01:49:07.140 --> 01:49:09.980 - Yes, yeah, and well, we have, 01:49:09.980 --> 01:49:12.220 'cause we have agreement, a lot of agreements with Dallas. 01:49:12.220 --> 01:49:13.500 I imagine that would be it. 01:49:13.500 --> 01:49:15.820 - Yes sir, it's woven into the agreement. 01:49:15.820 --> 01:49:18.460 We have an operating agreement with Dallas, 01:49:18.460 --> 01:49:21.580 but that doesn't influence the agreement we have 01:49:21.580 --> 01:49:25.900 with UTRWD, so the rate that we charge UTRWD isn't agreement. 01:49:25.900 --> 01:49:27.500 - I'm not asking about UTRWD. 01:49:27.500 --> 01:49:29.580 I'm just saying what other city would you say 01:49:29.580 --> 01:49:32.300 might be a comparison or a community or city? 01:49:32.300 --> 01:49:36.940 - I would say that Louisville purchases water. 01:49:36.940 --> 01:49:40.180 I believe they purchase water from Dallas as well. 01:49:40.180 --> 01:49:45.020 The distinction is that Dallas and Denton own the rights 01:49:45.020 --> 01:49:47.220 in Louisville and Ray Roberts 01:49:47.220 --> 01:49:49.900 and none of the other utilities in the area. 01:49:49.900 --> 01:49:51.340 - So there's not a good comparison. 01:49:51.340 --> 01:49:53.260 - There's really not a good comparison. 01:49:53.260 --> 01:49:55.300 - That's probably a simpler question, thank you. 01:49:55.300 --> 01:49:56.140 - Thank you, sir. 01:49:56.140 --> 01:50:03.900 - I'm just curious, the waste transportation manifest, 01:50:03.900 --> 01:50:09.140 what is that, who buys that in the book? 01:50:09.140 --> 01:50:11.780 (laughs) 01:50:11.780 --> 01:50:13.060 That's a good question. 01:50:13.060 --> 01:50:13.900 How many of these things do you sell? 01:50:13.900 --> 01:50:15.980 - Jessica just asked that question 01:50:15.980 --> 01:50:18.740 and it's actually from our industrial pretreatment group 01:50:18.740 --> 01:50:21.660 and so those are more or less our significant 01:50:21.660 --> 01:50:25.060 industrial users so they purchase that manifest 01:50:25.060 --> 01:50:27.060 and that's about all I can tell you about the book. 01:50:27.060 --> 01:50:28.220 We just knew that the cost, 01:50:28.220 --> 01:50:30.020 we were significantly under recovering 01:50:30.020 --> 01:50:32.820 and we asked if we could just include it in the increases. 01:50:32.820 --> 01:50:37.140 - Not to tie in but it may sound like it. 01:50:37.140 --> 01:50:42.140 Water oil separators that we have for let's say automotive. 01:50:42.140 --> 01:50:45.220 Where's the charge for that? 01:50:45.220 --> 01:50:47.540 How does that fall in wherever it falls in? 01:50:47.540 --> 01:50:49.660 - That actually would be something that would fall 01:50:49.660 --> 01:50:51.980 under environmental services and sustainability. 01:50:51.980 --> 01:50:54.180 They're responsible for managing 01:50:54.180 --> 01:50:56.020 our industrial pretreatment program 01:50:56.020 --> 01:50:59.740 and so those fees would fall underneath their purview. 01:50:59.740 --> 01:51:00.700 - So we won't see that? 01:51:00.700 --> 01:51:01.540 - No, sir. 01:51:01.540 --> 01:51:02.380 - Thank you. 01:51:02.380 --> 01:51:05.380 - How many books do you sell a year? 01:51:05.380 --> 01:51:06.220 I'm sorry. 01:51:06.220 --> 01:51:09.380 How many books do you sell a year? 01:51:09.380 --> 01:51:10.700 - How many do I sell? 01:51:10.700 --> 01:51:11.540 - Books. 01:51:11.540 --> 01:51:13.380 - Books, I have no idea, I can find out though. 01:51:13.380 --> 01:51:14.220 - No, no. 01:51:14.220 --> 01:51:16.740 - Your microphone wasn't on. 01:51:18.220 --> 01:51:19.780 (laughing) 01:51:19.780 --> 01:51:21.780 - Any other questions before he moves on? 01:51:21.780 --> 01:51:31.460 - Okay, so as we had mentioned at the previous meeting, 01:51:31.460 --> 01:51:35.460 DME is currently undergoing a cost of service study. 01:51:35.460 --> 01:51:38.900 We do anticipate that the results of that study 01:51:38.900 --> 01:51:43.740 will be available here this month 01:51:43.740 --> 01:51:46.860 and so we intend to bring that back to the board 01:51:47.660 --> 01:51:50.540 we do anticipate a base rate increase of one and a half 01:51:50.540 --> 01:51:55.500 percent to be included as part of the study recommendation 01:51:55.500 --> 01:51:59.140 but we'll bring that forward here in a couple weeks. 01:51:59.140 --> 01:52:03.340 So taking a look at the calendar, 01:52:03.340 --> 01:52:07.420 we'll be bringing forward the utility budgets 01:52:07.420 --> 01:52:11.380 and the rates that the board has seen over the last 01:52:11.380 --> 01:52:13.960 couple weeks to city council for their feedback 01:52:13.960 --> 01:52:17.580 on July 23rd and then we'll also discuss the rates 01:52:17.580 --> 01:52:20.540 on August 10th during the budget workshop 01:52:20.540 --> 01:52:23.540 and then we'll return to PUB on August 28th 01:52:23.540 --> 01:52:25.740 for the utility budget and rate approval 01:52:25.740 --> 01:52:28.660 so that will include any changes or recommendations 01:52:28.660 --> 01:52:32.380 or discussion that had come out of the meetings 01:52:32.380 --> 01:52:37.140 with city council and then we'll bring that back 01:52:37.140 --> 01:52:40.580 to city council and to public hearings on September 10th 01:52:40.580 --> 01:52:43.980 and September 17th for final adoption. 01:52:43.980 --> 01:52:48.460 Any questions? 01:52:48.460 --> 01:52:49.660 - Any further questions? 01:52:49.660 --> 01:52:53.540 I'm assuming we're all in agreement 01:52:53.540 --> 01:52:54.940 to just move forward, right? 01:52:54.940 --> 01:52:56.820 - I have a motion to adjourn please. 01:52:56.820 --> 01:52:59.060 (laughing) 01:52:59.060 --> 01:53:00.980 - Okay. 01:53:00.980 --> 01:53:04.300 1052.