Oct 28, 2019 Public Utilities Board on 2019-10-28 6:00 PM

>> It's 6 o'clock and we do have a quorum, so let's call to order the Public Utilities Board Meeting of October 28th, 2019. The first item is a work session, receive a report, and hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding proposed residential solid waste rate decreases. >> Good afternoon to the members, Chair, Nick Vincent, the city's budget manager. We're walking you through the proposed 19-20 residential rate decrease. Feel free to stop me throughout the presentation if you have any questions. I'm a little bit stomped up, if you can't understand me, just ask me again and I'll repeat what I said. I'll pull up the presentation here. So real quick, a recap on August 26th, staff did present a solid waste, some preliminary waste volume and rate agreements coming into the city and landfill facility. We did get permission from the PUB to continue negotiation with these companies and proceed to city council actually for approval. So here shortly I'll review these with you as a high level recap. If you have any questions, please stop me, I'd be happy to answer them. So as I had said, we do have five of the six waste agreements currently approved. I'll review those with you on the next slide. These agreements do increase the transparency of the volume and the rates between these haulers in the city of Nitton, and we'll go over those shortly. We are looking, these agreements do decrease the subsidization from residential and commercial to the landfill. So actually in front of you today, we have a decrease of residential customers and as a separate item, we have a decrease of commercial customers. As I said, residential decrease. So on August 26th, five of these contracted waste agreements were presented to PUB. Since then, one additional municipality has come forward to the city, want to contract with the city. You can see five of these agreements are currently approved by city council. The ones listed A through E which are in green have gone to city council for approval and currently have contracts. And the city of Little Lamb is going forward to city council November 5th for consideration. If it's approved by city council, it will be in effect also. So what I'll do is I'll walk you through this table from left to right. And you can see the 18, 19 tons that are currently coming in the landfill. We currently have about 105,000 tons, you can set number here. With the agreements in place, this is an additional 80,400 tons coming into the facility. So it would bring that total to about 185,000. You can see some people when we reach back to them and we continue the negotiations, they increase their tonnage coming into the facility. Some people stayed about the same like Little Lamb. Currently, without the contracts, these waste haulers were paying these rates, as you can see here in the 18, 19 column. Under the agreements that are in place now, are soon will be in place. And you can see the new rates outlined in the agreements. For instance, you can see waste connections. They're currently in a rate agreement for 29.50, I'm sorry, frontier waste. The current 18, 19 revenue you can see coming into the facility is 2.7 million. With the agreements in place with the increased waste volume, it would take the revenue to 5.2 million. So it is an increase of about 2.5. This 2.5 does go directly to decrease the subsidization for residential and commercial customers. So we are enabling to go back to those divisions and give some rate relief. And then in the last column out here, you can actually see how many years the contractors hauling into the facility have been coming in. So for instance, frontier waste has been coming in a year with waste connections coming in about 12 years. >> Question, the additional tonnage there amounts to, if I read your information right, between three and five months shorter life for the facility. >> Actually, I've got that note right here. So with the increased tonnage coming into the facility, it'd be 90 to 150 days of life. So about three months, that's correct. >> And what is the current life of the landfill? >> Let me ask Brian Burner to come up. We do have a contract, a landfill permit amendment still pending with the state. So he'll speak to that really quick. >> Thanks. >> Good morning, excuse me, good afternoon, it's been a long day. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the committee. My name's Brian Burner. I'm Director of Solid Waste for the City of Denton. I believe your question was how long is our landfill currently permitted for? Based on our current estimates, we have about 17 years remaining in the existing permitted life, and that's exclusive of any potential expansion that is currently under consideration down at the state. If our compaction gets better, that could actually increase slightly. Okay? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is there any more questions in this slide? We'll move on to the decrease for residential customers. Okay. So currently we are proposing to decrease the monthly collection rate for residential customers. There are two types of carts that customers have to choose from, from getting refuse and recycling service. The first being a large cart, the rate is 29.26. A medium cart, the current rate is 24.51. And that is for recycling cart and a refuse cart. Moving forward, we are proposing to decrease this rate by $3 a piece, so the large cart would go 26.26, and the small cart would go to 21.51. >> And when are you proposing that that starts? >> This would actually schedule to go to city council November 5th. So if the council was to approve it on November 5th, it would be effective then. >> Okay. >> That's correct. >> How long has the current rate structure been in place for residential city of Denton? >> The current rates that are in front of you today, the 29.26 and 24.51. So the ordinance was actually adopted September 17th by city council. It was effective October 1st. So these rates that you see in front of you today were effective October 1st. We did do a couple years ago a residential rate decrease for residential customers of 12%. I think that was in fiscal year 17. So since that point of decrease at 12%, we have been at the 29.26 and the 24.51. So for a year and a half, the rates have been the same, that's correct. And one other thing I want to note, so it's for approval for city council November 5th. It's actually on your agenda tonight for individual consideration. So if you approve it and city council approves it on November 5th, it would go into effect then. >> Thank you, any other questions? All right, then the next one is receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding proposed commercial solid waste rate decreases. >> Good afternoon again, Nick Vincent, city's budget manager. I'll walk you through the proposed commercial rate decrease really quick. As I said before, these contracts as significant revenue source for the solid waste department, it does set volume limits with these different haulers into the facility. It does allow us to increase the transparency of the agreements we have out there with the different companies. It also is reducing the residential commercial subsidization, as I mentioned before. So we reviewed this chart really quick, so it's an 80,400 additional tons coming into the facility, about $2.5 million in revenue. Commercial rate changes, there's a little bit more information on this than residential, I'll walk you through it. So we are proposing to make rate adjustments to side load refuse customers and front load recycling customers. I'll walk you through both of them and what the rate adjustments will do. So the first one of the side load refuse rates you can see here on the first table. And the current rates are on the white. For instance, a three cubic yard container going one time a week is 104.64. We are proposing that rate to go to 74.16. What this does, this aligns the side load refuse rates with the front load refuse rates, so we'll have one clearly identifiable set of rates for refuse commercial service, or commercial side load, or front load service. >> Excuse me. >> Yes, sir. >> Could you define for me the difference between front load and is it side load? >> Side load? >> Yeah. >> I'd be happy to. So in the community driving around, you may have seen several, well, different establishment restaurants, for instance. A front load truck would actually stab the container from the front and then tip it up. A side load container would actually approach the container from the side and pick it up on the side. So sometimes you see the side load containers on the side of the streets. Those are your side load containers. >> And one other question, is this extra garbage that's coming in, has it, have recyclables already been taken out of it? >> For point of clarification, are you talking about the additional tonnages that are coming in from different homes? >> Yeah, from those contracted carriers. >> For those, from what we understand from those that are servicing residential communities, they do have resident, or they do have residential recycling programs in place. However, there are some areas that, like in the city of Denton, we have residents that choose not to recycle. And some of the rural customers, they are not offered a recycling program either. So a majority of the residential that is coming in through the new contracts we feel is being removed and taken to the appropriate MRF for processing. >> Is there any way in the future to encourage communities that are not recycling, but whose waste we are taking to encourage? >> Those are discussions we can have, and I think in the future, in a couple of weeks, we'll be talking about a comprehensive solid waste management strategy for the city of Denton. And part of that, I think, we'll, again, not trying to telegraph anything, but part of it will be how we outreach into the community, not only within the city limits of Denton, but also as we become a major player in the county as far as solid waste management, how we help bring other communities to that point. >> Yeah, I think that would be a good thing for us to do to encourage that, thanks. >> I think that's a discussion for a couple more weeks. >> Great, thanks. >> Thank you. >> Okay, and then the bottom table really quick. I want to review with you is the front load recycling service. We are recommending that we do rate decreases for these customers. So currently, you can see a four cubic yard container going on one time a week is 98.88. We are proposing that to go to 8504. What this does is puts the rates about 14% below refuse, which is actually associated with the refuse component of those rates. So for instance, on the top table, these rates from a cost of service standpoint have a refuse component built in because that waste is actually going to the landfill facility. Since recyclings are being diverted, we've actually removed that component of the rate, which counts about 14%. So we are recommending the rates to be about 14% below refuse. >> So that will make it an incentive for commercial customers to start recycling. >> Yes, ma'am, that is the thought process behind it. >> Thank you for doing that, okay. >> With no other questions on commercial, that concludes the commercial presentation. >> Any other questions? >> I have one question. >> Yes, sir? >> You talked about the residential customers subsidizing or subsidizing less. Does that mean that the commercial operation is operated at a loss, or has historically been operating at a loss? Or does that mean that the residential has simply been more profitable than the commercial? >> So in cost of service, right now, the landfill's actually operating at a loss from a cost of service standpoint, and a lot of it has to do with some strain of debt service that we have with programs that were canceled a couple years ago. Example would be landfill mining. We bought some equipment with that. That will be paid for here in the next two or three years. So it essentially improves the landfill's position, but to answer your question, commercial would actually be a little bit over recovering. This actually is a step in the right direction to that cost recovery for commercial customers. Landfills under recovering, and then, yeah, I hope that answers your question for landfill and commercial. Does that answer your question, that landfills? >> Over recovering, you're saying, what I would call operating profitably? >> That's correct, yep. So commercial's operating profitably. Landfills a little bit under recovering, so not operating profitably currently. As this additional revenue comes in, and as that debt falls off in the future, it's very possible landfill could be breakeven also. >> Great, and where would be the best place for me to find those numbers? >> The over and under recovery of each? I can provide it to you. >> Okay, thanks. >> Absolutely. >> That's all. >> All right, then we'll move on to the consent agenda. We have items A through E. Does a board member wish to pull any of those items? >> I'd like to pull A. >> Okay, A. >> C is Charlie, and D is in delta. >> All right. >> And I'd like to pull B as in boy. >> Okay. Do I hear E? >> Move approval for item E. >> I'll second. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? Carries. All right, item A. >> Good evening board chair, board members. My name is Jim Jenks. I'm with the city's capital projects department. I'm the project manager on the go drive drainage phase two project. Be happy to answer any questions that you have on the change order item. >> I believe you didn't have a question, or you do have a question? >> No, I just wanted to give him an opportunity to leave the room. >> Okay. >> Mr. Cheek. >> Sure, sure, understood, understood. >> All right, do we have a motion to approve? >> Move approval. >> I'll second. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Carries. Okay, item B. >> Good evening, Ricky, thanks for the manager for energy delivery. Be happy to answer any questions. I do have a short presentation if you'd like to see that related to the pole inspection. Any preference? >> I'd like to see it. >> Okay. This item is a pole inspection service that we are looking for our wooden poles here in the city of Denton. The purpose of that is to reveal any hazard or danger poles that we have across our system. And to find any poles that are not dangerous, but have some early signs of decay, and is there any type of preventive corrective treatment we can do to help lengthen and extend the life of those. We definitely don't want the poles to fall on any type of public vehicles or any of the public. And so this is one of the reasons that we do that. The background, there's parts of the United States, they break it into different decay zones. As far as the amount of moisture and humidity and type of items, we're in the decay severity zone number three. You might notice here in Denton where we're at, we're really the middle part of the country. We do have some wet items from the Gulf Coast that comes in with all the moisture. We're in the same type of zone as California because of the Pacific moisture that they have. If you notice here in Florida, on the southeast side, there's zone five. They actually get the Atlantic and the Gulf moisture, so they have a little more decay down there. We did a previous formal pole inspection back in 2007. And they recommend we do these about every decade or so. We have about 100 square miles, 17,000 poles in our system, so our 55,000 customers. 12,000 of those 17,000 poles are wood poles. Some of them have been out there for an extended period, nearly 60 years in some cases. And so we depreciate them over a 30 year life schedule, so we've definitely got good use out of those wood poles. We are 42% overhead and 58% underground. This is some pictures of some typical decay in poles. Normally when poles decay, they'll break over here at the ground level. That's because of all the water, the rain, the sprinkler systems. In a grassy area, you'll have fertilizers and other types of nitrogen oxygen moisture that will cause that wood to get fungus and start to decay. The outer portion of the pole usually will end up with some type of a shell rot. That in itself doesn't mean the integrity of the pole is greatly compromised. But once you have inner decay within the pole, like this shows a picture of a guy's arm with a whole fist sticking in the pole. It's prone to failure, and when they break, they typically look like that. There's a couple methods that these pole companies will utilize. The visual inspection, they'll come and look at it to see how does it look visually. They'll do the sounding method, which is a hammer test. You'll see, come around right above the ground line with a big old hammer, they'll hit it hard and they'll listen to the pole. If you have a lot of decay in the inner part of the pole, you'll hear a completely different sound than you will if it's a strong pole. If it sounds like it's suspect, they'll come in and do a drill test called boring. They'll do a drill test in at the ground level to get to the middle part of the pole, pull it out to see what does the wood look like. If there are signs of decay, they'll go ahead and excavate down around the pole, go deeper and try to figure out how bad is that decay. They have some capabilities that they can do minor treatment on poles that have some decay, but it's not very great. They can put that in, and here's some pictures of them installing that and then putting the treatment around the pole, right around the ground line where the moisture would penetrate right before they leave the site. Here's a picture actually here in Denton of, this is one pole that actually did fall, and this happened about 18 months ago at an apartment complex. You can see the type of damage it did across a citizen's car in the parking lot. Landed right on top of it, it pulled down the surfaces right off of the roof of the apartment complex. We really want to try to prevent this from happening. >> Was that a wind event or it was just, it was- >> I think it was a nice sunny day when it happened. >> Great big woodpecker. >> We had that problem in Minnesota, yeah. >> So we sent out this RFP to 295 prospective bidders. We got two proposals back, one was from Texas and one was from Maine. We recommend awarding to the highest evaluated and the lowest cost bidder, and that is the one from Texas. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. >> I have some questions. What are the poles treated with? >> The poles that we purchased now are treated with creosote. >> Is that the same as penta? >> There's some chemical treatments, and we don't use the chemical treatments. We found the creosote to be better environmentally. Some of the chemical treatments, they don't make the poles last as long as we've read some concerns about them. >> So it's strictly creosote, and they come creosoted too when they're new? >> Yes, we have that in our specification. It's seven and a half pounds of creosote pressure treated into the wood. >> Okay. What are the environmental hazards of creosote? I assume there are some. >> Yeah, I don't have that information with me. I'd be happy to look that up and get back with you. >> What I'm curious about is how much does a new pole cost? >> They can run upwards of $500 to $700 and up in cost. That's just the purchase of the pole without it being installed. >> So I wonder if, have you ever looked at alternative poles that are done across estimate study of what would be involved if the city began phasing in non-wooden poles? >> Yes, right here on this page, there are the 17,000 poles. 5,000 are broken between aluminum, concrete, fiberglass, steel. So there are other types of poles. These do not allow any of our field personnel to climb them. You have to have access for a bucket truck. So they have those hazards. They also, being a steel pole, you have concerns as far as safety. You've basically brought the ground, electrically speaking, up to within a few feet of the conductor. And so there's some safety reasons that we try to shy away from some where those would actually inherently have some dielectric characteristics. >> Okay. Is there any thought about trying to increase as much as possible the use of non-wooden poles, especially since what's, we're all being told now that planting trees is very important for the future. And we seem to be using a whole lot of them for telephone poles. >> You know, these are southern yellow pine is the species. There's some Douglas fir, they're typically used for transmission system. The transmission system across Denton here that we've been upgrading from 69 KV to 138. We've been going back in with galvanized steel. So in those cases, we can add more insulation and we can improve some of the safety considerations going up and down every street. You know, it's a little more difficult to do that. But yeah, if we're always open to new ideas, certainly. >> Okay. Great. What do you do with the old poles? >> The old poles get brought in. We have had a company in the past through purchasing that actually bids on taking these from us. We have sold them in years past to people. You know, they cut them up, they use them for fence posts and different things. So we go through the purchasing department to properly dispose of them. >> Well, I would like to know if there are any environmental hazards involved in creosote, any chance of it leaching into the soil and just want to make sure that in a city now that is trying to go organic in their parks and as I think you'll recall, the original Eureka playground was made out of treated wood, not creosote, but chromated copper arsenic treated wood and I would just like to know if we're on the same path to sustainability and health concerns with our telephone poles too. >> We'll certainly look up the information on the creosote and get back with you, Mr. Solcher. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Board member, interject real quick. One of the things that we've been working with our city council is on a request that require research. If it requires more than two hours of time, staff time, what we've been doing is we've been working with our council to get direction from them because we want to make sure that the time that the staff is using is based on issues and items that are being directed by council. So certainly staff can look at that and I would say though if it requires more than two hours, we may have to put our city council, put that on the docket or at least make a request that has been items been requested by the PUB and get direction from them to make sure that they want us to spend time on those issues. It doesn't mean we won't look into it but if it requires more than two hours, we do have a process that's been adopted by city council. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You bet. >> Any other questions? Do we have a motion for approval? >> I move we approve. >> And a second? >> Second. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? >> Aye. Opposed? >> Item C. >> Yes, I have a question here. Really it pertains to the understanding better the purchasing process and this spreadsheet here that has information from the six bidders. >> Lori Hewlett, purchasing manager. What was your question? >> There's six bidders on here and we're talking about an item here that's five year not to exceed price of $275,000. I see six columns here and the one that's recommended has the highest price, $1147.20. What does that include? What does $1147.20 purchase for them? The other prices on that same line across to the right are all less than that. So I'm just wondering what that is. >> Well, their prices are for the same going across all. They're all pricing the exact same quantity. This was an RFP so it was a request for proposals. And so we base it not just on price, the award, it goes on a set of recommendations. So there's qualifications, probable performance, past performance, experience. And so the price is quote like everything was priced the same. It's just they were higher but they won it because of their experience and their past performance. >> Okay. What does $1147.20 purchase? So let me see if someone here from the department is here to explain the actual item. >> Brent Heath, Executive Manager for Energy Delivery. I have JR Richardson, he's in our meter shop and actually is filling in as well on our safety side that helped with the evaluation. This was for rubber gloves and also for rubber sleeves. There were a whole lot more items that were listed for each of these bidders than the one single number. And so they rolled everything up into this one price of the rubber glove and the rubber sleeve. There's different types of rubber gloves, a class zero, a class two, and a class three glove that we bid. So each of those have different components that get rolled up into that. The main thing we do with rubber gloves is the testing of them. >> I understand. >> And so we do that frequently. So if they fail or we need a replacement, then we would actually purchase. So some of the bidders had higher testing and lower gloves and vice versa. So we looked to see what would be the most advantageous for us based on where we thought the money would be spent out of which of those line items. And JR might be able to add a little additional information to that. >> I don't know much more that I can answer that, but initially when you ask what does that $11,047 buy you? >> The first thing that came to my mind was the life of that lineman that's working on the line. >> Yes, that's true. But what are you actually purchasing for $11,047.20? What does that buy? What does that purchase? >> The testing and replacement of the glove. >> And replacement? It includes replacement costs? >> Yes, sir. Yes. >> For one pair? >> Yes. >> And the sleeves. >> And the sleeves. >> And the sleeves. We also have rubber sleeves that come all the way up to the shoulders. >> Yes. >> Because when you're in the bucket and you're working in close proximity to the primary lines, you want to protect the lineman as much as possible for contact. Anytime that there's a problem with the glove, they not only mark the spot that's the problem, they do the writing on there and then they also make sure that you're not going to use that glove because anytime anything like this happens or even if there's a pinprick, then you've jeopardized the integrity of that glove and therefore putting that lineman in harm's way. >> Right. So this $11,47.20 is for testing all the gloves and replacement of a portion of the inventory, correct? You're not replacing every set of -- >> No, just the part that's deemed unsafe to use. >> Roughly what is the assumption made? How many do you figure -- what's this based on? Are you replacing 25% of them, 10% of them? >> I don't know the percentage, but I'm sure it's based off of the historic data from previous testing. I mean, we've -- >> Replacing. >> Yes. >> And this is required under OSHA and the other safety -- >> Yes. >> Rules. Yeah. >> Yes. >> One other -- another question on the -- on line three here under indicators of probable performance under the contract. The rating for this preferred or recommended vendor is 14 and the rating for all the others is less than half of that. I was just wondering what's that about? How does that -- what do those numbers mean exactly? >> Well, under the comments of each one, is there any one in particular, any vendor in particular? >> Well, the one next to it is rated 5, another one's rated 6, another one's rated 6, another one's rated 3, another one's rated 3, and this one is rated 14. So there's a big difference. One of them, the preferred vendor is two to three times higher than the others. I wondered what the explanation is for that. >> I think it's just because this is the vendor that we currently have, and I would say it's based off of their performance that we've had in the past. Some of these other vendors, I know one in particular on here we've had before and we had an issue with the way that they've cleaned the gloves. That particular vendor also one year had a -- unfortunately had a fire at their warehouse and their insurance evidently did not cover our stock, so we kind of took a loss for that, so therefore, you know, they're not rated favorably during this process. >> And when you're doing this review, purchasing is involved in reviewing the criteria and who -- >> That is correct, yes, ma'am. >> -- who gets the scoring. >> Yes, ma'am. >> I believe there were six people on the evaluation committee of this. >> Okay. All right. >> Yes. >> All right. Good. Including you guys. >> Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Thank you. >> So the recommended vendor is the one you're currently using. >> Yes, sir. >> Correct? Okay. Another question on item four, which is the price total cost of ownership, if I'm reading that right, if it was perfect, that parameter would receive a 40% rating in your purchasing calculation. Is that right? >> Yes. >> And this one has a 33% rating, and all the others have a higher rating than that. Can you talk about that a little bit? >> Price is based on a formula, so the person that has the lowest price gets the highest amount of points, so that's why Texas Meter and Device got 40 points, and then the rest are rated based off of that. It's a percentage of their price compared to the lowest. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> The Cotton Electric got 91, total score of 91, there's a high score. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Any other questions? >> I would like to know what, roughly what fraction of the total gloves inspected are going to be replaced, what this is based on, because I know they're not cheap. A new set of gloves can be kind of pricey, so there's somebody made an assumption here on this analysis that we're going to replace 10% or whatever percentage it is of all those tested. That's all I have. >> All right, any other questions? Do we have a motion to approve? >> Move approval. >> Second. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? The motion carries. Item D. Has TACA systems, oh, you're back. >> I'll try, yes. >> I have a question here, I don't know if any others had one also, but my question is simple, we're paying for a software upgrade on this? >> Continue use of a software. >> All right. And it includes applications on mobile devices, that's what I read in some of the backup information I think. >> Then I assume yes, if you've read that in the backup information. >> My question is, can you get a read only application loaded onto this for me? >> Yes, it does have an iPad interface, and I'd have to double check and see if we have enough licenses available under our renewal to do something like that. It is access to our active work order system that the water and wastewater utility departments use. Can I get a read only? I don't want to do anything to it, just read it. >> I don't have the answer to that functionality necessarily right now. The primary interface that I think you'd probably like to see is the GIS database of our utility infrastructure, and that is available on the city's website. If you go to the mapping page, and then there's an interactive GIS map where you can see all of our water and wastewater assets, lines, valves, manholes, but what the city works application does is it provides work order systems so we can actually tie work orders to specific assets in the system. Whether we're replacing a line or fixing a manhole or a service for a customer. >> That was a question. Can I get that loaded onto this iPad, just a read only version? >> We can check. I mean, a lot of these systems are tied to what's called active directory, and so there's credentialing involved as far as just access by city employees, and so I don't even have access to that. >> And there's some things, not to say you're the general public, we don't want the general public to have access to for specifics related to our utility infrastructure. We're actually currently undergoing a risk and resiliency study mandated by the federal government, so that might be something we'd have to look at. We're looking at the cyber security aspect of things and who has access to what. Forgot to introduce myself, Frank Pugsley, water utilities director. >> Thank you. >> All right. Do we have a motion to approve? >> Make a motion to approve. >> Any second? >> I second. >> All in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? That carries. All right. The next item is consider approval of the minutes of October 14th, 2019. Were there any changes or issues? Okay, hearing. >> Approval. >> Okay. >> Second. >> All in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Okay, that carries. Consider recommending adoption of an ordinance for the city of Denton, Texas, establishing the rates for solid waste recycling collection services. >> Good afternoon. Good evening, Mr. Chair. I have a presentation. We can cover the exact same thing we did a couple of items ago, if you'd like. Otherwise, we are looking for your approval tonight. >> I'm not sure we need to see it again. >> Nope. >> Do we have a motion for approval? >> I move approval. >> I second. >> All in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> Motion carries. Okay, assistant city manager. >> Yes, good evening, members of the board. In your packet, we had provided you the contracted rates that Mr. Vincent just mentioned. The reason we included in the packet is because they had gone to council because of just the pending issues that these other entities were needing to get those contracts established. So we needed to go ahead, and so we wanted to put that in the packet not for your consideration but mostly just for your information. And then secondly, in your future agenda items, you had noticed that there was a comprehensive solid waste management plan that was supposed to be presented tonight. Obviously, that has not happened. That will be coming to you on the 11th of November to the PUB. So outside of that, that's all I have to report. >> I have a question regarding the third attachment. We had a Denton Energy Center update scheduled for October. Are we likely-- is there a revised date when we're likely to get that? >> Good evening, David Gaines, director of finance. Our plan would be to bring the fiscal year in through September deck report at the-- hopefully the next PUB meeting so you'll get-- we try to bring those to you at least at a quarterly basis so you can get a good recap. So at the end of the fiscal year, sometimes it can take a little bit longer just trying to close the books out, but hopefully at either the next meeting or the following one, we'll have that September report ready. >> OK. So does the June 30th report, has that all previously been distributed to this group? >> Correct. That was distributed previously, I believe. >> Would you mind emailing that to the new members? >> Sure. And it's out-- we have it on the website as well, but make sure that the website's updated and then we can send that out to you. >> OK. Thanks. >> Yeah, we'll make sure we get-- the whole board gets it. >> OK. Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> And then I have a question and I think maybe Barbara was unclear too. We have that we talked about on October 14th, the changing of the meetings. Did-- >> Well, actually what we covered-- the request was to just bring forward the metrics on the viewership. >> Right. >> So the item was just posted for the metric viewership. >> OK. >> There was no discussion from the board as far as changing the timeframes. If that's something that you all would like to discuss at a future meeting, we'd be happy to bring that information forward, but we just reported based on just the metrics of the viewership based on the request from the board. >> Go ahead, Barbara. >> Could you refresh? I'm not sure that I heard. What has been the response to the evening meeting? >> Response in which way? >> Attendance? >> Well, I've been keeping sort of an informal tally. Most of the folks that you hear see here tonight is staff, zero members of the public. Last probably six, seven months, again, informal tally, if there's been more than one or two members of the public, it's been that. Usually it's zeros, mostly staff members or consultants that are here to answer questions of the board and be here that just has witnesses or subject matter experts regarding their respective items. >> And the public has the opportunity to view it live or video of the meeting? >> Yes, ma'am. That was the whole premise of being able to provide that. We stream it live through the app, along through television, and then it's also recorded and folks can watch it on demand and be able to review the item in an index fashion so they can go straight to that item as opposed to having to fast-forward through a number of items on that respective agenda. >> So what is the fee, oh, go ahead. >> Is there a, have you calculated what it costs in staff overtime to be here in the evenings? >> Well, most of the staff here are salaried, so there's no overtime, it's just other duties as a sign. >> I think you answered that question. >> So, but again, not to debate the item on here tonight, but we can certainly bring back a report of kind of, just provide a little bit more information to the board, either at the next meeting or the first meeting in December, because there won't be a second meeting in November. We'd be happy to do that. I believe this may be the last evening meeting of the calendar year, so just because we're up against November now. So there's not a second meeting in November, there's not a second meeting in December, so be happy to bring information to the board, just kind of where we started and where we've ended up, and it's your determination how you would like to handle these meetings going forward. >> And did you have a question, Ed? >> Yes, I just wanted to know, do I have to formally put my request, the gentleman from DME said about, he's going to provide a report on the creosote, do I have to formally make that under new business? >> That would be preferred under concluding August. >> Okay, then that's what I've done. >> So, okay. >> Thank you. >> And I think I heard you seek input. I would assume the chairman is the person who schedules meetings. For my preference, I have a slight preference for the morning meetings, but I'm happy to go with the consensus of everyone else. >> So is this an item the board would like to have formally? >> Yes. >> Discussions on, okay. So please add that to the future agenda. >> So just to discuss evening meetings or meetings? >> Changing it to having all morning meetings. >> All mornings, okay. We can do that. >> But just a point of order, is that not a decision for the chairperson to make and surely this isn't the open records for when to meet coming a month in advance? >> Well, what we did as a courtesy to a previous board member, we reviewed the agenda items and at the request of the board member to mix up the meeting times. And so the consensus of the committee, there wasn't a formal action, but just consensus of the board at the time was to have a blend of evening and morning meetings. And so that's the practice we've been going on for the last probably 16 to 18 months. >> Okay, and that member is no longer a member of this board? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> But we can certainly bring all that information back to you at a future meeting. So again, just concerned about staying on posting. >> Well, it's been a fairly good experiment to see, you know, if there is an interest. If there's an interest is one thing, but if no interest has been shown. >> So was that concluding items or now we're in concluding items? So any board member wish another item be placed on the agenda? All right. Do we have a motion to adjourn then? >> So moved. >> Second. - All right, we're adjourned.