Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-04-24 RMLD Board of Commissioners MinutesReading Municipal Light Board of Commissioners Reeular Session 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 to April 24, 2013 Start Time of Regular Session: 7:30 p.m. End Time of Regular Session: 10:30 p.m. Commissioners John Stempeck, Chairman Philip B. Pachm, Vice Chair Robert Soli, Secretary David Talbot, Commissioner Staff: Kevin Sullivan, Interim General Manager Beth Ellen Antonio, Human Resources Manager Jeanne Foti, Executive Assistant Bob Fournier, Accounting/Business Manager Paula O'Leary, Materials Manager Jane Parenteau, Energy Services Manager David Polson, Facilities Manager Peter Price, Chief Engineer William Seldon, Senior Energy Analyst Citizens' Advisory Board Dave Nelson, Member Guest Diedre Lawrence, Esquire, Rubin and Rudman Public: John Arena, Bill Brown, Peter Hechenbleikner, David Mancuso, Bob Mauceri, John Norton, Fred Van Magness Opening Remarks kw Chairman Stempeck called the meeting to order and stated that the meeting was being videotaped, it is live in Reading only. Chairman Stempeck said that all we do here pales in comparison to the events of these past two weeks. We cannot express enough our sorrow, to the families of those who were killed or injured by the cowardly acts of terrorists at the Boston Marathon, MIT, Watertown and other parts of Boston. We as a country, and certainly New England as the initial founder of freedom for this great nation, have never bowed to terrorism of any kind, yet we recognize that words provide little comfort when faced with the loss of a loved one involved in such a terrible event. Lacking a better mechanism as an expression for our shared desire to help, Mr. Sullivan has set up an individual contributor fund within the RMLD for contributing to the One Fund Boston to help these families and individuals during the long recovery. Chairman Stempeck polled the Board, Citizens' Advisory Board members and the public to we if there were additional comments. Them were none. Introductions Chairman Stempeck acknowledged Citizens' Advisory Bomd member, Dave Nelson; Town of North Reading, Board of Selectmen, Vice Chairman, Bob Mauceri; Town of Reading Board of Selectmen, Vice Chairman, John Arena, in attendance at the meeting. General Manager Search Committee—Chairman Stempeck Chairman Stempeck reported that they have retained a professional recmiter w solicit individuals for the General Manager position. It has been very successful and the Committee is now performing the initial interviews of candidates. This work will be completed over the next week or so. it is anticipated that the candidates will be brought before the Board immediately after that. If needed, they will call a special meeting to expedite the process. Chairman Stempeck said that as you are aware, the Board received a letter from the Town Manager indicating that ® the Town felt that our March 27, 2013, vote was tat legal. Chairman Stempeck said that counsel (Rubin and Rudman) was retained to examine this. Counsel has returned a seven -page letter. The letter asserts that the RMLB's action was legal, with numerous examples with case law showing this point. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 Report of the Chairman (Attachment I and Attachment 2) • Results of Town of Reading and RMLD's Legal Counsel on Reading Home Rule Charter This is relative to the March 27, 2013, RMLD vote on the Interim General Manager. Only RMLD Board members will receive this since it is draft form. Chairman Stempeck asked Diedre Lawrence to be here this evening to entertain any additional questions. Chairman Stempeck said that he would like to get a motion from the Board to send a letter of response to Town Manager, Peter Hechenbleilmer, that shows the legal opinion so it is open and people can look at it. Discussion followed. Messrs. Talbot and Pacino staled that the legal opinion should be made public at this point. Chairman Stempeck agreed. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Patin to approve sending the following letter. Motion carried 4:0:0. Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner, Thank you for your concerns about the validity of votes taken by the RMLB on March 27, 2013, related to the Interim General Manager's position. We appreciate your interest in maintaining the correct process for our actions at the RMLB, and we would like to respond appropriately. We have asked counsel to review the letter and please see attached their response. As such, we disagree with you on both of the issues you raised in your letter and we maintain that all votes and actions that occurred were within the purview of the RMLB. Respectfully submitted, John Stempeck, Chairman • Mr. Pacino made a motion seconded by Mr. Talbot to make the legal opinion public. Motion carried 4:0:0. Mr. Van Magness said that on the agenda that only the Board would receive the information because it is in draft form It is difficult to ask counsel any questions because the legal opinion was not made public before the meeting. It is very difficult to have discussion. Mr. Talbot suggested passing out the legal opinion now. Chairman Stempeck said that the legal opinion will be made public after the meeting. Chairman Stempeck said that the vote taken at the March 27 meeting has been affirmed by RMLD counsel. However, the person that is involved in this, Jane Parentem, has responded that at this point in time, rather than rotate into the Interim General Manager position; she would rather see the Board be successful in hiring a new General Manager as quickly as possible. She has an extremely full workload and wants to see the RMLD continue an serve its citizens and put any remaining issues of leadership aside to get the job done without any distractions. Chairman Stempeck said that we would like to commend Jane for her professional attitude and thank both she and Kevin as we work our way through this difficult transition period. Mr. Pacino made a motion seconded by Mr. Talbot that the Commission retains the present Interim General Manager, Kevin Sullivan until such time as the Commission appoints either a new General Manager or the Commission elects to appoint a different Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. Mr. Arena said that as he understood the original motion it created a temporary assignment whereby one or more persons could in a series occupy the role of Interim General Manager, is that correct? Chairman Stempeck said that the initial intent was to have people rotate into that position. Mr. Arena said that he has not heard anything in the amended motion that rescinds the multiple roles or the temporal nature of that. He understands retaining the current, but you need to ferret out or reconstruct as it was constructed previously m well. Chairman Stempeck said that • counsel's legal opinion states that this does not have to be done. Mr. Areas asked Chairman Slempeck [o enlighten him. Charman Stempeck responded that he would like their legal counsel to do so. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 • Report of the Chairman (Attachment 1 and Attachment 2) Results of Torsm of Reading and RMLD's Legal Counsel on Reading Home Rule Charter This is relative to the March 27, 2013, RMLD vote on the Interim General Manager. Only RMLD Board members will receive this since it is draft form. Chairman Stempeck said that it was within the purview of the RMLD to choose a General Manager. It was meant to be temporary and that was the intent. There is no need to rescind what was done previously; we are putting in place what is already there. That was the intent of the motion. Mr. Arena said that the earlier motion appeared to create an instance of serial leadership. It is within the purview of the Board to make such a motion that has never been the question. The question was with adherence to the Town Charter. The Board is within its authority to create a leadership structure of its own design. His question is that given that was created a few weeks ago, what does reinstatement mean in context to the earlier motion with having multiple persons. Ms. Lawrence stated that how the Town Charter does or does not impact the appointment of an interim, temporary, General Manager position is discussed in the legal opinion. The cliff notes are basically that the Charter provision addresses hiring and removing the General Manager. However, they differ on how they view the position of Interim General Manager on the same footing as the position of General Manager. Assuming that for the sake of argument, that the Charter provision applies (it is discussed in the legal opinion that they differ on this) to the actions of the RMLB, it does not apply in this instance because we are not talking about a permanent position of General Manager. It is an interim, filler type of position. The second item addressed in the legal opinion is that Town Charter provisions can only apply to actions of the Municipal Light Board to the extent that they do not conflict with Chapter 164. It is discussed within the legal opinion that the provision is not necessarily compatible with Chapter 164, which discusses in detail how and when the Board appoints a General Manager. Mr. Arena's question is not on the legal basis. Last week the vote was to have two or three persons occupy a seat serially. The next period the decision is to retain the precursor, which was the interim. Isn't it necessary to recast the role with it no longer being the three persons? Ms. Lawrence clarified; procedurally, you are asking if they need to sew up the old one. Mr. Arena said that the motion stated that we have three people for this seat; there is now one Q person. Ms. Lawrence said that she does not see the need to do that, it sounds like he is referring to Robert's Rules or something to do with procedures. Mr. Arena replied, not at all; it is not Robert's Rules; it is the org chart question. Organizationally, there are three managers in fill the position aerially, which is the position of the Board. Now the decision is to revert. Where is the motion to revert the prior org chart? Ms. Lawrence replied that it is assumed with the action taken this evening with that vote. An announcement was made that Ms. Parenteau declined to serve in that role. Mr. Arena pointed out that role may still exist even if she does not want that role. Ms. Lawrence said that it only exists as long m they say it exists. By taking the vote tonight that no longer exists. Mr. Soli pointed out that the vote on March 27 said to appoint senior staff on a rotating position with Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Parenteau in those roles. It had two names only. Mr. Soli said that Ms. Parenteau says that her plate is quite full; then it is Mr. Sullivan. Chairman Stempeck said that the motion was made to be as clear as possible; we are trying to do the right thing and being very explicit as opposed to getting tied up into the intricacies of whom is to do what with whom on any given day. Mr. Hechenbleilmer stated the he e-mailed Mr. Sullivan regarding the joint meeting with RMLD Board and the Board of Selectmen on May 7 to appoint the fifth member m the Board. It would be important to have all the members of the RMLD Board and Board of Selectmen present. Mr. Arena added that he will not be present at the meeting. Mr. Hechenblekner said that he will coordinate with Mr. Sullivan another meeting dale. Mr. Hechenbleikner said, for the community, those interested can submit their applications to him. Report of the Chairman Fiscal Year 2014 - RMLD Operating and Capital Budget Chairman Stempeck reported that he received a letter from the Citizens' Advisory Board Chairman that they have accepted both the Fiscal Year 2014 Operating and Capital Budget. Mr. Talbot said that (today), he had sent a letter with some questions. Procedurally, it has been at the May meeting that the Board has approved the Budget in the past. Mr. Talbot said that at the last meeting there were other items that kept them preoccupied. Chairman Stempeck added that he just received this. (Mr. Talbot apologized for that, but was a little timelier than Mr. Hechenbleikner's letter.) Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 Report of the Chairman Fiscal Year 2014 - RMLD Operating and Capital Budget 40 Chairman Stempeck suggested having a committee to address his ideas. Mr. Pacino pointed out that on the agenda; committees were being addressed, the committee to address this is the Budget Committee that would address Mr. Talbot's suggestions. Mr. Pacino asked if there is a downside to not approving the Budget this evening. Mr. Sullivan cautioned that if we form a committee, it will push out the timeto me and the CAB may need to vole on this again causing a delay. Anything that is a material change needs to go back to the CAB for approval. Mr. Talbot pointed out that there are many exciting things happening on the campus alone. The Station 1 report is a great report. It is very exciting to think what the building can be. The covered storage is a great initiative that is a means to get us out of the expensive lease. With four things happening on the campus, let us do a site plan. It is worth getting a planner in to see how the pieces fit together. This will enable Station I to be looked in terms of will it be storage or public use; it will influence the work done to the building. Chairman Stempeck asked if we could do something like that (in terms of a master plan), irrespective of approving the Budget. Can the Budget be approved, but have money allocated to develop the master plan. Mr. Sullivan responded that you can perform a master plan. Mr. Sullivan said that as far as Station 1, he would like to get some forward motion to preserve the building even if it means to the masonry or the roof. Mr. Talbot asked if we could take a piece of the $850,000 and set that aside for planning. Mr. Polson said that Mr. Talbot had a good point with the master plan to evaluate the site. There is enough money available so that a master plan could be a part of the project. There are a lot of things going on such as traffic flow, Station 1 and covered storage. A site plan would not be an exorbitant amount of money and should be able to fit that in and present that to the Board. Mr. Polson would encourage the Board to support the capital plan as quickly as possible in order that the site plan can take place. Chairman Stempeck asked if there is anything that would be impacted if we waited until May to approve the Budget Mr. Sullivan responded that only if there is a material change that requires CAB input. Chairman Norton stated that historically, if there is movement of $200,000 or more either way, then it goes back to the CAB for re -approval. If you move within Budget, that is not within the • CAB's purview. Mr. Soli asked for clarification, the bottom line. Chairman Norton said that if the bottom line remains within the $200,000 that is fine. If you are moving dollars in the context of the conversations here it does not affect them because the bottom line remains the same. Mr. Sullivan pointed out that the energy storage process is a $20 million project which would require a bond be floated because the RMLD does not have that level of funding. Ms. Parenteau said that she wanted to speak to the storage opportunity. Her department is responsible for managing the wholesale power supply costs, which include capacity, transmission, and energy. One of the areas being investigated, in terns of managing capacity and transmission costs, is distributed generation. At the December meeting, the building presentation was being discussed. One of her employees approached her to discuss clean energy in terms of battery storage. They submitted a proposal to the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (CEC) for a feasibility study. They were notified in late March that as a municipal light plant that RMLD does not qualify for the proceeds of that grant. However, she was contacted directly by the CEC, it was indicated to her that the submitted proposal was substantially strong. It provoked discussion with the Sandia National Laboratories and the Department of Energy. The CEC subsequently scheduled a conference call with RMLD and the Department of Energy on April 16. The Department of Energy has proposed to fund a feasibility study for this up to $100,000 if we could submit a proposal to them by the end of May. It is preliminary, it is an idea. Ms. Parenteau is concerned that we do not have the resources to perform this proposal in house and achieve that timeline with their current level of activity. Mr. Talbot clarified that we have an opportunity to get $100,000 from the Department of Energy. Ms. Parenteau responded that they have funds available for this fiscal year. Mr. Talbot asked, this money pays for the study, not the storage. Ms. Parenteau responded that it is for a feasibility study for what the building can hold and what the economics are RMLD is looking at. We are talking one megawatt of battery storage. Chairman Stempeck asked if the additional resources, externally will it be paid by this grant? Ms. Parenteau replied, yes. Mr. Talbot asked if additional funding is required. Ms. Parenteau explained that this is for this fiscal year. Ms. Parenteau added that it is a matter of manpower issues developing this proposal to work with the CEC. The CEC would like to see this in Massachusetts because there is no utility in Massachusetts that does this operation. Mr. Talbotasked what • needs to be done to get the application in. Ms. Parenteau said that it is a matter of manpower. Chairman Stempeck suggested taking this offline; it is a great idea and it can be funded externally. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 • Report of the Chairman Fiscal Year 2014 - RMLD Operating and Capital Budget Mr. Soli said that when he came to the meeting, it was his expectation that one or two committees were going to be reinstituted, especially the Budget Committee. There has been a lot of discussion and he has some notes that would be better served at a Budget meeting. Chairman Norton cautioned the Board in postponing this.into May. If the $200,000 figure is exceeded; it has m come back to the CAB. Per the Twenty Year Agreement, they have thirty days to act on that and resubmit it to the Board. You are potentially getting into Jane and July. He cannot guarantee getting a quonrm due to vacations; keep yew timeframes in mind. Chairman Norton reiterated if you exceed $200,000 the Budget needs to go back to the CAB there is a thirty day review. Mr. Pacino suggested if the Budget Committee is formed that it meets two weeks from this evening. At a prior Board meeting, it was suggested to have a second meeting during the month to accommodate such issues. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Talbot that the RMLD Board of Commissioners delay action on the Fiscal Year 2014 Operating Budget and Capitol Budget until May 29, 2013. Motion carried 4:0:0. RMLD Board of Commissioners Committees and Assignments (Attachment 3) Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Talbot to reinstitute the Budget Committee, the Power & Rate Committee, and the General Manager Committee, with the Budget Committee members, Robert Soli, Chairman; Philip Parma, Member; and David Talbot, Member; with the other committees to be smiled at the May meeting. Motion carried 4:0:0. Mr. Soli explained that the Power & Rale Committee involves getting into the details with Energy Services when power contracts become due. Such meetings provide an opportunity to learn those details, understand them and ® come up with a recommendation for the Board. This committee meets up to three times a year depending on whether power has to be purchased. Mr. Soli said that the General Manager Committee met with the General Manager and came up with a list of goals for the year on which compensation was based and at the end of the year evaluated the General Manager. Chairman Stempeck asked the Power & Rale Committee is that something where we would have influence on how the General Manager handles the operational aspects or is it for informational purposes. Mr. Soli responded that the Board approves contracts, so if there are power contracts it is good that we try to understand them. Mr. Pacino explained that how it worked in the past is that the Power & Rate Committee got the first not on the power contracts and made a recommendation to the entire Commission as to whether or not to approve the contracts. Mr. Soli added that when there were green power projects, Energy Services would come to the Committee with proposals that were green with the consensus that the contracts were too pricey. Chairman Stempeck commented that it is his sense that it is a valuable committee; the only qualification is the workload that currently exists within that particular department, is there time to do this. Chairman Smmpeck asked for Ms. Paremeau's input. Ms. Parenteau reported that part of the power supply strategic plan involves going out for an energy request for proposal for power supply on an annual basis for the next four years. They are a little behind on that as they usually go to the Board in February. The Department needs authorization on contracts prior in final prices because those prices are only valid for less than a one how period Ms. Pamadeau said that she is in the process of putting that together what needs to be presented to the Power & Rate Committee or the Board as well as the CAB. There are two wind projects as well as two hydro projects that are being evaluated. Chairman Stempeck said that the Power & Rate Committee will serve a very useful purpose. Ms. Pa mean said that when the meetings are posted the full Board is also encouraged to come. Mr. Pacino added that each month there should be a report from each of the committees because the REC issue was not discussed with the ® full Board only the Power & Rate Committee. The Budget Committee will meet on Wednesday, May 8 at 7:00 pm. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 Report of the Chairman Code of Conduct RMLD Board Meetings • Chairman Stempeck reported that the Code of Conduct at RMLD Board Meetings is c t endy in draft form. Chairman Stempeck is proposing that the Code of Conduct be read at each Board meeting because it is a mutual document that we show each other respect whether it be from the public or the Board speaking. He has the feeling it has not always been the case here. Chairman Stempeck read the Code of Conduct at RMLD Board Meetings: Prior m opening the meeting to public comment, we would like to establish a few rules of conduct for these meetings, which will be repeated at every meeting. 1. Fust, a statement of who we are: The RMLD Board is a body of elected volunteers who have chosen to try to serve our communities, with the goal of providing reliable electric power at the lowest possible cost. 2. The RMLD Board will be focused on facts at our meeting, not conjecture, and we will hold all public comment to this same standard. If you wish to discuss facts of performance and/or non-performance by the RMLD, which can be documented, we welcome your comments and constructive criticism. 3. We believe in being courteous to everyone. The Board will not tolerate any individual who chooses to question the character, motivation, or qualifications of any member of the Board or the CAB. 4. As a pre -requisite to be recognized by the Board to speak, we would ask that everyone acknowledges that they understand what was just presented. Charman Stempeck polled the Board for comments. Mr. Talbot said that he liked it. Mr. Mancuso said that he thought it was a great idea to have a Code of Conduct. Adherence to Robert Rules provides the exact same framework. As the Board develops proficiencies as volunteers, with the complexity of Robert's Rules is the Hamm] by-product of will be the Code of Conduct you are after. Mr. Mancuso said that he encourages constructive input from the ratepayers. There are many agendas in the energy industry these days and the Board will address many of these agendas. People come from many perspectives on these agendas, some informed some not informed. Sometimes it will be the obligation of the Board to share information with the public that educates them about these issues. Sometimes the public will ask what appear to be aggressive questions because they do act know, so within that Code of Conduct, so as long as the spirit is to enable open transparent dialogue between the Board and the public. Charman Stempeck said that he completely agrees with Mr. Mancuso to get something out there that can be wordsmithed. It is a mechanism they can use to have courtesy guidelines. It is about facts. No one wants to deal with conjuncture. He is one hundred percent into digging into the facts for the truth. Mr. Van Magness said that it is a great idea to get that kind of policy. Mr. Van Magness added that the spirit is there and it is a good thing to have. Mr. Van Magness suggested publicizing this at the very beginning of the meeting instead of waiting for public comment. Mr. Van Magness said that Chairman Stempeck has been quite gracious with allowing comment. From a public standpoint, it cuts both ways and somehow that statement (referring to the context of the document) that the Board needs to understand some of that. Mr. Talbot clarified, is there a provision formerly on the agenda to have the public speak. He also pointed out that on the Board of Sciccunen's agenda; the opportunity to speak is on there for the first ten minutes. It is valuable and friendly to the public. It is the spirit of openness. If there are issues out there you can take care of them early. He suggests that we could adopt it too. Mr. Talbot suggested making a motion that the Board add a ten minute public comment period at the beginning of the meeting. The consensus was that no motion was required; it was up to the discretion of the Chairman. • Chairman Stempeck said that he looks for public comment on the Code of Conduct as well. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April24, 2013 Report of the Chairman Code of Conduct RMLD Board Meetings Mr. Pacino made a motion seconded by Mr. Soli to establish a Code of Conduct and be decided upon at a future meeting. Motion carried 4:0:0. Approval of Board Minutes Mr. Pacum made a motion seconded by Mr. Soli that the RMLD Board of Commissioners approve the Regular Session meeting minutes of Much 27, 2013 with the changes presented by Mr. Soli. Motion carried 4:0:0. General Manager's Report— Mr. Sullivan — Interim General Manager Mr. Sullivan reported on the following community announcements: Earth Day April 27 The RMLD will be participating at the Earth Day event at the Mattera Cabin, 1481 Main Street, Reading, 10 am to 2:00 pm. Bicycle Swao May 3 and May 4 A bicycle swap will be at the Reading Municipal Light Department. Reading Cares and Reading Climate Advisory Committee will sponsor their fifth free annual bicycle recycling event. This will take place on Friday, May 3 and Saturday, May 4. For more information please email infir&eadiugcares.org. Friends and Family Day June 15 The RMLD will have a booth at the Friends and Family Day, Saturday, June 15. Middleton Overpayment Discussion ® Mr. Sullivan reported that he met with the General Manager of Middleton Municipal Electric Department (MELD). They discussed the amount of the overpayment, which is approximately $400,000. Mr. Sullivan said that last month he reported that the amount was lower; however, the number has been refigured. Mr. Sullivan added that Energy Services was involved in the refiguring amount. The Middleton Board would like to credit this back as soon as possible. META has agreed to make this right by the end of RMLD's fiscal year 2013. Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Frontier are working on this process. NSTAR Overpayment Discussion Mr. Sullivan reported on the NSTAR overpayment. Per RMLD's legal counsel in Washington, DC, Duncan & Allen, approximately $198,000 was recoverable when filed with the Regional Network Service expenses for 2010 and 2011. The 2011 expenses did not include the Schedule 125 payment of the remaining $58,380. He has contacted the attorney on this as well as an outside service the RMLD utilizes, Frank Radigan. They am going to try to re -file this year. Mr. Sullivan said that there is no assurance that the 2011 expense will be allowed to be claimed this year. There could be potentially a loss of $58,380. He will keep the Board updated on this. Due to both of these situations, the Middleton and NSTAR overpayment issues, he bas directed Mr. Fournier to speak with Melanson, Heath & Company, PC. They will be coming out to audit the purchase power process. Mr. Sullivan reported that RMLD has received notification from MMWEC relative to their new billing process, which has been in place since late January. The March invoices will be issued on April 29 with the April invoices being on schedule in May. Power Supply Report — February 2013 — Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 4) Ms. Parenteau presented the February power supply report provided in the Commissioner packets covering power ® supply charges, energy cost, fuel charges and collections, fuel reserve balance, spot market purchases, capacity costs, as well as the percentage of RMLD's hydro projects. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 Power Supply Report — February 2013 — Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 4) • Ms. Parenteau reported that in February natural gas prices were 96% higher than January's average cost at $21.17 per MBTU. February 2013 to February 2012 comparison reflects an increase of the natural gas prices by 490%. It is $21 versus $3.61 per MBTU. The ISO observed that the fuel uncertainty is escalating and is unsustainable. They are working with the state stakeholders to address system reliability during the cold snaps and storm conditions. In February, the RMLD had 7.7% of its purchases from hydro generation. The RMLD has four hydro projects in which they have signed purchase power agreements. For quarters three and four of 2012, as well as January and February 2013, the RMLD has a total projected REC value of 7,409 with a market value as of the writing of this report of approximately $274,000. Mr. Soli commented that he watches NYPA closely; he has never seen the fuel charge so high. Ms. Parenteau explained that is a result of the congestion in the New York, NYPA comes through the New York ISO, it is transmission related. Engineering and Operations Report — March 2013 — Mr. Sullivan (Attachment 5) Mr. Sullivan presented the report included in the Commissioner packet covering the monthly capital projects, an update on the metering project and reliability reporting. Mr. Sullivan reported that the Customer Average Interruption Duration (CAIDI) annual average is a little bit lower than what it was in February. The System Average Interruption Frequency (SAIFI) values have climbed due to the number of customers out of service. Mr. Sullivan referred back to the North Reading cable failure. There were 1,266 customers out of service for the month of March. Mr. Sullivan reported on the meter upgrade project. The Department has resumed the installation of residential • meters since the snow has abated. Residential and commercial meters are being installed simultaneously. The fixed network was tested in Lynnfield which is the last town to be installed. Financial Report— February 2013 — Mr. Fournier (Attachment 6) Mr. Fournier presented the financial report included in the Commissioner packet for the fust eight months; net income $130,000, increasing the year to date income to $2.4 million. Year to date kilowatt hour sales were 454,000,000 kilowatt hours sold which is 3% ahead of last year's actual figure. Melanson Heath & Company, PC — Potential Special Audit Chairman Stempeck reported that this is in response to how we get a better handle on our financial aspect or whatever it may be within the Department where issues have arisen. Chairman Stempeck said that we are trying to put other things in place to rectify this. Mr. Fourier explained that when Mr. Sullivan told him about the Middleton overpayment issue and after the NSTAR issue that occurred in 2011, the auditors made it very clear to him that they wanted to be notified immediately, therefore he called the auditors. Mr. Fournier said that the auditors were quite surprised. This could appear as a foomote in the financials, again; however, where the RMLD was proactive and was addressing it, would make it easier on the financial report. Mr. Fournier reported that they have a special division that addresses this and can send someone out by June. Mr. Fourier said that when the audit is performed in August, the auditors can be assured that the numbers they are looking at with the loose ends being tightened up. They can at least say that the Department is being proactive. He is having this special audit performed by Melanson Heath, if they are available, in May or June to conduct such an audit. Chairman Stempeck stated that it is good to be proactive where we are financially driven. Regular Session Meeting Minutes April 24, 2013 Financial Report — February 2013 —Mr. Fournier (Attachment 6) Melanson Heath & Company, PC — Potential Special Audit Chairman Stempeck asked if Melanson Heath is the right company because it can be a conflict of interest where they do things for other parts of the town. Mr. Fournier responded that it will not be the same auditors performing the audit because it is a different division. Mr. Fournier said that the scope dictates the pricing, but this may cost approximately $50,000. Mr. Van Magness said that there was discussion last month about this issue. Mr. Van Magness applauds the Interim General Manager for his actions. The scope of this needs to be a thorough examination of the entire process of the accounts payable. That is where the problem has been, in the account payable process. Mr. Van Magness questioned how things get reviewed within the Department, where the approvals are being made, what processes the Board members go through. Are there specific control points, are there control mechanisms that need to be in place for recurring payments? Both times it has been the recurring payments rather than go buy a bucket truck or cable. It is important for the Board m have a discussion around what we want to ask the auditors to do. Chairman Stempeck said that we are discussing a workflow analysis and will examine that. He has done that for other companies, is familiar with that and thinks it is a good idea. The real question is the timing and the cost. Mr. Fournier pointed out that part of the audit process is testing the account payable invoices with a testing of fifty to one hundred invoices which are followed from soup to nuts. To have a special audit on the whole account payable (AP) process is unnecessary because it is performed annually. Mr. Founder pointed out that with the power invoices Accounting does not see the contracts therefore, whatever gets approved goes through. Mr. Fournier reported that on the NSTAR issue that Mr. Sullivan had esoteric knowledge because of working at NSTAR knew that right away the invoice should not be paid. Mr. Fournier stated that if Mr. Sullivan had not covered the AP in the absence of Mr. Cameron, the RMLD would still be paying that invoice. Mr. Fournier added that for the ® Middleton billing, it is unfortunate that it happened coupled with the NSTAR issue. Mr. Pacino added that the Department is seeking authorization to go forward and take the next step. There is no formal motion required, but the sense of the Board is to go forward with the next step and obtain the auditor's opinion. Mr. Founder will bring any information relative to the Budget Committee if he has any update on this. M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7) Ms. O'Leary stated that the Board has had concerns in the past with bidders not submitting the required documents m a result of being deemed non-responsive. Mr. Soli's recommended for neon paper in order that it stands out for bidders. The neon will not work because most of the bids are sent electronically, instead highlighted all documents with bold and italics, clearly stating that they would be deemed non-responsive. Certain documents are statutory and must be included in the bid. Relative to the four bidders on the underground bid that will be addressed this evening which was the fust bid this has been tested on, none have been deemed non-responsive. Ms. O'Leary thanked the Board for the suggestion. 1FB 2013-21 Bucket Truck 55 Ft. Mr. Polson reported that this track will be utilized by the Line Department. The bucket track will arrive next Fiscal Year 2014. It is for Fiscal Year 2014 because it will take more than two hundred days before the RMLD will receive this crack. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Pacino that bid 2013-21 for one Bucket Truck 55 Ft. be awarded to Altec Industries, Inc. for $187,905.00 as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. IFB 2013-22 Trouble Truck 40 Ft. Mr. Polson reported that this bid was sent out to twenty-two companies with four responses. The lowest bid was ® deemed non-responsive. They were unable to provide the lift equipment that was in the specifications for this bid. The second lowest, Freightliner, offered a area additive to the exhaust not in our spec, therefore were non- responsive. Regular Session Meeting Minutes 10 April 24, 2013 M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7) • IFB 2013-22 Trouble Truck 40 Ft. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Patin that bid 2013-22 for one Trouble Track 40 Ft. be awarded to James A. Kiley Co. for $182,744.00 as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. 17012013-23 Deck Repair Mr. Polson reported that he would like to cancel this bid. Yesterday, he was made aware of additional information because of the scope of work. The original infommtion he received from the building inspector regarding the handicap ramp was that the existing ramp was sufficient. However, yesterday he found out that the building inspector is requiring widening the ramp. This changes the scope of the project and increases the cost. Therefore he would is recommending to cancel this project. IFB 2013-25 Lynafheld URD Excavation Project 2013 Mr. Price repotted that this bid is for the underground excavation for the Lynnfield URD project. The original bidder pulled his bid back. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Patin that bid 2013-25 for the Lynnfield URD Excavation Project 2013 be awarded to Tim Zanelli Excavation., LLC for $91,975.00 ar the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. IFB 2013-26 Underground Electrical Distribution Mr. Price reported that this bid is for the underground electrical contractor and is a three year bid. Mr. Price explained that Fischbach & Moore is RMLD's current contractor. They are the lowest qualified bidder and are 0.4% lower than last year for their rates. • Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Patin that bid 2013-26 for Hourly Rates for Professional Manpower, Vehicles, Trade Tools and Equipment For Underground Electrical Distribution Construction be awarded to Fischbach & Moore Electrical Group, LLC for $900,681.60 - Projected cost for a typical crew including Foreman, Journeyman and vehicle as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. IFB 2013-29 750 MCM Cable Mr. Price reported that this bid is for cable for the underground getaways. There was discussion in the cable budget raising the capacity to fifteen megawatts; this is the cable that is utilized. Mr. Sullivan explained that this cable is replacing what was used in the 3W8 cable failure in North Reading. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Patin that bid 2013-29 for 750 MCM Cable be awarded to Yale Electric East LLC for a total cost of $54,585.00 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. Motion carried 4:0:0. General Discussion Chairman Stempeck asked if there was any other additional discussion There was none. Public Comment Mr. Van Magness asked about the deck repair. Why would any money be spent at all. Why can't it be moved? What functional purpose does it serve; perhaps it is part of the site plan. Mr. Van Magness said that he does not need an answer this evening. Mr. Sullivan explained that the deck is approximately twenty by thirty. The decking material and the foundation is in terrific shape, the railings and enclosure where affected by Hurricane Sandy. Ms. O'Leary mentioned recently she received something from Northeast Public Power Association for a contract for O wooden poles. Regular Session Meeting Minutes l l April 24, 2013 Public Comment Ms. O'Leary said that she had heard Mr. Van Magness' suggestion in the past; they also obtained separate pricing from a vendor which came in lower than NEPPA contract They are working on that. Chairman Stempeck suggested looking at the most strategic items first as a means of trying to we if a joint purchase is feasible. There has to be a case study that has been performed on this. Mr. Sullivan said that it is a good suggestion, but can be unwieldy due to Chapter 30B. Chairman Stempeck asked that Ms. O'Leary contact other utilities towe if it is feasible. Ms. O'Leary added that through the Massachusetts Association Public Purchasing there me other consortiums that provide bulk purchasing. Mr. Van Magness added that on February 20 there was discussion that the Board was going to make public the full content of the previous General Manager's consulting contract. It was expected to be at the March 27 meeting. Mr. Sullivan responded that nothing has been spent to date. Mr. Pacino added that no contract has been signed. Mr. Van Magness commented that if no contract has been signed, then there is nothing to disclose. BOARD MATERIAL AVAILABLE BUT NOT DISCUSSED Rate Comparisons, April 2013 E -Mail responses to Account Payable/Payroll Questions RMLDBoard Meetings Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Meeting with Reading Board of Selectmen, Reading Town Hall, 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, May 29,1013 and June 26, 2013 Citizens Citizens' AdvisorvBoard MeetlneMeetine Wednesday, May 15, 2013, RMLD at 6:30 p.m. Executive Session At 9:42 p.m. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Pacino that the Board go into Executive Session to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining Chapter 164 Section 47 D exemption from public records and open meeting requirements in certain instances and mmm to Regular Session for the sole purpose of adjournment. Chairman Stempeck polled the Board. Motion carried by a polling of the Board: Mr. Soli; Aye; Mr. Pacino, Aye; Chairman Stempeck, Aye; and Mr. Talbot; Aye. Motion carried 4:0:0. Adjournment At 10:30 p.m. Mr. Soli made a motion by Move to adjourn the Regular Session. A true copy of the RMLD Board of Commissioners minutes as approved by a majority of the Commission, Robert Soli, Secretary RMLD Board of Commissioners E ora o I Town of Reading ATLACHNIENTI 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867-2685 FAX: (781) 942-9071 Email: townmanager@cl.reading.ma.us TOWN MANAGER Website: www. readingma.gov (781) 942-9043 April 10, 2013 Phil Pacino, Chairman Reading Municipal Light Board 230 Ash Street Reading MA 01867 Re: Appointment of Interim General Manager Dear Mr. Pacino: This letter to the Reading Municipal Light Board is to bring to the Board's attention my concern about the validity of votes taken by the RMLB on March 27, 2013 related to the Interim General Manager's position. On February 20, 2013, three members of the RMLB met and discussed the appointment of an Interim General Manager of the RMLD until such time as a permanent replacement to retired GM Vinnie Cameron can be appointed. Mr. Soli made a motion that 'the RMLD Board of Commissioners pursuant to Commonwealth of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 164, Section 56 appoint the troika of Bob Fournier, Jane Parenteau, and Kevin Sullivan to the position of Interim General Manager.' The motion was defeated by a vote of 1-2-0. Ms. West then made a motion that 'the RMLD Board of Commissioners pursuant to Commonwealth of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 164, Section 56 appoint Kevin Sullivan to the position of Interim General Manager' and that motion was approved on a vote of 3-0-0. On March 27, 2013, at the end of the meeting, the RMLB entered into discussion about the Interim General Manager's position, even though that item was not on the agenda. With little debate, the RMLB considered a motion by Ms. Snyder that 'the RMLD Board of Commissioners pursuant to Commonwealth of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 164, Section 56 appoint senior staff on a rotating basis to the position of Interim General Manager with Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Parenteau in those roles, and that Ms. Parenteau be appointed for the 3 month period starting April 1 to May 1.' The motion was approved by a vote of 3.0-1 (the motion was amended to provide an April 15 start date.) There are two concerns with the Process that resulted in this action, and in consultation with Town Counsel, I believe that the March 27, 2013 motion on this matter is null and void. 1. The motion on March 27 was virtually the same as the motion of February 20 that failed. ® Under Roberts Rules of Order, the action on March 27 would be considered a reconsideration. There was no motion to reconsider. A motion to reconsider must be made by someone on the prevailing side of the initial vote (Mr. Pacino or Ms. West) and the motion to reconsider takes a 2/3 vote. 2. Of greater concern is that this action was not taken in accordance with Section 3-5 of the Reading Home Rule Charter. The V paragraph reads: 'The Municipal Light Board shall hire the General Manager of the Reading Municipal Light Department and set his compensation; the General Manager shag serve at the pleasure of the Board and may be removed by vole of a majority of the entire Board after notice and hearing' There is no evidence of any notice or hearing. The appointment of the Interim General Manager on February 20 was done under the section of the MGL that addresses the appointment of General Managers — there is no separate section that deals with an Interim General Managers. Therefore the action of the RMLB on March 27 was to remove the (Interim) General Manager who was appointed on February 20, and the process included in the Chanter was not followed. My concern is not whether the WILD could take the action that they did on March 27, but that they did not follow the process required by Charter. I therefore ask that the RMLB acknowledge that their decision on March 27 is not legal and that the action of March 27 be declared by the Board to be void. If you choose to rotate the Interim General Manager position, 1 request that you do so after notice to the existing Interim General Manager, and a hearing on his removal from that position. Thank you for your attention. incerely, I Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager oc: Board of Selectmen Town Counsel 0 ATTACHNIENT 2 sending Municipal Light Deartuanat 230 Ae $tree, PO. Box 150 Reading, MA 01867-0250 T<I: (781) 9441340 Pu: (781) 942-2409 Web: w ve nrd i April 25, 2013 Mr. Peter I. Hechenbleikner Town Manager Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Re: Letter of Apol 10, 2013 to the Reading Municipal Light Board Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner: Thank you for your concerns about the validity of votes taken by the RMLB on March 27, 2013, related to the Interim General Manager's position. We appreciate your interest in maintaining the correct process for our actions at the RMLB, and we would like to respond appropriately. We have asked counsel to review the letter and please see attached their response. As such, we disagree with you on both of the issues you raised in your letter and we maintain that all votes and actions that occurred were within the purview of the RMLB. Respectfully Submitted, John Stempeck, Chairman Reading Municipal Light Board Attachment: 1 C. Kevin Sullivan, Interim General Manager Jane Parenteau, Energy Services Manager RMLB Board of Commissioners Board of Selectman Reading Town Counsel Citizens' Advisory Board 11 0 11 rRUBINAND RUDMANLLP Attorneys at Law T: 617.330.7000 F: 617.330.7550 50 Rowes Wharf, Boston, MA 02110 MEMORANDUM By Email To: Reading Municipal Light Department. Board of Commissioners From: Diedm Lawrence, Karla Doukas RE: Process to Appoint Interim General Managers Date: April 18, 2013 cc: Kevin Sullivan, RMLD Jane Parenteau, RMLD On behalf of the Reading Municipal Light Department ("RMLD"), you have asked us to discuss the validity of the votes taken by the RMLD Board of Commissioners ("RMLB") at its March 27, 2013 meeting relating to the designation of Interim General Managers. As we have been informed, on February 20, 2013, the RMLB met to discuss the designation of an Interim General Manager. The General Manager position became vacant when the former General Manager, Mr. Cameron, retired. The Interim General Manager position is intended to be a temporary position until a permanent replacement can be found. We have been told that during the February gds meeting, the RMLB considered the option of appointing three individuals to serve as Interim General Managers, but that motion failed. Ultimately, at that meeting, the RMLB voted to approve Kevin Sullivan to serve as the sole Interim General Manager. The motion designating Mr. Sullivan referenced G.L. c. 164, ¢ 56 — the statute applicable to the appointment of a Manager of the light plant. We have been informed that subsequently, at its March 27, 2013 meeting, RMLB engaged in another discussion concerning the Interim General Manager position. As we have been told, this topic did not appear in the RMLB meeting agenda. As we understand, with little debate, one of the Commissioners, Ms. Snyder, made a motion to appoint an additional Interim General Manager, Ms. Parenteau, to serve with Mr. Sullivan on a rotating basis until the General Manager position is filled. Ms. Parenteau's rotation is to begin on April 15's and will remain in effect for up to a three-month period. That motion also referenced G.L. c. 164. Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Parenteau both are existing RMLD employees and to our knowledge, neither individual 0 received any salary adjustment to compensate them for any additional duties assumed by them until a General Manager is hired. In a letter dated April 10, 2013, the Reading Town Manager challenged the March 27'" RMLB vote as null and void on procedural grounds. First, the Town Manager claims that the RMLB failed to follow Robert's Rules of Order, which according to the Town Manager, require a motion for reconsideration to be made by one of the RMLB members on the prevailing side of the initial vote —either Mr. Pacino or Ms. West. According to the Town Manager, no motion for reconsideration was made at the March 27" RMLB meeting to add Ms. Parenteau as an Interim General Manager. Second, the Town Manager claims that the March 27" RMLB vote contravened Article 3-5 of the Town of Reading Home Rule Charter, which requires, among other things, that the RMLD General Manager may be removed by majority vote of the RMLB after notice and a hearing. The Town Manager suggests that Article 3-5 of the Town Charter applies because the RMLB vote referenced G.L. 164, 9 56, which pertains to the appointment of a General Manager, and claims that the action taken at its March 27" meeting removed Mr. Sullivan as the Interim General Manager without any notice or hearing. Based on our research, we conclude that the March 27'h RMLB vote designating an additional Interim General Manager is not invalid for the reasons specified in the April 10, 2013 ® letter by the Town Manager. We have discussed our conclusion below.] DISCUSSION Applicability of Robert's Rules of Order The failure of the RMLB to follow a motion for reconsideration process does not invalidate the action taken at its March 271" meeting. Without discussing the appropriate procedure required by Robert's Rules of Order, the vote is not invalid because RMLB, as a municipal light board, is not required to follow Robert's Rules of Order. In general, the meetings of municipal bodies, such as the RMLB, are not governed by strict parliamentary rules, such Robert's Rules of Order. The Court has ruled that strict rules of parliamentary procedure do not apply to town govemment. See Salem Sound Development The Town Manager notes that the Interim Manager topic was nut on the agenda for the March 27'" RMLB meeting but does not challenge the validity of the RMLB vote on the basis of the open meeting law. For avoidance of doubt, the fact that the issue was not on the agenda does not invalidate the action. Issues that arise after the meeting was noticed and nu] anticipated by the chairperson of the RMLB may he discussed and acted upon.. See. e.g.. OML FAQ: Meeting Noun Vs. published by the Attorney General OML-2012-107 (topics -that arise within 48 hours of the meeting, which the chair did not reasunahly anticipate would he discussed at the meeting. may he added w the agenda and considered by the public body.) The Attorney General also has determined that an anticipated topic may include an issue that is presented by another board member. as long as the chair did not know in advance that the topic would be raised See OML 2013-25. As we understand, a RMLB member, not the chairperson, raised the ® issue at the March 27" meeting without providing any notice in advance of the posting ofthe meeting notice. Corp. v, City of Salem, 26 Mass.App.Ct. 396, 398-99 (1988) (noting that strict mles of parliamentary procedure do not apply to town meetings or municipal board meetings); Blomquist v. Town of Arlington, 338 Mass. 594, 598 (1959) (rejecting the applicability of Robert's Rules of Order to actions in a Town Meeting). Further, neither G.L. c. 164 — the statutes governing municipal light plants — nor G.L. c. 30A, §§ I8-25 (the open meeting laws) require municipal light plant boards to follow particular procedures for taking formal action. Rather, municipal boards and commissions may establish their own procedures of governance. For instance, towns, by the enactment of bylaws or otherwise, can adopt their own procedures or agree to follow procedures in specified handbooks published especially for Town governance. Unlike Robert's Rules of Order, the rules governing the conduct of municipal board meetings are Flexible and they can be waived or suspended so long as the particular procedure(s) followed by a board or commission is established by rule and not by ordinance. See E.F. Semas Trucking, Inc. v. Mayor of Taunton, 7 Mass.App.Ct. 907, 908 (1979). We note that, as a matter of practice, the RMLB has observed Robert's Rules of Order in the past and the RMLB has referred to those rules at a couple of its Board meetings. However, we are not aware of any written procedures requiring the RMLB to observe Robert's Rules of Order. Notably, not even the Town Charter or the Town's Operating Procedures for Boards, Committees, Commissions, and Task Forces Town of Reading, Massachusetts, requires town boards and commissions to observe Robert's Rules of Order. In fact, the Town's Operating Procedures expressly recognize that the various boards may adopt their own operating guidelines • or bylaws so long as they do not conflict with these procedures or any provision of State Law, Town Bylaws, or the Town Charter.' Thus, we conclude that RMLB's practice does not create a binding obligation on RMLB to strictly follow Robert's Rules of Omer for all Board business without waiver, suspension, or exception. Indeed, as the Court has recognized in E.F. Senior Trucking, Inc., supra, procedures of local boards can be waived or modified. Accordingly, we conclude that the motion for reconsideration process, as purponedly prescribed by Roben's Rules of Order, does not invalidate the action of the RMLB. Applicability of Town Charter Process Moreover, the March 27ib RMLB vote is not invalidated for failure to observe procedures specified in Article 3-5 of the Town Charter. That provision, which purports to pertain to the Municipal Light Board, states in relevant part: The Municipal Light Board shall hire the General Manager of the Reading Municipal Light Department and set his compensation; the General Manager shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and may be removed by vote of a majority of the entire Board after notice and hearing. 2 We recognize that municipal light plants are not subject to traditional town government processes and operations and municipal ordinances do not apply to them. See, e.g., Municipal Light Commission r f Peabody v. Peabody. 348 Mass. 266 (1964): Mimic Trial Light Coniocksion of Taunton c. Taimon. 323 Mass. 79 (1948). However, the absence ® of any Town pnxecses equivocally shows that any observance ul' Robert's Rules of Order is voluntary, which can he subject to waiver or deviation. C Town Charter, Article 3-5 (emphasis added). This charter provision requiring notice and hearing for the removal of the General Manager does not apply to the action taken by the RMLB for several reasons. First, Article 3-5 does not apply by its express terms as it governs the "hiring" and "removal" of the "General Manager." Significantly, as the Town Manager recognizes, the Town Charter does not govern the process for appointing an Interim General Manager, which is a temporary position or designation. Here, RMLB did not "hire" a General Manager, which is a permanent position, but instead, on February 20", RMLB designated Mr. Sullivan to serve as an "Interim" General Manager on a temporary basis until a General Manager is hired Mr. Sullivan was an existing employee; he was not hired and did not receive a promotion or a salary increase. Notably, RMLB did not require Mr. Sullivan to furnish a bond, as required for the hiring of General Managers pursuant to G.L. c. 164, § 56. The fact that the motion referenced G.L. c. 164, § 56 does not change the character of the action, which simply was to ensure that the duties of the General Manager arc performed on a short-term basis until the General Manager could be hired. Rather, Mr. Sullivan continues to be employed by RMLD as the E & O Manager. The RMLB vote simply had the effect of adding some duties to Mr. Sullivan's existing position until the General Manager position can be filled. The procedure in Article 3-5 also does not apply because RMLB did not take any action Q to remove Mr. Sullivan from the "General Manager' position or any position. As stated above, Mr. Sullivan was not hired as the General Manager, and at most, only was designated to serve as an Interim General Manager. Further, the RMLB did not "remove" Mr. Sullivan but instead, added another employee to sham the General Manager duties on a temporary basis. Mr. Sullivan has not been demoted or discharged from his employment. He will continue to be employed as the E&O Manager and may continue to perform the additional duties of a General Manager on a rotating basis until a General Manager is hired by the RMLB. Accordingly, we conclude that Article 3-5 does not govern the designation of an Interim General Manager and does not express any intention to give due process rights or an entitlement to temporary appointments or individuals performing duties on a temporary basis. Indeed, to hold that the notice and hearing procedure applies at this stage, would require that such procedure apply to the "removal" of Mr. Sullivan when the RMLD Board ultimately hires a General Manager to fill the vacancy created by Mr. Cameron's departure. Such an interpretation is not supported by the terms of Article 3-5. Second, it is questionable whether Article 3-5 of the Town Charter even applies to RMLD. A chatter provision applies only insofar as it does not conflict with G.L. c. 164. A Town Charter provision that circumscribes the RMLB's ability to appoint a permanent General Manager presumably would be invalid While the Town of Reading has broad powers of self - governance, municipal charters duly adopted or amended in accordance with G.L. c. 43B only have the effect of law so long as they present no conflict with laws enacted by the Legislature. Kowalczyk v. Town of Blackstone. 48 Mass.App.Ct. 58, 59 (1999); City Council of Boston v. Maynr oj'Boston, 383 Mass. 716, 719 (1981). Here, G.L. c. 164 provides for a comprehensive E legislative scheme governing the powers of RMLD, including the RMLB's authority to appoint a General Manager without interference from the Town. Several decisions provide guidanceon whether local legislation is inconsistent with or conflicts with the State Constitution or any General Laws. In Del Duca v. Town Administrator of Methuen, 368 Mats. 1 (1975), the Supreme Judicial Court struck down an ordinance adopted pursuant to Methuen's charter purporting to alter the powers and duties of the local planning board in contravention of the General Laws. There, the Court reviewed the various sections of G.L. c. 41 which comprehensively treated the creation and operation of planning boards, and determined that the Legislature had taken the entire subject of the establishment, powers and duties of local planning boards in hand. Having done so, the Court concluded that the Legislature precluded local legislation that would impair the operation and effect of the statutes in that field. Del Duca, supra at 12-13. As a result, the Court determined that Methuen was "powerless to specify the planning board's powers and duties in a manner which deviated in any respect from the powers and duties established by the legislation on the subject" Id. The Court also struck down municipal home rule legislation in City Council of Boston v. Mayor of Boston, 383 Mass. 716 (1981). In that case, the offending legislation purported to limit the number of employees in the mayor's office and to fix their maximum salaries. The Court determined that such local legislation was an invalid and unenforceable encroachment on the • mayor's power under the Boston charter and special legislation pertaining to the mayor's administrative authority. Under the Boston charter and relevant statutes, the mayor was charged with the administrative duties of the city government, including the supervision of subordinate officers, powers of appointment and termination, and the implicit power to set compensation levels for his staff. Therefore, the Court found that the charter and special acts evinced a legislative intent to reserve to the mayor the discretion to determine the size and salary level of his own staff, and that an ordinance purporting to regulate the same was necessarily inconsistent and, therefore, invalid. City Council of Boston, supra at 721. We recognize that after the Court issued these decisions, the Legislature enacted G.L. c. 43B, § 20 to address the consistency of charters with existing General Laws. Section 20 provides in pertinent part that, The provisions of any charter or charter amendment adopted pursuant to the previsions of this chapter [43B] shall be deemed consistent with the provisions of any law relating to the structure of city and town government, the creation of local offices, the term of office or mode of selection of local offices, and the distribution of powers, duties and responsibilities among local offices. G.L. c. 43B, §20. Although the provision in Article 3-5 at issue arguably specifies the mode of appointment of the General Manager, it cannot be interpreted in a manner which impairs the RMLB's ability to hire a General Manager as required by G.L. c. 164, § 56. Requiring a hearing before RMLB can hire a General Manager, and particularly to discontinue temporary duties for nV 0 which an employee has no vested or contractual rights, arguably infringes on RMLB's hiring authority and its authority to set the terms of employment as set forth in G.L. c. 164, § 56. Indeed, a subsequent court decision, Town Council of Agawam v. Town Manager of Agawam, 20 Mass. App. Ct. 100 (1985) ("Agawam"), indicates that the Town's powers with respect to municipal light plants are much more limited. Agawam stands for the narrow proposition that a municipal charter may provide for an employee appointment process (e.g., in Agawam, the appointment of a town assessor) that does not involve town council approval, and still be deemed consistent with G.L. c. 39, §I, which provides that appointments are subject to confirmation by town council. However, the Court in Agawam also indicated that Section 20 should be interpreted generally to harmonize municipal charter provisions adopted under Article 89 and Chapter 43B with existing General Laws. The Court stated: As this court has noted before, when the Home Rule Amendment was adopted in 1966, the Legislature failed to revise many existing laws to reflect the new balance of power that the amendment established between municipalities and the Commonwealth.... tG.L. c. 43B, §201 is a significant step taken by the Legislature to remedy this oversight. The statute makes explicit what was implicit before in the Legislature's decision to enact the Home Rule Procedures Act. By the Legislature's delegation to municipalities through G.L. c. 43B of greater power in managing their affairs, municipalities could, within certain broad limitations, choose for themselves the forms of local government they found best suited to their own needs, including as part of that choice the manner of creating and filling local offices. Agawam, supra at 103. Therefore, despite the seemingly broad interpretation of G.L. c. 43B, §20 set forth in Agawam, the Court expressly stated that its holding did not extend to existing General Laws that consist of a comprehensive statewide plan of regulation. In this regard, the Appeals Court referred to the decision in Young v. Mayor of Brockton, 346 Mass. 123 (1963), where the Supreme Judicial Court held that a city charter provision calling for the appointment of members of the liquor licensing board without confirmation by the city council would not escape the provisions of G.L. c. 138, § 4, which required such confirmation. The Court noted that Young was based on the "special characteristics" of liquor licensing boards which, inter alia, "operate under a detailed and strict State-wide plan of supervision and control reflecting the Commonwealth's supervening interest in the uniform regulation of the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages." Agawam, ,supra at 105, n. 9 (emphasis added). Further, the Agaunm Court noted that, with respect to the work of town assessors at issue therein, the Legislature "has not established a State-wide plan for their supervision at all comparable to that mandated for alcoholic liquors," nor did it "single out the town assessor for special treatment" under the General Laws. W. at 105, n. 9. "Unlike the statute relied upon in Young, [the town assessor statute[ is purely general in its operation" Id. After considering the ® importance of the comprehensive general legislation at issue in Young, the Court in Agawam E concluded that, "[wle expressly make no determination, however, of the effect of [G.L. c. 43B, §201 on the sort of appointment discussed in the Young case" Id. Accordingly, despite the enactment of the consistency provisions in G.L. c. 43B, §20, they will not apply to statutory requirements that are part of a statewide legislative scheme. Municipal light plants, such as RMLD, arc subject to a comprehensive statewide scheme of legislation regarding their powers found at Chapter 164. Notably, the Appeals Court's decision in Golubek v. Westfield Gas & Eler. Light Bd., 32 Mass. App. Ct. 954 (1992), which was issued after Agawam, indicates that local legislation generally cannot alter the comprehensive statutory scheme pertaining to municipal light plants. While that case does not specifically discuss the applicability of G.L. c. 43B, §20, it delineates the respective powers of the Manager and Light Board, finding that the "charter provision cannot alter the statutory power of the manager to hire employees and attorneys." Id. at 956 (emphasis added). Conversely, a charter provision cannot alter the statutory powers of the RMLB to hire a General Manager or to set the terms of the General Manager position or those individuals fulfilling those duties until a permanent General Manager is hired. Imposing a hearing prerequisite effectively transforms a temporary assignment of duties to an existing employee or employees into a position with automatic, vested rights, a term that the RMLB clearly did not intend. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions. C, J E ATTACHMENT ® RMLD Board of Commissioners Committees and Assignments April 10, 2013 Audit (Including Town of Reading Audit) Recommend audit findings to the Board. Philip Pacino One member of Audit Committee meets at least semiannually with the Robert Soli Accounting/Business Manager on RMLD financial issues. Town of Reading Audit Committee - Sit on the Town of Reading Audit Committee and select firm that performs annual financial audit or RMLD pension trust. This term expires on June 30, 7013. General Manager Search Committee Not To Exceed One Year John Srempeck, Chair Philip Pacino Public Relations Committee Not To Exceed One Year John Siempeck David Talbot Assienmente Accounts Payable David Talbot - April John Stempeck - May Philip Pacino - June Roberl Soli - July AssfOunents Payroll - Four Month Rotation Philip Pacino, April - July David Talbot, August - November Robert Soli, December- March John Stempeck, April - July Recommend the RMLD General Manager. From time to time review press releases and public relations programs. Review and approve payables on a weekly basis. This position is rotational. It requires one signature. No Commissioner may serve more than three consecutive years on this Committee and must take a year leave before returning to this Committee. Review and approve payroll. This position is rotational every four months. It requires primary signer and one back-up. No Commissioner can serve more than tfiree consecutive years on this Committee and must take a year leave before returning to this Committee. Revision No, 12 RMLD Policy No. 19 Effective Date: '19 p BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS �� Par Board Vole D to �I.ht^�3�i *1l M ager 2010 ChairtnaNDate I. PURPOSE A. To establish the role of the RMLD Board and Commissioners. B. To establish administrative controls for certain Commissioner activities. C. This policy may not be changed unless A is advertised in the local newspapers in the four-tgwn service territory once a week for two consecutive weeks. These newspapers are Reading Daily Times Chronicle, The Wilmington Town Cner, The North Reading Transcript and The Lynnfield Villager. The notice of this change will also be posted in the Town Halls in the four-town service ter lory. Any changes that involve grammar or minor content needed for clarification need not be advertised. It. GOVERNING LAWS M.G.L., Chapter 164 and other applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. III. RESPONSIBILITIES A. Board Chairman and Vice Chairman' I . Chairman is responsible for calling regular, emergency, and Executive Session meetings of the RMLD Board as needed. ® 2. Chairman presides over RMLD Board meetings, approves the agenda and recognizes all speakers, including other Commissioners. 3. Chairman nominates Board members to represent the Commission at appropriate functions, events and meetings. Final decision is by a majority of the Board members. A majority of the Board is at least three of the five members. 4. Chairman nominates Board members to Board Committees. Final appointment is by a majority vote of the Board members. 5. If the Chairman is unable to attend a Board meefing, then the Vice Chairman will serve as the Chairman of the Board Meeting. If the Chairman and Vice Chairman are unable to attend a Board meeting, then the Secretary of the Board will assume the duties of the Chairman and will appoint a Commissioner to serve as Secretary for that meeting. 6. The Board will not address a new Issue past 10:45 PM and will end all Board meetings by 11:15 PM. B. Board Secretary: 1. Final review of Board minutes. 2. Certifies. as required by law. votes of the Board. 3. Signs, upon direction of a mafonty of the Board members, power supply contracts and legal settlements on behalf of the Board. Alternatively, the General Manager or any Commissioner may be authorized by a malorlly vote of the Board to perform this function RMLD Policy No. 19 111. RESPONSIUTIES (Continued) • Commission as a whole, by majority vole: Responsible for approving overall goals, objectives and policy sming for the Department to be discharged by the General Manager within the constraints of M.G.L.. Chapter 164 and other applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. The Commission is elected by the voters of the Town of Reading, accountable to the Town of Reading and responsible b the ratepayers of the entire RMLD service area. Selects the General Manager and establishes the rate and manner of compensation The General Manager serves as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Operating Officer for the Board with the ultimate authority and responsibility for the operation and the management of the RMLO. under the direction and control of the Commissioners and subject to M.G.L.. Chapter 164. Before Me and of the General Manager's contract year. the Board will give the General Manager a written performance appraisal based on the General Managers performance during the previous fiscal year and adjust the General Managers salary based on that appraisal. During this process, the Board will set the General Managers goals and expectations, in writing, for the next fiscal year, upon which the General Manager will be evaluated. Except for actions contrary to decisions or written policies made by the Board as a whole, the General Manager is authonzed b take whatever actions are required to operate and manage the utility. The General Manager Is the only designated representative for the Board regarding collective bargaining negotiations. The General Manager may utilize other RMLD • management personnel as needed to carry out these responsibillties. The Accounting/Business Manager Is appointed by the Boar. The Board will appoint courted. The Commissioners will meal quarterly with the AccounbngMusiness Manager to discuss the qua"" budget variances report an the Operating Budget. This meeting will be held during a Board meeting in Open Session. If any issues to be discussed are being considered in Executive Session, then the discussion will proceed during the next Executive Session. The Accounting/Business Manager will aim meet with a member of the RMLD's Audit Committee and the Town Accountant semi-annually to discuss the RMLD's financial issues. These meetings may be held more frequently H the RMLD Accounting/Business Manager believes that necessary. Also on a quarterly basis. coinciding with the AccountingiBusiness Manager's presentation in Open Session to the Carom mitimirs, the General Manager will give an update on the expenditures on Outside Services, which includes the legal, engineering, autla, and other consulting servkes. The General Manager ,s required to give the Commissioners a full report on the expenditures for earn of Me outside services including the dollars expended. cost to complete, and a projected end date. If any legal issues are being considered ,n Executive Session then the explanation of that legal issue will be given in closed session. When the AccountinglBusmess Manager questions a payment on an invoice. the AccountingrBusiness Manager shall brng his concerns to the Commissioners for discussion and resolution at the 1.4 available Boats meeting The issue .NII be discussed m Open Session unless Here ,s a reed to go into Executive Session (i e.. invoices Contenting legal matters. etc ) 0 RMLD Policy No. 19 0 in. RESPONSIBILITIES (Continued) kw 8. Sennett as an appeal body for customers on mattera arising from the RMLD's ope2tlons. 7. The RMLD Board will appoint ons Commissioner 10 earn, on the Town of Reading Audit Committee. Reappomunemt of this position will be done annually aril celncide with tw Board restructuring, which Occurs at the And meetrg slash the annual Town of Reading elector. The Commissioner on the Town of Reading's Audit Commitee will snare that the selected auditing firm is quaiigeo to PeAortn a financial audit of a municipal electric utility. The RMLD Board of COmmiesionera accepts the audited financial statements and management letter and shall require the General Manager to submit a written action report on any item commented on by the auditors Management Leper. S. Annually select COnressioners to serve as Bard Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary. The Chairman, Vks Chairmen, and Secretary will be elected by a majority vole Of the Board. A special restructuring of Na Board may be held with a vole of tour members. 9. Approves. atter allowing a 30 -day period for input from the Citizens' Advisory Board, as provided for in the Twenty -Year Agreement, on the following topics: a. Annual Capital and Camtng Budgets - Upon approval of an annual operating budget, the RMLB will make a presentation to the Reading Finance Committee and Reading Town mating. Upon request, the RMLB shall make a presentation of the annual operating budget to the Finance Commitee andlor Town Meeting of any of the other towns serviced by the RMLD. b. Significant Expansion or Retirement of the RMLD a Transmission, Distribution, General Plant, or Generation; c. Power Contracts and Agreements and their Mix; kw d. Cost -of -Service and Rate Making Practices ark; e. Other issues that may come before the Bard. 10. Approves: a. The annual report (including audited financial statements) of the RMLD. b. All correspondence on RMLD letterhead that Is written by any Commissioner to other elected Boards. Committees or ratepayers. C. All collechys bargaining agreements. Also establishes the goats and objectives for the General Manager to meet in bargaining new or amended collective bargaining agreements. I. All presentations made by the RMLD to other elected Boards or Committees. e. Settlement Of Imgation. f. The appointment of Commissmners to Board Committees. g. Electric rates. 11. Approves, in conjunction with the General Manager, the payroll and weekly accounts payable warrants. 12. Commissioners may attend (cOmoslenl Nth approved RMLD budgets) meetings. cmnferences, tram,ng sessions and Smile functions as appropriate for enhancing pollcy- makng Skills. Attendance at APPA'S national conferences and NEPPA's annual conference and annual business rrewngs are presumed tic a appropriate RMLD Policy No. 19 4 Ill. RESPONSIBILITIES (Continued) 12. Attendance of similar functions sponsored by the Town of Reading or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for elected officials are also presumed to be appropriate. Attendance for all other meetings, conferences, training "salons and similar functions shag M administered in the sans, manner as for RMLD management employees. as outlined In Policy 5, Employee. RMLD Board of Commissioners, Citaeni Advisory Board Ovemight/Day Travel Policy, In the event a Commissioner disagrees with the resultant casaioMs), Wshe may request the Board as a whole. by a majority, vote, to approve attendance (subject to any conditions deemed appropriate by the Board). Any Commissioner attending meetings, conferences, training sessions and similar functions as appropriate for enhancing policy-making skills am required io make a full report at the hart available Comm umnei a meeting. It is the policy of the Board that no Commissioner will have a personal or economic interest or t ehefit. directly of indirectly, from attendance in meetings, conferences, training sessions and similar functions. Further, it is the responsibility of each Commissioner to make a full public disclosure of any personal Interest or benefit in advance. D. Commissions, some as Trustees of the RMLD Pension Trust with all rights and obligations conferred upon Mem by the That, as amended by the Trust from lima to time. Commission, as a whole and by majority vote, as Pension Trustees: 1. Acknowledges that the Town of Reading Audd Committee will select the firm that performs the annual financial audit of the RMLD Pension Trust. Tho RMLD Board of Commissioner accepts the audited financial statements based on the recommendation of the RMLD's Audit Committee. 2. Selects the firm that performs actuarial study of the RMLD Pension Trust. 3. Selects all Professional services associated with the Pension Trust other then the annual such. 4. Performa any other responsibilWes as specified in RMLD Policy R22, Pension Trust Investments. E. Commissioner will do the following relative to the RMLD Other Post Employment Benefits Liability Fund Trust 1 Establish a separate fund. Icy be known as the Other Post Employment Benefits Liability Trust Fund (Fund). 2. Establish a funding schedule for the Fund, 3. Appropriate amounts recommended by the funding schedule to be credited to the Fund. 4, Appoint a custodian of the Fund. 5. Review the funding schedule every three year. F Board Committees: t. Serve as a mechanism for the Board to review and consider specific ssues. - Committees can recommend, but not approve unless specifically delegateda course of action to the Board RMLD Board of Commissioners Committees Responsibilities Gene al Mariayer Committee Revew GM evaluation orress. A.dil . ¢4id�ny T.,. of Reading Audit RecmmanC acdn rndings to me Boa, Cne memos, 4ud, Commtlbe meets at least semi dmrually xnP:ne Accounting Business Manage, on RMLD finan Gal %Sues • RMLD Policy No. 19 RMLD Board of Commissioners Committees `e Power a Rale Committee Budget Commmee Account Payables Partial Joint Committee - Payment to Me Town of Reading Two RMLD Commissaries Two Oazeni Amnsory Board Manthers Ona Reading Selecbnen Policy CumMttee IV. POLICY ELEMENTS 5 Responsibilities Town of Reading Audit Committee - Sit on Me Town of Readug Audit CPmTkee. SOI"' Ms firm Mal Pefctios annual financial audit IN RMLD portion Must and Martially h,,k wa OPER trust fund Recommend power cohoscts M Board. Recommend Me changes W the Board. Recommend OPanang and Capital Budgets M Sound Recommend actuaries and emery findings to the Board. Make necommandebon M Me RMLD Board for legal wumN. Rays w ark approve payables on a weekly basis. The POOMM a noUaon's 11'"W er Miss primary ninsn and one Desk up. Nc Cammisaione may senor mon Man in'--wraeabve years on M4 Cpnmibee and must lake a year Isave before rmme, b this Commitee. ReNew and aPPmae payrdl. This poubon a mMvorh II r"tires p4mary Surer and ons bad up. No ComniukOne may Mme more than Mtee oona6wbve year on MIs CPMMknk ark must Mks a year Isave before ntuming to Mia Committee. Recommend M Me RMLD Board payment b Me Town Recommend oneness of Board prides lee RMLB. A. It is the policy of the RMLD Board: 1. To operate in accordance with the sped. as well as the letter of an law, aact g its business and as employees. 2. All Commissioners and employees are required to act with the highest level of integrity, business ethics and objectivity, in any RMLD transection or where a Commissioner or employee represents the Board or the RMLD. No Commissioner or employee is allowed to misuse the authority or influence of his or her RMLD Position. 7. To operate In a businesslike and efficient manner in all aspects of operagng and managing the RMLD. 4. To be sup"Nye of a gold wading relationship between Management and Unions as detailed in the Labor Relations Objective section of Me Labor Relations Guide for Managers: to India, communication and interaction with respect to RMLD business with all RMLD employees only through the General Manager; to previds union employees separate access to the Board as constrained within the collective bargaining agreements. 5. To hold regular open and public meetings to allow customers to pmvide direct input on any open session matter before the Board. 6. To aPormadvely and cou teousty respond to all requests for Public Information, subject to the constraints of Policy 12, Board Document Dissemination and Me Massachusetts Public Records Law All requests will be arranged through :he General Manager. 1. Not to contribute. In any to, to civic, chartable, benevolent sir other simdar organzabons. B To maintain 'cost of service' electricity rates: 10 manage :he RMLD with the goal that it, resdenbal rates are lower than any investor owned electric utility in Massachusetts and lowenha, any electhc utility whose service oma s contguit" xiih the RR'LD's RMLD Policy No. 19 IV, POLICY ELEMENTS To Mlue technology, training, personnel, and flexible work and administrative processes to maintain a competiova and municipally owned electric utility serving the best interests of all ratepayers, to direct and manage the WILD in the best interests of the WILD, the Town of Reading, and its cusu mers. 0 ATTACHMENT 4 OTo: Kevin Sullivan From: Energy Services Date: April 16, 2013 Subject: Purchase Power Summary — February, 2013 Energy Services Division (ESD) has completed the Purchase Power Summary for the month of February, 2013. ENERGY The RMLD's total metered load for the month was 53,799,410 kwh, which is a.35% decrease from the February, 2012 figures. Table 1 is a breakdown by source of the energy purchases. TABLE 1 ® Amount of Cost of % of Total Total $ $ as a Resource Energy Energy Energy Costs % (kWh) ($JMwh) Millstone M3 3,354,141 $6.99 6.22% $23,437 0.69% Seabrook 5,324.983 $8.22 9.88% $43,751 1.29% Stonybrook Intermediate 1,400,665 $99.57 260% $139,471 4.10% JP Morgan 8,411,200 $58.55 15.60% $492,498 14,50% Ne#Era 6,926.000 $66.59 12.85% $461,179 13.57% NYPA 1,709,545 $4.06 3.17% $6.941 0.20% ISO Interchange 4,720,978 $170.31 8.76% $804,036 23.66% NEMA Congestion 0 $0.00 0.00% $244,863 7.21% Coop Resales 112,892 $12425 0.21% $14,027 0.41% MacOuarie 8,320,000 $37.61 15.43% $312,897 9.21% Summit Hydra 1,214,731 $56.41 2.25% $68,519 2.02% Braintree Watson Unit 387,012 $215.37 072% $63,351 2.45% Swift River Projects 1,240,504 $99.55 2.30% $123,488 3.63% Constellation Energy 10,762,400 $53.36 19%% $574,295 16.90% Stonybrook Peaking 33,724 $146.99 0.06% $4,957 0.15% Monthly Total 53,918,775 $63.02 100.00% $3,397,710 100.00% Table 2 breaks down the ISO interchange between the DA LMP Settlement and the RT Net Energy for the month of February, 2013. • Table 2 Amount Cost %of Total Resource of Energy of Energy Energy (kWh) ($/Mwh) ISO DA LMP6,204,340 149.71 11.51% Settlement RT Net Energy" -1,483,362 84.14 -2.75% Settlement ISO Interchange 4,720,978 170.31 8.76% (subtotal) • Independent System Operator Day -Ahead Locational Marginal Price •' Real Time Net Energy CAPACITY The RMLD hit a demand of 104,480 kW, which occurred on February 4, at 7 pm. The RMLD's monthly UCAP requirement for February, 2013 was 211,828 kWs. Table 3 shows the sources of capacity that the RMLD utilized to meet its requirements. • Table 3 Source Amount (k Ws) Cost ($/kWmonth) Total Cost $ % of Total Coal Millstone#3 4,991 46.22 $230,706 15.40% Seabrook 7,742 49.44 $382,771 25.55% Stonybrook Peaking 24,981 2.00 $50,035 3.34% Stonybrook CC 42,925 3.86 $165,575 11.05% NYPA 4,019 3.57 $14,347 0.96% Hydro Quebec 4,584 5.09 $23,320 1.56% Ne:tem 60,000 5.50 $330,000 22.03% Braintree Watson Unit 10,520 10.47 $110,132 7.35% ISO -NE Supply Auction 52,066 3.67 $191,170 12.76% Total 211,828 $7.07 $1,498,056 100.00% 0 • Table 4 shows the dollar amounts for energy and capacity per source. Table Cost of %of Amt of Energy Power Resource Energy Capacity Total cost Total Cost (kWh) (SIkWh) Millstone#3 S23,437 $230.706 $254,143 5,19% 3.354.141 0.0758 Seabrook $43,751 $382,771 $426,522 8.71% 5,324,983 0.0801 Stonybrook intermediate $139.471 $165,575 $305,046 6.23% 1,400,665 0.2178 Hydro Quebec $0 $23,320 $23,320 0.48% - 0.0000 JP Morgan $492,498 $0 $492,498 10.06% 8,411,200 0.0586 NextEra $461,179 $330,000 $791.179 16.16% 6,926,000 0.1142 NYPA $6.941 $14,347 $21,288 0.43% 1,709,545 0.0125 ISO Interchange $804,036 $191,170 $995,206 20.33% 4,720,978 0.2108 Noma Congestion $244,863 $0 $244,863 5.00% - 0.0000 MacOuarie $312,897 $0 $312,897 6.39% 8,320,000 0.0376 Summit Hydro $68,519 $0 $68,519 1.40% 1.214.731 0.0564 Braintree Watson Unit $83,351 $110,132 $193,483 3.95% 387,012 0.4999 4 Swift River Projects $123,488 $0 $123,488 2.52% 1,240,504 0.0995 Coop Resales $14.027 $0 $14,027 0.29% 112,892 0.1243 Constellation Energy $574,295 $0 $574,295 11.73% 10.762,400 0.0534 Stonybrook Peaking $4,957 $50,035 $54,992 1.12% 33,724 1.6306 Monthly Total $3.397.710 $1698,056 54,895,766 100.00% 53,918,775 0.0908 Renewable Resources 7.72% ® RENEWABLE ENERGY CERTIFICATES (RECS) The RMLD sold 12,613 2012 RECs (Quarter 1 and Quarter 2) for $582,097.75 in January, 2013. 750 Quarter 1 and 2 RECs remain banked for retirement. Table 5 shows the amount of banked and projected RECs for the Swift River Hydro Projects through February, 2013, as well as their estimated market value. Table 5 Swift River RECs Summary Period - January 2012 - February 2013 Banked Projected Total Bt. RECS RM REre 0011.11 wonm..o 392 4.208 4,600 $174,721 Pepperell 384 13 397 $21,422 Indian River 92 1449 1541 $78,228 Turners Falls 781 91 872 $0 Grand TOW 1,649 5,760 7,409 $274,371 U TRANSMISSION • The RMLD's total transmission costs for the month of February were $801,945. This is an increase of 3.5% from the January transmission cost of $774,307. In February, 2012 the transmission costs were $581,199. • 0 Table 6 Current Month Last Month Last Year Peak Demand (kW) 104,480 108,799 100,453 Energy (kWh) 53,918,775 60,866,668 54,076.850 Energy t$) $3,397,710 $2,523,167 $2,879,937 Capacity ($) $1,498,056 $1,496,984 $1,336,718 Transmission($) $801,945 $774.307 $581,199 Total $5,697,711 $4,794,458 $4,797,854 • 0 ] ..- !§ ! !rK ;! ® !E§ \\ !§! !\ ! !■■■E■! 77 §| !® !) .. �` 888 „ #■ \ |! . !~ !§ !§® �T'IT ) 4!I !rf## I \\§i(}\ \ !/ ![[ !� [[ [[ SR -- 2 sc §\\}\) !\} Z! ] ..- !§ ! !rK ;! !■■■E■! !) .. 888 „ |! . !§ �T'IT ) 4!I !rf## I \\§i(}\ \ !/ !� SR -- 2 Z! .i| ! ! Tolat System Projects Station Upgrades station k4 8 Relay Replacement Project - (Partial CARRYOVER) R 9 Station 4 Getaway Replacement -4W13 R Total Station Projects SCADA Proiects READING MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT 10 Station 5 RTU (Remote Terminal Unit) Replacement FY 13 CAPITAL BUDGET VARIANCE REPORT 4 Station 4 RTU (Remote Terminal Unit) Replacement (Partial CARRYOVER) FOR PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31, 2013 Total SCADA Projects ACTUAL New Customer Service Connections COST s PROJECT DESCRIPTION TOWN MARCH E&O Construction-SYetem Proiects ALL 1 Essex Street - Reconductoring LC 2 4W13 OH Reconductoring- West Street W 3 Upgrading of Old Lynnfield Center URDs (Partial CARRYOVER) LC 5 Shady Lane Area - Reconductoring W 15,673 6 Federal Street - Recenductoring W 35,531 Tolat System Projects Station Upgrades station k4 8 Relay Replacement Project - (Partial CARRYOVER) R 9 Station 4 Getaway Replacement -4W13 R Total Station Projects SCADA Proiects ANNUAL 10 Station 5 RTU (Remote Terminal Unit) Replacement W 4 Station 4 RTU (Remote Terminal Unit) Replacement (Partial CARRYOVER) R Total SCADA Projects AMOUNT New Customer Service Connections 200 ervice Installations-Commercial/Industrial Customers ALL ervice Installations - Residential Customers ALL Total Service Connections 121,554 14 Routine Construction 370,589 Various Routine Contruction ALL Total Construction Projects Other Proiects 15 GIS 16 Transformers/Capacitors Annual Purchases 17A Meter Annual Purchases 17B Meter Upgrade Project - (Partial CARRYOVER) 17C Meter Upgrade Project -Commercials 18 Purchase Vehicles 19 Purchase Line Department Vehicles 20 Purchase New Pole Dolly 21 Automated Building Systems 22 Engineenng Analysis software& data conversion - (CARRYOVER) 23 G. Station Generator 24 Capital Repairs - Station One 25 New Carpeting 26 Water Heater Demand Response Technology 27 Hardware Upgrades 28 Software and Licensing Total Other Projects TOTAL FY 13 CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES 679 20,916 ATTACHMENTi YTD ACTUAL ANNUAL 988,211 COST BUDGET REMAINING THRU 3131113 AMOUNT BALANCE 200 197,855 197,655 14,608 188,193 173,585 121,554 492,143 370,589 111.350 199,042 87.692 124,017 175,565 51,548 119,309 119,309 4,430 161,779 157,349 56,163 56,163 149,567 80.653 (68,914) 6,574 63,074 56,500 173,332 207,923 34.591 197,154 1,409,225 988,211 (421,014) 115,403 462,799 284,000 (178,799) 269,953 2,114,858 2,929,910 816,063 8,866 71,628 97,495 25,867 115,403 462,799 284,000 (178,799) 24,856 78.997 49,710 (29,267) 16,823 492,376 564,416 72,039 2,210 423,012 551,853 128,841 65,000 65,000 474,861 570,000 95,139 12,000 12.000 150,000 150,000 76,789 76,789 55,000 55,000 400,000 400,000 35,000 35,000 9,474 200,088 336,611 136,523 73,184 126,629 53,445 79,315 119,002 39,687 177,632 2386,260 3,493,606 1,137246 447585 4,471,118 6,423,416 1,952,298 ® Reading Municipal Light Department Engineering and Operations Monthly Report March 2013 11 FY 2013 Capital Plan E&O Construction - System Proiects 1 Reconductoring of Essex Street, Lynnfield Center - No Activity. 2 4W13 Off Reconductoring Project, West Street, Wilmington - No Activity. 3 Upgrading of Old Lynnfield Center URDs - (Phase 1 Completed). No Activity. 5 Shady Lane Drive Area, Wilmington - Reconductoring - Make ready work. Install poles, and primary and secondary cable, and upgrade transformers. Energized new secondaries. 6 Federal Street, Wilmington - Reconductoring - Line Department., Pole framing and wiring for reconductoring. Transfer new primaries onto new poles. Station Upgrades a Station 4 Relay Replacement Project - Reading - No Activity. 9 Station 4 Getaway Replacement - 4W13 - No Activity. SCADA Proiects 10 Station 5 RTU Replacement, Wilmington - No Activity. 4 Station 4 RTU Replacement - Engineering time. New Customer Service Connections 12 Service Installations - Commercial/Industrial Customers - This item includes new service connections, upgrades, and service replacements for the commercial and industrial customers. This represents the time and materials associated with the replacement of an existing or installation of a new overhead service, the connection of an underground service, etc. This does not include the time and materials associated with pole replacements/installations, transformer replacements/installations, primary or secondary cable replacementstinstallations, etc. This portion of the project comes under routine construction. No Activity. April 19, 2013 rIL C 13 Service Installations — Residential Customers — This item includes new or upgraded overhead and underground services, temporary overhead services, and large underground development. Routine Construction: 14 Routine Construction — The drivers of the Routine Construction budget category YTD are listed. This is not an inclusive list of all items within this category. Pole SettingIrransfers $275,817 Maintenance Overhead/Underground $347,259 Projects Assigned as Required $250,377 Pole Damage includes knockdowns some reimbursable $72,000 Station Group $14,199 Hazmat/Oil Spills $1,638 Porcelain Cutout Replacement Program $0 Lighting Street Light Connections $19,491 Storm Trouble $134,368 Underground Subdivisions $44,051 Animal Guard Installation $33,442 Miscellaneous Capital Costs $216,583 TOTAL $1,409,225 `In the month of March, zero (0) cutouts were charged under this program. Approximately 13 cutouts were installed new or replaced because of damage making a total of 13 cutouts replaced this month. April 19, 2013 ® Reliability Report Two key industry standard metrics have been identified to enable the RMLD to measure and track system reliability. A rolling 12 -month view is being used for the purposes of this report. l1 Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI) measures how quickly the RMLD restores power to customers when their power goes out. CAIDI = Total of Customer Interruption Duration for the Month in Minutes s Total Number of Customers Interrupted. RMLD 12 -month system average outage duration: 64.93 minutes RMLD four-year average outage (2006-2009): 50.98 minutes per outage On average, RMLD customers that experience an outage are restored in 64.93 minutes April 19, 2013 • E System Average Interruption Frequency (SAIFI) — Measures how many outages each customer experiences per year on average. SAIFI = Total Number of Customers Interrupted =Total Number of Customers RMLD 12 -month system average: 0.31 outages per year RMLD four-year average outage frequency: 0.62 The graph below tracks the month -by -month SAIFI performance. Months Between Interruptions (MBTI) Another view of the SAIFI data is the number of months RMLD customers have no interruptions. At this time, the average RMLD customer experiences an outage approximately every 38.7 months. April 19, 2013 ATTACHMENT 6 • Dt: April 18, 2013 To: RMLB, Kevin Sullivan., Jeanne Foti Fr: Bob Fournier Sj: February 28, 2013 Report The results for the first eight months ending February 28, 2013, for the fiscal year 2013 will be summarized in the following paragraphs. 1) Change in Net Assets: (Page 3A) For the month of February, the net income or the positive change in net assets was $130,881, increasing the year to date net income to $2,436,763. The year to date budgeted net income was $2,029,335 resulting in net income being over budget by $407,428 or 20.1 %. Actual year to date fuel expenses exceeded fuel revenues by $260,160. 2) Revenues: (Page 11 B) Year to date base revenues were under budget by $1,375,284 or 4.2%. Actual base revenues were $31.3 million compared to the budgeted amount of $32.7 million. 3) Expenses: (Page 12A) *Year to date purchased power base expense was under budget by $1,395,536 or 6.82%. Actual purchased power base costs were $19.0 million compared to the budgeted amount of $20.4 million. *Year to date operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses combined were over budget by $149,287 or 1.85%. Actual O&M expenses were $8.2 million compared to the budgeted amount of $8.1 million. *Depreciation expense and voluntary payments to the Towns were on budget. 4) Cash: (Page 9) *Operating Fund was at $9,881,781. * Capital Fund balance was at $3,056,590. * Rate Stabilization Fund was at $6,688,307. * Deferred Fuel Fund was at $2,009,885. * Energy Conservation Fund was at $259,837. 5) General Information: Year to date kwh sales (Page 5) were 484,484,799 which is 13.2 million kwh or 2.8%, ahead last year's actual figure. GAW revenues collected ytd were $484,374 bringing the total collected since inception to $1,781,458. ® 6) Budget Variance: Cumulatively, the five divisions were over budget by $154,482 or 1.19%. 11 FINANCIAL REPORT FEBRUARY 28, 2013 ISSUE DATE: APRIL 18, 2013 TOM OF RRADINO, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIETARY FUND STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS 2/28/1) NET ASSETS INVESTED IN CAPITAL ASSETS, NET OF RELATED DEBT 67,872,710.75 PREVIOUS YEAR CURRENT YEAR ASSETS RESTRICTED FOR DEPRECIATION POND IP.9) 3,993,160.62 3,056,569.58 CURRENT 23,990,379.72 25,fi60, 060.3] TOTAL NET ASSETS UNRESTRICTED CASH ISM A P.9) 9,396,162.56 9,886,780.96 98.9]0 82) RESTRICTED CASH ISM A P.9) 18,319,256.51 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS 17,990,650.53 106,110.286.60 RECEIVABLES, NET ISM E P.30) ],103,10].33 9,100,021.88 PREPAID EXPENSES (SCH B P.10) 1,919,721.19 1,561,9]3.1] INVENTORY 1,105,233.69 1,551,756.41 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 36,473,790.19 60.191481 18 NONCURRRNT INVESTMENT IN ASSOCIATED CO ISM C P.11 ]3,]65.66 16,958.35 CAPITAL "SETS, NET ISM C P.2) 6],8]2,]60.]5 70,151,193.11 TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS 67,946,505.41 70.]01 151.56 TOTAL ASSETS lOfi,630.186.60 130.193.)]]X6 LIABILITIES CURRENT ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 5,510,7)6.68 6,057,992.80 CUSTONER DEPOSITS 601,219.01 666,616.16 CUSTOMER ADVANCES POR CONSTRUCTION 296,339.96 601,931.15 ACCRUED LIABILITIES 1,331,683.70 1,388,610.36 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES ].fi19,007 13 8,5)5.119.6] NONCURRQIT ACCRUED RNPLOYBE CONPENSATRD ABSENCES 2,936,698.5E 3,986,360.21 TOTAL NONCURRENT LIABILITIES 2.936 698 5E ].986.)60 21 TOTAL IT" ILIiI88 10,503,705.71 11.521.509 68 NET ASSETS INVESTED IN CAPITAL ASSETS, NET OF RELATED DEBT 67,872,710.75 70,256,193.11 RESTRICTED FOR DEPRECIATION POND IP.9) 3,993,160.62 3,056,569.58 UNRESTRICTED 23,990,379.72 25,fi60, 060.3] TOTAL NET ASSETS IP.31 89 95.856,580 98.9]0 82) 06 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS 106,110.286.60 110.191.3)1.71 m TONS OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT NONCURRENT ASSET SCHEDULE 2/18/13 SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS IN ASSOCIATED CONPANIES NEN ENGLAND HYDRO ELECTRIC HEN ENGLAND HYDRO TRANSMISSION TOTAL IIVESTNENTS IN ASSOCIATED COMPANIES SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL ASSETS LAND STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS EQUIPMENT AND FURNISHINGS INFRASTRUCTURE TOTAL CAPITAL ASSETS, NET TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS 11265,042.23 6,639,576.34 12,931,726.76 47,035,593.42 67.872.]40.]5 67.946,506.41 11265,642.23 61792,724.53 13, 079, 989.39 49,115.]3].06 ]0.254.193.21 ]0.301.151.56 i 0 SCHEDULE C PREVIOUS YEAR CURRENT YEAR 15,]4].64 2.9]5.]4 56,010.01 43,962.61 ]3.]65.66 46.956.35 11265,042.23 6,639,576.34 12,931,726.76 47,035,593.42 67.872.]40.]5 67.946,506.41 11265,642.23 61792,724.53 13, 079, 989.39 49,115.]3].06 ]0.254.193.21 ]0.301.151.56 i 0 11 TONN OF READING, NASSACNUSMS NUNICIPAL LIGHT! DRPARI3RNI BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIRTARy FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CNANGRS IN FORD 93R ASERTB 3/]S/13 OPPRATIRO ReVENO59; IgCp D P.111 RASH REVENGE FUEL REVENOR PURCHASED PONES, CAPACITY FORFEITED DISCOUNTS ENERGY CONSERVATION REVEMIE OAN REVEIIOE NEPA CREDIT TOTAL OPERATINU REVENUER OPERATING EXPENSES: (SCN R P. 121 PORCtl Sxv PONES, BASK POPCRASED POKER FUEL MARTINS NAINTESANCR DEPRECIATION VOLUNTARY PAT6®PIS TO TONNA TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATING INCOM L6ERATINO REPQ30ER IiImals) CONIRIBOTIONS IM AID OP WEST RETURN ON JRVERTMMXT TO Rmi" INTEREST INC09Q INTEREST EXPENSE OTRRR INOSE AND MORT) TOTAL NONOPERATIN0 PN (EXP) ORANGE IN NRT ASSETS NET ASSETS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR NET ASSETS AT RID) Of PEBRURRY MOMN LAST SMSA MOM1A CUP.M YEAR LAST YEAS, TO OATS NITO DATSENr M1'OOOS YCMAAU \ ),434,1)3.16 ],394,141.)1 19.056.391 )0,491.05 51,033.19 51.693.94 _ (62,445,74)_ 6,130,102.93 3,906,049.6) 3,030,833.21 163,666.75 64,203.73 59,)60.)0 60.130.41 0).11 3(469,280,29)414, ),23),382.10 30,)13,80).31 35,136,680.66 189,539.0)1 6]6.950.3] 404.230.16 H1, ]fb.l6 56.815,193.16 32 364 048.67 34,116,0lS.11 1,467,331.16 671,515.7S 4T), OS).4l 3T1.6e 1441 97 58,140,565.73 3.13\ -4.05% -1)39.93% 5.43% 10.03\ 2.T% -4.02% 2.33% 1,921,25).99 3,09,916.8E )1),6)4.)4 169,649.03 216.027.47 133.000 00 6,167,543.01 ],399,125.86 3,39>,T09.)9 )14,19!.03 21),1B6.3) 303,469.11 114 000 0 7,00,901.05 16,055,504.43 31,63),)04.49 5,)!6.)90.41 1.9)0.])0.)1 3,16e,31f.T6 Y�0 186.00_ 53,1)0,6)5.83 19,055.450.42 33,936,11).60 6,4)1,)93.34 1,)45,910.53 ],443,)53.41 90s 35 0 51,569,708.33 13.05% -6.60\ 12.56% -11.24% 1.19\ 0.50% 3.011 (3),10.0@) 179,398.05 3,336,514.04 3,570,877.41 7.02% @,115.30 )) 3e.1.) 11 ]3 43 46 _ 55,112.10 1100,)85.561 1.603.)9 1350.191 l48 516 0 43,)44.64 0.001 11,]0,63,)0 14 15.)2),804.10 ]10.1)81 . 41.00 2 19 6 103,299.19 11,510,]72l]5 ) 21,0]].38 13,109.]41 35],10).39 11 1]4.114 34 1)20..)1309\%\1193839.)!1 .7 -6T.)2\14]501.3191 -45 -10.511 4. 0\ IUl j 4 54 130.1 65 2,252.996.43 3.I36.)63.0) 93.603.382.17 96.534,059.19 93.Bs 6. 580 69 91. 9T0.B]3 06 8.16% 3.13% 3.15% TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS NINICIPAL LIGHT DEP,ARTHOFC BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIETARY FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS 2/23/13 OPERATING RBVBNIRS: (BCH P P.11B) BASE REVENUE FUEL REVENUE PURCHABED POKER CAPACITY FORFEITED DISCOUNTS ENERGY CONSERVATION REVENUE GAN REVENUE NYPA CREDIT TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES OPERATING EXPENSES: (SCM O P.12A) PURCHASED POWER BASE PURCHASED POWER PURL OPERATING MAINTENANCE DEPRECIATION VOLUNTARY PAYNENTS TO TOWS TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES OPERATING INCOME NONOPERATINO REVENUES (EXPENSES) CONTRIBUTIONS IN AID OF CONST RETURN ON INVESTMENT TO READING INTEREST INCONS INTEREST EXPENSE OTHER (015E AND AMORT) TOTAL NONOPERATINO REV (EXP) CHANGE IN NET ASSETS NSC ASSETS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR NET ASSETS AT ENO OF FEBRUARY ( I • ACTUAL CHUBB BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET 8 YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE. CHANGE 31,364,048.67 32,739,333.00 (1,375,294.33) -4408 14,118,055.34 21,731,610.00 2,386,445.34 10.988 1,467,331.16 1,486,803.00 (19,471.84) -1.318 691,515.75 720,265.00 (46,749.25) -6.778 477,059.43 490,815.00 (13,757.57) -2.80% 484,374.68 490,815.00 (6,440.32) -1.318 (441.797.30) (464.664.0 24.866.70 -5.33% 58,140,585.73 57,192,997.00 947,608.73 1.66% 19,055,450.42 20,450,987.00 (11395,536.50) -6.82% 23,936,411.60 22,222,566.00 1,713,851.60 7.718 6,479,793.34 6,375,335.00 104,458.34 1.648 11748,910.52 1,704,062.00 44,826.52 1.638 2,443,753.44 2,433,336.00 10,417.44 0.43% 905.383.00 917.000.00 (6,617.00) .0.738 54,569,708.32 54,098,306.00 471,402.32 0.81% PI 3,570,879.41 3,094,671.00 476,206.41 15.398 0 105,299.89 300,000.00 (194,700.11) -64.90% (1,510.284.66) (11510,000.00) (284.66) 0.02% 21,072.18 66,664.00 (45,591.72) -68.398 (3,109.24) (2.000.00) (1,109.24) 55.468 252,907.39 60,000.00 172,909.39 216.138 (1,134,114.34) (1.065.336.00) (68.799.34) 6.46% 2.436,763.07 2,029,335.00 407,428.07 96,534,059.99 96,534,059.99 0.00 96.9>0, 821.06 98.563.394.99 107,438.01 20.088 0.005 0.414 0 11 SOURCE OF CAPITAL FUNDS: TOM OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT RECONCILIATION OR CAPITAL FUNDS 3/18/13 DEPRECIATION POND BALANCE 7/1/13 CONSTRUCTION FUND BALANCE I/1/13 INTEREST ON DEPRECIATION FUND PT 13 DEPRECIATION TRANSFER PY 13 TOTAL SOURCE OF CAPITAL FINDS 098 OF CAPITAL FUNDS: LESS PAID ADDITIONS TO PLANT TNRU FEBRUARY GENERAL LEDGER CAPITAL FINDS BALANCE 3/18/13 psi 3,635,305.)0 3,000,000.00 6,660.38 3.663,75] N 7,083,619.52 6.037.039.96 3.056.589.58 TOWN OF READING, HASSACHMSTTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTNENT SALES OF KILOWATT HOURS 2/28/13 r -IL 0 MOGTH NORTH LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR YTD % SALES OF ELECTRICITY: LMT YEAR CURRENT YEAR TO DATE TO DATE CHARGE RESIDENTIAL BALES 19,102,966 22,820,062 1]5,6]7,609 182,259,130 3.86% CONN. AND INDUSTRIAL SALES 30,118,666 36,836,035 275.363,217 261,668,368 2.22% PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING 73,667 73,263 $83,863 585,086 0.36% TOTAL PRIVATE CONSUHSRS 69.296.857 57.]2],320 651.606.509 666,293,366 2.86% NUNICIPAL SALES: STREET LIGHTING 239,338 236,879 1,913,265 1,905,680 -0.61% HUNICIPAL BUILDINGS 791,333 916,766 6,658,169 6,572,257 1.77% TOTAL MUNICIPAL CONSUMERS 1.030.01 1.153,625 8.371.616 8,677.737 1.27% SALES FOR RESALE 267,699 261,611 2,297,395 2,307,876 0.66% SCHOOL 1,310,083 1,502.518 9,210,539 9,605,822 2.12% TOTAL KILOWATT HOURS SOLD 51.963.300 60.625.0]6 6]1.28].85] 686.686.799 3.80% r -IL 0 TORN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT KILOWATT HOURS SOLD BY TOWN 2/28/13 WORTHTOTAL READING LYNNPIRLD NO.RSADING WILMINGTON RESIDENTIAL 22.820,042 ),16),160 3,372,597 4,734,595 7,545,682 CONK A IND 34,834,035 4,312,863 291,275 5,478,812 24,751,065 PVT ST LIGHTS 73,243 13,585 1,360 21,316 36,982 PUB ST LIGHTS 230,679 00,536 31,500 41,196 84,61] MUNI BLD08 SALES/RESALE 914,746 205,656 16],0]) 139,560 ]8),503 341,611 241,611 0 0 SCHOOL 1,502,516 518,924 340,20E 203.)60 0 441,026 TOTAL60.625.074 12.630.3431.199.96)10.617.0]9 33.166.925 YEAR TO DATE RESIDENTIAL 182,259,130 56,009,215 26,415,604 41,617,161 $),41),150 COMM A IND 281,440,348 35,127,006 3,188,629 43,512,560 ]00,6]0,073 PVT BY LIGHTS 585,886 108.600 10,890 170,468 295,BSS PUB $T LIGHTS 11905,480 644,289 259,960 324,896 676,336 MUNI BLDOS SALEE/RESALE 6,572.]5) 1,696,469 1,161,522 1,256,314 2,457,921 2,307,876 2,307,676 0 0 SCHOOL 9,405,0]] 3,311,451 2.053,859 1,203,600 0 2,637,832 TOTAL 181.481. )99 _ 300. 005. OBS 12,090.154 88 084.089264.305.1)1 LAST YEAR TO DATE RESIDENTIAL 175,477,409 54,933,316 24,871,283 41,075,196 54,597,514 COMM 6 IND 275,343,]1) 35,070,011 2,218.1)) 42,673,553 195,351,476 PVT ST LIGHTS 583,683 111.312 10,860 171,773 209,919 PUB 8T LIGHTS 1.913,265 643,788 ]59,50] 319,203 690,692 MUNI 31.008 61458,149 1,658,432 1,098,987 1,163,292 2,437,438 BALBB/RESALE 2,297,395 2,297,395 0 0 SCHOOL 9,210,539 3,291,026 2.015,795 1,179,400 0 2,724,318 TOTAL 171 ]83.55) 98.005.280 0l 86.68E 516 256.111.35) KILOWATT HOURS SOLD TO TOTAL WORTH TOTAL READING LYNNPIELD NO. REAMING M WILMINGTON RESIDENTIAL 37.64% 11.82% 5.56% 7.61% COMM 6 IND 57.46% 7.11% 0.48% 9.04% 12.45% 40.83% PVT ST LIGHTS 0.12% 0.02% 0.00% 0.04% 0.06% PUB 8T LIGHTS 0.39% 0.13% 0.05% 0.07% MUNI SLOGS 1.52% 0.47% 0.27% 0.23% 0.14% SALES/RESALE 0.40% 0.40% 0.00% 0.54% SCHOOL 2.48% 0.86% 0.56% 0.00% 0.00% 0.33% 0.73% TOTAL 100.00\ 20.8]% 6.93\ 17.51\ 54.741 YEAR TO OATS RESIDENTIAL 37.62% 11.73% 5.45\ 8.59% 11.85% COME L IED 58.09% 7.25% 0.45% 8.93% 41.41% PVT ST LIGHTS 0.12% 0.02% 0.00% 0.04% 0.06% PUB ST LIGHTS 0.39% 0.13% 0.05% 0.07% 0.14% MUNI ELMS 1.36% 0.35% 0.24% 0.26% 0.51% SALES/RESALE 0.48% 0.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SCHOOL 1.94% 0.68% 0.42% 0.25% 0.59% TOTAL100.00\ 20.64\ 6.61\ 10.19\ 54.56\ LAST YEAR TO DATE RESIDENTIAL 37.24% 11.66% 5.28% 8.72% 11.58% COME I IND 58.42% 7.44% 0.47% 9.05\ 41.46% PVT ST LIGHTS 0.12% 0.02% 0.00% 0.04% 0.06% 10 PUB ST LIGHTS MMI SLOGS 0.41\ 1.37% 0.14% 0.35\ 0.01% O.M 0.07\ 0.27\ 0.14% SALES/RESALE 0.49% 0.49% 0.00% . 000\ 0.53\ 0.00\ SCHOOL 1.95\ 0.70\ 0.43% 0.25% 0.57% TOTAL 100.00\ 30.80\ 6.47\ 18.40\ 54.33\ TOW OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT FORMULA INCOME LIE/13 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES ADD, POLE RENTAL LESS: (P.3) 58,160,585.73 INTEREST INCOME ON CUSTOMER DSVOSIT9 OPERATING EXPENSES (P.3) CUSTOMER DEPOSIT INTEREST E%PWSR PONMULA INCOME (LOSS) 0.00 667.1] (56,570,010.11) (3,109.161 1.566353.50 r� 11 kle SALE OF XWB (P.5 EMH PORCHASM AVE BASE COST PER SNB AVE BASE SALE PER BNB AVE COST PER SBR AVE SALE PER SBH PURL CHARGE RSV S (P.3) LOAD FACTOR AS LOAD 'E TOMN OF RB mo, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT GENERAL STATISTICS 1/29/13 ROME OP FEE 2012 51,883,300 59,S50,250 0.033086 0.066118 0.089145 0.121100 2,594,141.71 73.74% 100,453 NOME OP % CHA310E YEAR THRV PEE 2011 2012 2011 P8B 2032 FEE 2013 60,625,074 -3.97% 2.80% 471,283,857 484,484,799 53,918,115 -2.82% 2.05% 487,656,547 497,668,189 0.042641 -7.01% 10.781 0.034564 0.038289 0.064430 2.77% -0.67% 0.065175 0.064737 0.105656 -5.56% -0.84% 0.087117 0.086387 0.114423 -2.07% -3.37% 0.118511 0.114518 3,030,833.31 -11.18% -4.05% 25,136,688.86 24,118,055.34 70.69% 104.480 O O > L ria U r��d p n� Vico M '1-- .�I li� rn�On li tJ) 1 °i r p0 �r }L, b 3 ,4 °,ten i ° o�' p l Ol O+ o � S � N ' o� yin �b ore y, Sa Ln C) Ln 0 LO CD 0o ti L(-) �t N CD Q Q CD CD C) CD C CD CD CD V) Im TORR OF READING, HASSACRUHSTTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DZPARTNENT SCHEDULE OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS 1/39/13 SCHEDULE A PREVIOUS YEAR CURRENT YEAR 9.)9),163.56 9,881,280.96 ),000.00 ],000.00 9 )96.16].56 9.BB6,280.96 ],993,661.61 UNRESTRICTID CASH 3,056,589.58 CASH - OPRMTIHO FOR, 896,000.00 CASH - PETTY CASH 605,521.00 TOTAL UNRESTRI CTBO CASH 1,103,928.82 RESTRICTED CASH 1,009,886.93 CASH - DEPRECIATION PUN, 6,069,916.65 CASH - TOWN PAYMENT 6,688,302.62 CASH - DEFERRED FUEL RESERVE 100,000.00 CASH - RATE STABILIZATION POND 300,000.00 CASH - UNCOLLECIISLE ACCTS RESERVE 2,953,598.15 CASH - SICR LEAVE BENEPIT9 2,982,106.62 CASH - HAZARD WASTE RESERVE 150,000.00 CASH - CUSTONER DEPOSITS 1501000.00 CASH - ENERGY CONSERVATION 602,169.01 CASH - OPES 686,616.16 TOTAL RESTRICTED CASH 128,810.32 259,832.31 TOTAL CASH BALANCE SCHEDULE A PREVIOUS YEAR CURRENT YEAR 9.)9),163.56 9,881,280.96 ),000.00 ],000.00 9 )96.16].56 9.BB6,280.96 ],993,661.61 3,056,589.58 896,000.00 605,521.00 1,103,928.82 1,009,886.93 6,069,916.65 6,688,302.62 100,000.00 300,000.00 2,953,598.15 2,982,106.62 150,000.00 1501000.00 602,169.01 686,616.16 128,810.32 259,832.31 1,123,181.95 1,166,239.12 18 319.]56.51 32.990.650.4] 12, 215. QT.OB IL825.631.69 TOW OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS WHNICIPAL LIGHT DSPARTMENT SCHEDULE OF ACCOIRTS RRCRIVABLS 1/10/13 SCHEDULE B SCHEDULE OF PREPAYNENT9 PREPAID INSURANCE PREVIOUS YEAR COAR6MS YEAR SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE PRBPAYNHNT PORCRABED POWER 245,]{7.57 8.114 (103,081.81) 68,995.61 2,869,168.10 238,330.65 4,496,114.61 241,849.32 RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PRHPAYWRIT PARRY 155,415.83 312,381.85 188,363.19 ACIDOSIS RECEIVABLE - OTHER 198,821.16 14,523.70 43.936.63 14.533.70 ACCOUETS RECEIVABLE - LIMB 651168.95 891.14 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE EMPLOYEE ADVANCES 891.14 1.969.73].19 (351,416.50) 1.562.973.37 SALES DISCODHS LIABILITY (154,131.B1) (147.924.61) RESERVE FOR UMCOLLECTIBLS ACCOUNTS (306,916.18) 4,264,005.05 TOTAL ACIDOSIS RECEIVABLE BILLED 2,573,112.86 UNBILLED ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 4,830,194.37 4,915,9)6.8) TOTAL ACCOHETS RECEIVABLE, NET 7.40),407.1) 9.200.011.88 SCHEDULE OF PREPAYNENT9 PREPAID INSURANCE 1,296,204.42 1,]]1,398.40 30 DAYS PRBPAYNHNT PORCRABED POWER 245,]{7.57 8.114 (103,081.81) 68,995.61 238,330.65 90 DAYS 241,849.32 PRHPAYWRIT PARRY 155,415.83 53,684.51 188,363.19 1.304 PREPAYNATBON 14,523.70 14.533.70 PURCHAMHHD POWER HOMING CAPITAL TOTAL PRBPAYMENI 1.969.73].19 1.562.973.37 ACCVIMTS RECEIVABLE AGING FEBRUARY 2013: R68IDLYTIAL AND COMERCIAL 4,496,114.62 LESS: BALES DISCOUNT LIABILITY (351,416.56) GENERAL LEDGER BALANCE 4.144,796.04_ CURRENT 3,666,454.65 88.45% 30 DAYS 340,499.0 8.114 60 DAYS 68,995.61 1.664 90 DAYS 15,163.80 0.374 OVER 90 DAYS 53,684.51 1.304 TOTAL 4.144.798.04 100.00 2 TOM OF READING, RASSACHUs[TTS HURICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTNENT SCHEDULE OF OPERATING REVERIE 2/26/1] SUB -TOTAL 61019,016.87 6,936,681.68 55,852,526.26 SCHEDULE D -0.66\ SALES OF 8L8CTRICITY: NORTH LAST YEAR NONTN CURRENT YEAR LAST YEAR TO DAT[ CURRENT YEAR TO DAT[ YTD \ CXANGE RESIDENTIAL SALES COMM AND INDUSTRIAL BALES PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING ],65),596.16 3,268,515.35 5,9)8.]6 5.63\ ],915,33).11 3,692,335.19 5.896.81 PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY 23,086,855.36 30,3]5,11].39 51.695.18 ]3,1)),8]8.86 39,99],63].10 1),091.69 0.65\ -1.16\ -12.30\ TOTAL PRIVATE CONSUHER3 5.)3].111 )5 6.61].56) 61 50.16].fi91 ]] 53.16),55] 9] -0.56\ 182,366.67 396,690.96 19.89Y 16.89\ GAN REVENUE 51,893.96 60,630.61 MUNICIPAL SALES: 1)1,]96.56 181,376.68 2.77\ HYPA CREDIT (62,665.76) (77,941.37) STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS 29,270.31 9),1)9.38 28,166.17 101,151.]) ]55,)1].]1 783,589.18 326,563.13 )61,26).55 -11.11\ -].7]\ TOTAL MUNICIPAL CONSUMER 1]2,)69 72 132.298.)1 1.0]9,3]1.)9 988.910 98 _ t. 127.)82.10 5656 81 33 . 58.160.585.73 SALES FOR RESALE 29,500.55 ]9,)00.32 281,515.05 273,161.51 -2.97\ SCHOOL 111,651.95 162,315.61 1,063,906.57 1,05],5)8.56 SUB -TOTAL 61019,016.87 6,936,681.68 55,852,526.26 55,1B2,101.01 -0.66\ PORPEITED DISCOUNTS 70,691.05 66,]03.)3 636,950.33 671,515.75 5.63\ PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY (91856.38) 183,666.75 (89,519.87) 1,167,331.16 -1738.93\ ENERGY CONSERVATION - RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION - CONM6RCIAL 19,113.83 31,906.36 ]],039.16 36,921.56 152,117.67 252,113.61 182,366.67 396,690.96 19.89Y 16.89\ GAN REVENUE 51,893.96 60,630.61 1)1,]96.56 181,376.68 2.77\ HYPA CREDIT (62,665.76) (77,941.37) (660,280.28) (461,797.30) -6.02\ TOTAL REVENUE 2.33\ 6.1]0.10].93 _ t. 127.)82.10 5656 81 33 . 58.160.585.73 III TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT SCHEDULE OF OPERATING REVENUE BY TOWN 2/28/13 LAST YEAR TO DATE RESIDENTIAL TOTAL READING READING NO.RRAOINO LYNN9I8L0 NORTH NO.RBADIN0 WILMINGTON HOME INDUS/MUNI BLDG 31,108,731.53 6,303,966.35 396,832.65 62.03% 6,967,132.02 13.25% 21,660,380.55 RESIDENTIAL 2,915,317.61 255,363.21 918,792.65 82,118.63 628,615.17 31,327.50 606,160.52 65,306.91 961,969.07 96,181.17 INDUS/MUNI BLDG 3,796,689.66 53,695.60 526,565.27 10,009.60 51,252.26 981.10 610.010.16 16,593.38 2,610,601.79 26,112.30 PUB.ST.LIGHTS 28,166.67 281,515.05 9,171.62 281,515.05 3,633.03 0.00 6.966.75 0.00 10,389.07 0.00 PRV.ST.LIGHTS 5,896.81 l.013,996.S7 1,075.60 383,551.35 107.64 22B,803.70 1,782.32 139,705.39 2,929.65 311,925.73 CO-OP RESALE 28,700.32 55.852,526.26 28,700.32 12.307,061.05 0.00 3,921,309.60 0.00 .10,560,6 0.00 29 063.139 SCHOOL 162,315.61 56,693.36 36,102.62 13.95% 22,360.23 52.38% 67,359.60 THIS YEAR TO DATA TOTAL 6. 936. 881. BB 1.535,904 62 519.510.52 1,265.317.96 3.633.248.76 61.09% THIS YEAR TO DATE 13.11% 6.03% 9.55% 13.20% INDUS/MUNI BLDG 55.23% RESIDEHTIAL 23,237,828.86 0.69% 1,211,756.57 3,367,505.12 5,301,306.07 0.60% 7,317,265.08 0.13% INDUS/MUNI BLDG 30,666,979.95 0.07% 6,185,637.66 0.15% 385,612.86 PRV.ST.LIGHTS 6,892,152.18 21,101.677.69 PU9.ST.LIGNTB 226,563.63 73,621.06 29,058.18 0.69% 61,099.63 0.69% 82.986.60 0.00% PRV.ST.LIGHTS 67,091.69 0.00% 8,610.96 SCHOOL 861.16 16,192.10 23,627.67 0.25% CO-OP RESALE 273,161.56 173,161.56 100.00% 0.00 21.96% 0.00 3.18% 0.00 SCHOOL 1,052,578.56 LAST YEAR TO OATH 373,710.68 226,860.32 138,268.63 313.759.13 TOTAL 55.682.106.01 41.36% 12,186.296.23 12.91% 3,989,677.70 5.81% 10.387.016 62 26,919,113.66 LAST YEAR TO DATE RESIDENTIAL 23,088,955.36 READING 7,265,850.67 NO.RRAOINO 31263,366.65 NORTH 5,3911500.18 3,188,160.26 INDUS/MUNI BLDG 31,108,731.53 6,303,966.35 396,832.65 62.03% 6,967,132.02 13.25% 21,660,380.55 6.16% PUB.ST.LIOHTS 255,363.21 13.06% 82,118.63 INDUS/MUNI BLDG 31,327.50 65,306.91 96,181.17 8.79% PRV.ST.LIOHTS 53,695.60 10,009.60 0.61% 981.10 0.13% 16,593.38 O.OS% 26,112.30 CO-OP RESALE 281,515.05 PRV.ST.LIGHTS 281,515.05 0.00 0.00 0.03% 0.00 0.03% SCHOOL l.013,996.S7 0.61% 383,551.35 0.61% 22B,803.70 0.00% 139,705.39 311,925.73 TOTAL 55.852,526.26 12.307,061.05 3,921,309.60 _ .10,560,6 0.69% 29 063.139 91 PERCENTAGE OF OPERATING INCOME TO TOTAL TOTAL READING LYNNPI6L0 NO.RRAOINO NILNINGTON NORTH RESIDENTIAL 62.03% 13.25% 6.16% 8.76\ 13.06% INDUS/MUNI BLDG 56.13% 3.56% OAS% 8.79% 37.64% PUB.ST.LIGHTS 0.61% 0.13% O.OS% 0.07% 0.16% PRV.ST.LIGHTS 0.08% 0.02% 0.00% 0.03% 0.03% CO-OP RESALE 0.61% 0.61% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SCHOOL 2.36% 0.81% 0.52% 0.32% 0.69% TOTAL 100.00% 22.18% 3.69% 13.95% 52.38% THIS YEAR TO DATA RESIDENTIAL 61.09% 13.11% 6.03% 9.55% 13.20% INDUS/MUNI BLDG 55.23% 3.56% 0.69% 6.62% 30.18% PUB.ST.LIGHTS 0.60% 0.13% 0.05% 0.07% 0.15% PRV.ST.LIGHTS 0.09% 0.02% 0.00% 0.03% 0.06% CO OR RESALE 0.69% 0.69% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SCHOOL 1.90% 0.63% 0.61% 0.25% 0.57% TOTAL 100.00% 21.96% 3.18% 18.12% 52.16% LAST YEAR TO OATH RESIDENTIAL 41.36% 12.91% 5.81% 9.65% 12.08% INDUS/MUNI BLDG 55.70% 3.71% 0.31% 8.69% 38.39% PUB.ST.LIGHTS 0.66% 0.15% 0.06% 0.00% 0.17% • PRV.ST.LIGHTS 0.10% 0.02% 0.00% 0.03% 0.05% CO-OP RESALE 0.50% 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% SCHOOL 1.90% 0.69% 0.61% 0.25% 0.55% TOTAL 100.00% 22.06% 7.02% 10.90% 52.06% ( I • ACTUAL ORDER BUDGET TONS OF READING, NA38ACBUSRTTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT BUOORTSD REVENUE VARIANCE REPORT 2/28/13 SCHEDULE P ACTUAL YGR TO DATE SALES OF RLECIRICITY: VAAIANCB • RESIDENTIAL 16,160,183.71 COMM AMD INDUSTRIAL BALES PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING SALES FOR RESALE SCRAWL TOTAL USE SALES TOTAL FUEL SALES TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE FORFEITED DISCOUNTS PURCHASED POSER CAPACITY ENERGY CONSERVATION - RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION - CONNERCIAL GAS REVENUE PASNY CREDIT TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES ( I • ACTUAL ORDER BUDGET TONS OF READING, NA38ACBUSRTTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT BUOORTSD REVENUE VARIANCE REPORT 2/28/13 SCHEDULE P ACTUAL YGR TO DATE BUDGET YEAR TO DATE VAAIANCB • \ CBAN08 16,160,183.71 14,000,956.00 (660,772.29) -6,33% 16,336,667.72 17,0]],369.00 1687,681.281 -6.04% 131,277.67 135,108.00 (3,830.33) -2.84% 158,652.90 196,672.00 (36,019.10) -18.50% 579,266.67 586,248.00 (6,901,33) -1.19\ 31,366,068.67 32,739,333.00 (1,375,286.33) -6.20% ]6.118.055 36 21.731.610 00 2.386,649 10.99% 55,682,106.01 56,670,963.00 1,011,161.01 1.86% 671,515.75 720,265.00 (48,749.35) -6.77% 1,667,331.16 1,686,003.00 (19,671.86) -1.31% 182.366.67 296,690.96 183,530.00 307,285.00 (1,163.53) (1],596.06) -0.63% -6.10% 686,376.68 (661,797.30) 690,815.00 (466:664.00) (6,440.321 24,866.70 -1.31% -5.33% 58 160.585.7) 57.19].971.00 967.fi00.7] 1.66% TONE OF READING, NASSACNUSSTTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTNW? SCall DOLE OF OFSAULTING EXPENSES 2/24/13 SCHEDULE E El NORTH NONTN LAST YEAR CDRHENT Y9:AI1 YTD OPERATION EXPENSES: LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR TO DATE TO DATE CHANGE PURCEASED POWER BASE EXPENSE 1.911.257.89 2,299.125.86 16.855,504.43 19,055.650.42 13.05% OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING EAP 37,781.66 113,000.00 36,516.65 347,486.20 00 316,071.69 1.768.910.52 -3.86% -11.24% STATION SUP LABOR AND RISC 8,259.52 6,BS9.23 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES ]5,1]3.95 6.167.546. 50,952.06 G1 -32.12% 08PRECIATION EXPENSE LIME RISC LABOR AND EIPENSE 68,396.95 305,469.18 46,255.53 2.368.219.76 453,336.13 444.689.33 -1.91% STATION LABOR AND EXPENSE 33,860.42 31,136.24 316,713.88 348.348.73 13,936,617.60 9.99% -6.60% STREET LIGHTING EXPENSE 9,949.11 4,798.98 78,030.62 $3,616.24 -31.18% INTER EXPENSE 15,095.89 14,534.37 165,421.64 12!,049.84 -24.41% RISC DISTRIBUTION EXPENSE 26,532.33 22,603.68 121,444.58 123,833.03 1.08% METER READING LABOR 6 EXPENSE 71016.91 5,219.29 60,870.99 57,621.58 -5.34% ACCT A CULL LABOR 6 EXPENSE 1101819.86 106,512.57 922,689.64 965,464.44 6.80% UMCOLLECTIBLB ACCOUNTS 16,000.00 8,333.33 128,000.00 66,666.64 .67.92% ENERGY AUDIT EXPENSE 31,736.69 4D,058.12 294,218.82 326,513.10 11.66% ADMIN A GEN SALARIES 57,334.00 51,678.86 494,447.65 508,619.95 2.87% OFFICE SUPPLIES A EXPENSE 11,787.31 13,982.62 145,420.61 167,766.39 13.03% OUTSIDE SERVICES 30.183.04 67,591.86 253,840.84 319.655.76 25.93% PROPERTY INSURANCE 32,379.12 36,915.54 250.946.96 250,169.41 -0.31% INJURIES AND DANAGBS 2.883.11 21980.03 10.509.34 31,031.37 187.08% ENPLOYERS PENSIONS A BENEFITS 195.495.15 161,557.95 677,691.57 1,422.430.99 62.07% MIHC GENERAL EIPENSE 7,630.97 11.064.10 128.591.35 117,923.02 -0.30% REST EXPENSE 28,543.16 13.895.48 131,434.89 132.939.57 0.40% ENERGY CONSERVATION 45,946.94 27,941.48 396.208.79 5101381.15 18.81% TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES 787.674.74 714.493.03 5,756,790.43 6,479,793.34 12.56% MINTENANCE EXPENSES: • MAIST OF TRANSMISSIONPLANT 127.06 227.08 1,816.66 1,816.66 0.00% MAIN) OF STRUCT AND EGUIPRT 7,421.39 9,701.11 195,464.79 91,000.25 -53.44% MAIM OF LINES - ON 08,278.85 107.337.11 1,158,292.06 1,013,404.02 -12.51% MAIM OB LINES - UG 10,331.03 12,665.75 125,613.39 110.213.38 -12.26% MAIM OF LINE TRANSFORMERS 1.575.16 15,033.17 32,762.59 93,559.67 185.57% MAIM OF ST IT A SIG SYSTEM 157.811 130.511 1608.321 1288.111 -29.27% MAIM OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM 46,922.88 61,712.41 347,469.70 342,560.15 -1.41% NAIM OF MINES 6,543.46 716.26 56,151.47 11,739.25 -61.28% RAIN OF GBN PLANT 61404.99 9.023.77 53,108.37 74,685.75 41.01% TOTAL RAIMENANCE EXPENSES 169.669.03 113,000.00 11].186.1] 1.970.170.71 00 1.768.910.52 -11.24% 905.383.00 0.50% TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 6.167.546. G1 ].04].986.05 08PRECIATION EXPENSE 396,027.67 305,469.18 54.569.700.31 2.368.219.76 2,443,753.44 3.19% PUNCTURING FORM FUEL EXPENSE 1,579,936.88 3,397.709.79 35,627,706.69 13,936,617.60 -6.60% VOLUNTARY PAYNEN9 TO TONNE 113,000.00 116, DOG. 00 900,166.00 905.383.00 0.50% TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 6.167.546. G1 ].04].986.05 31,6]8.6]5.02 54.569.700.31 2.04% 11 11 TOMS OF BRAIDING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT BUDGETED OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE REPORT 3/20/13 SCHEDULE G • ( ) • ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET 0 OPERATION EXPENSES: UAL Y TO DAT[ YEAR TOODATE VARIANCE • CHANGE PURCHASED POWER MASE EXPENSE 19.055 550 13 30.150.981 00 11,)95,5]6 SBI -6.82% OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING BEP STATION SUP LABOR AND MISC LIN[ RISC BOROR ANO [EPEES% STATION LABOR AND PENSEE% a;epee EXTRA] EXPENSE MTBE ISTRIBE MISE DISTRIBUTION "BOBBEPBEXP MASTER READING L LABi EXPENSE ACCT i COIL LABOR i [%NESSE ACCOUNTS ENERGY RNRROY AGOIT [%PRIES: OFFICE ADMIN i GEN SALARIESSERVICES OUTSIDE B 9 VB c EXPENSE PROPERTY INSURANCE IISVRIEe NDAMAGE, EMPLOYEES PENSIONS 6 BENEFITS MISC GENERAL EXPENSE RENT EXPENSE ENERGY CONSERVATION 331,0]2.69 501952.06 111,689.33 318,318.]) 53,626.31 125,049.81 333,833.03 57,621.58 965,464.44 66,666.64 336,513.10 506,639.98 167,766.39 319,655.76 250,169.43 31,031.37 1,423,436.99 117,933.02 132,959.57 510,381.15 309,535.00 52,571.00 130,751.00 ]96,3]5.00 591059.00 119,703.00 240,928.00 61,852.00 915,311.00 66,664.00 318,798.00 499,007.00 169,381.00 395,952.00 311,311.00 37,909.00 1,323,733.00 153,033.00 141,336.00 471,100.00 24,56].69 (1,631.91) 13,938.33 19,9]3.]3 (1,432.76) 5,316.81 (17,094.97) (1,2)0.13) 70,153.11 2.44 9,715.10 91622.98 (11614.61) (76,296.24) , (6,677.63) 98,705.99 (35,109.98) (8,376.43) 39,381.15 . 7.93% -3. 3,21\ 16.75% -2.60% 4.47% -7.10% -6.94% 7.66% 0.00% 3,05% 1.93% -0.95% -19.27\ -20. -18.14% 7.46% -33.94% -5,93\ 8.34% TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES 6.179,793.31 6.375.335 00 101.156 J4 1.64% QMAINTENANCE 8Xpp88B: MIST OF TRANSMISSION PLANT MINT OF 9TRUCT AND EGUIPMRNI MINT OF LIKES - ON MISS OF LINES - GO MISS OF LIME TRANSPORMERS MINT OF 9T LT i SIO SYSTEM MINT OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM MISS OP KEYS" MNT OF GEN PLA 11816.66 91,000.25 1,013,404.02 110,213.38 93,559.67 (388.81) 342,580.35 31,739.35 ]1,885.75 21000.00 76,119.00 794,542.00 110,453.00 134,406.00 6,105.00 119,655.00 13,994.00 8],406.00 (163.34) 11,781.25 318,862.02 (239.63) (40,846.33) (6,69).611 (107,074.65) (31,354.]5) (1],5]].]5) -9.17% 19.39% 37.55% -0.32% -30.39% -104.S1Y -33.61% -19.61IST -11.44% \ TOTAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSES 1. NB.910 ST 1.701 OB] 00 11 8]6 5] 2.61\ DEPRECIATION EXPENSE 3,113,753.11 3,133,336.00 10,417.11 0.43% PURCHASED POWER FUEL EXPENSE 23,936,117.60 32,223,566.00 1.713,851.60 7.71% VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS 905,383.00 912,000.00 (6,61].00) -0.73% TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 51.Sfi 9.708.12 51 098.)06.00171 402.32 0.07% • ( ) • ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET 0 TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT BUDGETED OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE REPORT 3/x8/13 j RESPONSIBLE RB 668,989.00 RSMA THING 336,071.69 SENIOR 2013 ACTUAL BOUGHT REMAINING OPERATION EXPENSES: MANAGER ANNUAL BOUGHT YEAR TO DATE BALANCE BUDGET % PURCHASED POWER BASS EXPENSE SP 30.30].76].00 19.055.650.62 11,067.391.58 36.70% OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING EXP RB 668,989.00 336,071.69 136,816.31 STATION SUP LABOR AND MISC 99 79,813.00 50,952.06 28,860.96 LINE MISC LABOR AND EXPENSE BE 671,309.00 886,689.33 226,619.67 STATION LABOR AND EXPENSE RE 688,289.00 388,388.73 99,900.27 STRBXT LIGHTING EXPENSE RE 83,106.00 53,626.16 29,679.76 METER EXPENSE BE 197,329.00 125,089.88 72,279.16 MISC DISTRIBUTION EXPENSE BE 366,689.00 223,B33.03 182,655.97 METER RRADING LABOR 6 EXPENSE R9 69,966.00 57,521.53 12,326.62 ACCT S COLL LABOR 8 EXPENSE RP 1,385,210.00 985,666.68 399,765.56 UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RP 100,000.00 66,666.68 33,333.36 ENERGY AUDIT EXPENSE SP 679,013.00 328,513.10 1501699.90 ADMIN R GEN SALARIES RE 761,068.00 $00,629.98 251,833.02 OFFICE SUPPLIES S EXPENSE RS 253,950.00 167,766.39 86.183.61 OUTSIDE SERVICES BE 507,125.00 319,655.76 107,669.26 PROPERTY INSURANCE: R9 671.500.00 250,169.43 221,330.57 INJURIES AND DAMAGES RE 56.619.00 31,031.37 25,587.63 EMPLOYEES PENSIONS 6 BENEFITS RE 1,889,6]1.00 1,6]],433.99 667,196.01 MISC GENERAL EXPEISE RS 200,785.00 117,9]3.0] 82,861.98 RENT BXPENSE RS ]1],000.00 132,959.57 79,080.83 ENERGY CONSERVATION JP 697,983.00 530,381.15 187,601.95 TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES 3.0]3.305.00 6.679.793.36 2.920.372.66 MAINTENANCE EXPENSES: WAIST OF TRANSMISSION PLANT XB 3,000.00 11816.66 1,183.36 WAIST OF BSRUCT AMD EDUIPHT RS 116,120.00 91,000.25 23,119.75 MAI" OF LINES - ON RS 1,]50,6]1.00 1.013.608.02 237,016.98 HAINT OF LINES - UD RE 185,371.00 110.113.38 175,157.62 MAINS OF LINE TRANSFORMERS RS 188,500.00 93,559.67 98.980.33 MAINY OF ST LT R SIG SYSTEM BE 9,688.00 (288.81) 9,972.81 SAINT OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM BE 672.589.00 362,5BO.35 330,008.65 MAI" OF METERS BE 67,392.00 ]1,739.]5 25,652.75 MAINT OF GEN PLANT RF 131.320.00 76,885.75 56,836.25 TOTAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSES 2.817.601.00 1.768.910.52 953.886.88 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE PURCHASED POWER FUEL EXPENSE VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 18.76% 36.16% 33.76% 11.19% 35.67% 36.63% 38.93% 17.62% 18.66% 33.33% 31.62% 33.17% 33.96% 36.97% 66.96% 65.19% ]6.71% 81.]7% 37.]8% 26.88% 33.10% e 39.68% ]0.16% 18.95% 61.38% 50.37% 101.98% 69.07% 56.13% 81.97% 33.86% RP 3,650,000.00 2,683,753.86 1,106,166.56 33.05% JP 30,500,000.00 33,936,817.60 6,563,582.60 31.52% RF 1,360,000.00 905,383.00 862,617.00 33.82% 83.767.500.00 58.569.708.31 33.153.696.68 27.66% • 4w PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DY PRO",I TOW OP READING. MA98AMS,,,S MUNICIPAL LIGHT 0[PARTMENS PROP089IONA, SERVICES 3/10/1013 ITq DRIAN1MMI ACTUAL Dp00[S VARIANCE 1 RELD AM PENSION TRUST AUDIT FEES ACCOUNTING 31,]50.00 31,350.00 3 PENSION ACTUARIAL EVALUATION ACCOONSINO 500.00 3 LEGAL- P[RC/I90 ISSUES ],]50.00 0.00 ]1]30.00 LROFESAL - I890N8 ENERGY SERVICE 0.00 11,000.00 (11.000.001 5 PROFESSIONAL SBRPLY 5 NROPi88MPLIL ."ROT SERVICE 18,065.00 30,000.00 (11,916.10) CE[AND A 6 NERC COMPLIANCE AND AUDIT [MERCY SERVICE 91939.80 161000.00 (6,060.10) 7 LOM CYACENI [ 6 0 9,307.50 11.700.00 (1,391.50) 8 HARDENING 9TODY G S ENGINEERING 0.00 11,130.00 (11,150.00) LEGALSTROX 9 LEGAL-OW[PAL, ENM[C AUDIS ENGINEERING 0.00 501000.00 (50,000.001 SO LEGAL SERVICES-OEEEML GE ]0,00.63 100,000.00 139,33.581 11 LEGAL NR 83,038.66 63,600.00 39,6438.66 GENVICRS-NEGOTIATIONS 13 LEGAL BID NR 51.767.50 36,000.00 15,967.50 9ptVBIDET, OF NAY BLOC. MAINE. 10.300.90 11000.00 9,300.90 15 QNIROMENGM SLID. NAIMT. 0.00 ].336.00 11,336.00) 15 ENGINEERING SERVICES BLDG. NAXNT. 0.00 3,336.00 (3,336.00) 16 REPAIR NSD DECK AREA BLDG. KNIFE. 16,118.05 51680.00 0,636.05 1] LEGAL [ CONBpLTAN'[ CZ C BLDG. PRINT. 0.00 30.000.00 (30,000.00) 18 LEGAL GEN. SMFIT 0.00 6.666.00 16,664.00) 19 BIND A89E88M[M FOR MASOa pPOGpi OG. BENEFIT 0.00 3,336.00 (3,336.00) 30 GENERAL,BANKRUPTCY ACCOUNTING 3.056.37 0.00 3,056.17 31 REECOSIV[ SERA". ON ACCOUNTING 1.616.00 0.00 1,666.00 TOTAL ON 13 ]50.00 0.00 1] ]50.00 ]19,655.]6 195.9 .00 176 396 6 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BY VENDOR ACTUAL 3ELM80N SIXTH R CONNANY 33,500.00 HUDSON RIVER ENERGY GROOP 1,895.60 STONE CONSULTING INC. RUSIM AND MySSSF 3,750.00 35,603.16 UTILITY SERVICES INC. 9,307.50 DVNCAN R AI'I= 63,066.96 CHOATE HALL R STEWART 136.735.03 MERGERS MEN" R SPENCER 12.365.55 RICHARD HIGGINS ARBITRAMS 3.710.00 GRANT NOOTER8 ARSITRA=R 2,012.00 MICHAEL BROWN ARBITRATOR 2,538.99 MILLIAN P. CRONLEY BITOIEp 1,280.00 CNE[C JM ASSOCIATES ], 0'4 .00 1.733.50 OACRI 6 ASSOCIATES LLC 11,150.00 c008DME 2,056.27 TOTAL 319.655.]6 kol RMLD BUDGET VARIANCE REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 28, 2013 DIVISION ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE CHANGE ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS 2,853,493 2,701,222 152,271 5.64% -6.82% ENERGY SERVICEIS 868,114 848,235 19,880 2.34% 1,713,852 GENERAL MANAGER 630,582 600,620 21,962 3.61% 55,610,304 FACILITY MANAGER 2,519,108 2,630,110 (111,003) -4.22% BUSINESS DIVIS'ION 6,219,936 6,148,564 71,372 1.16% SUB -TOTAL 13,091,233 12,936,751 154,482 1.19% PURCHASED POWER - BASE 19,055,450 20,450,987 (1,395,531) -6.82% PURCHASED POWER - FUEL 23,936,418 22,222,566 1,713,852 7.71% TOTAL 56,083,101 55,610,304 472,797 0.85% J G RNLD DEFERRED PURL CASH RESERVE ANALYSIH 2/28/13 GROSS DATE CHARGES REVENUES NYPA CREDIT MONTHLY DEFERRED DEFERRED Jun -12 Jul -12 3,581,715.28 3,492,043.61 (61,106.90)1169,9'!8.5]1 2.270,044.48 Aug -12 3,,611.20 2,916,9]8.]5 144,365.60) (101,995.65) 2,120,065.91 9.p-12 2,666146,309.32 3,686,)69.65 (67,678.60) 1,612,06].26 Oct -12 2,595,375.65 3.309,167.90 (86,781.28) 792,961.33 2,205,028.59 Naw -12 2,]66,81].38 2,]60,129.6] (22,566.16) (255,009.75) 1.950,019.86 DRc-12 2,868,712.69 2,987,105.82 (60,965.36) (27,253.97) 1,923,]65.8] Jan -13 2,523,166.59 3,0]6,26].65 (70.691.63) 69,627.77 1,9]2,193.66 Fhb -13 3,397,709.79 3,030,833.31 (]],861.]1) 603,609.23 2,656,602.9] (666,]1].95) 2,009,086.92 G RNLD STAFFING REPORT []I FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SIMS, 2013 y 13 BUD JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEE TOTAL 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 GENB MANAGER GENERAL MANAGER 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 HUMAN RESOURCES 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 COMMUNITY RELATIONS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 TOTAL 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 BVS• ACCOUNTING 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 ].00 CUSTOMER SERVICE 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7-75 7.75 7.75 7.75 7.75 MGICT INFORMATION SYS 6.25 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 TOTAL 17.00 16.75 16.75 16.75 16.75 16.75 16.75 16.75 16.75 ENGINEERING. 4.O J=LONS AGM 840 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 ENGINEERING 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 LINE 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 METER 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 STATION 8.00 8.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 TOTAL 40.00 39.00 36.00 38.00 38.00 38.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 PROJECT BUILDING 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 GENERAL BENEFITS 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 TRANSPORTATION - MATERIALS MGM 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 TOTAL 8.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 ENERGY.SEEVSCES ENERGY SERVICES 5.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 5.50 S.SO TOTAL 5.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 5.50 5.50 ARLO TOTAL 74.50 70.25 71.25 71.25 71.25 71.35 72.25 73.25 73.25 CGNIEACIORB UG LINE 2000 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 TOTAL ].00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 GRAND TOTAL 76.50 72.25 73.25 73.25 73.25 73.25 74.]5 75.25 75.25 []I sa� a Reading ATTACHMENT7 RMLD V ueie vomu n a eenriorvs 230 Ash Street 'Nia, P.O. Box Iso Reading. MA018674)230 Tel: (781) 9". 1340 Fax: (781) 942.2409 Web: www.rmid.com April 18, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Bucket Truck 55 Ft. On January 23, 2013 a bias invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle, Lynnfield Villager, North Reading Transcript and Wilmington Town Crier requesting proposals for one Bucket Truck 55 Ft. for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was sent to the following 22 companies: Altec Industries, Inc. Baker Equipment Boston Freightliner, Inc. Coastal International Trucks, CUES DC Bates LLC Dejana Truck Equipment Fredrickson Bros., Inc. G & S Industrial, Inc. James A. Kiley Co. Liberty Chevrolet Mid -State International Trucks, Inc. Minuteman Trucks Moore GMCTruck Inc. Morse Manufacturing, Inc. NESCO Nutmeg International Trucks, Patriot International Trucks of Inc. Boston, LLC Place Motor, Inc. Stoneham Ford Sunrise Equipment Company Taylor& Lloyd, Inc. Bids were received from four companies; Altec Industries, Inc., Boston Freightliner, Inc., James A. Kiley Co., and Taylor& Lloyd, Inc. '[he bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. February 28, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2011-21 for: one Bucket Truck 55 Ft. be awarded to: Alter Industries, Inc. for $187,905.00 as the lowest qualifiedand responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. I he I ) 2014 Capital Budget amount for this item is $210,000.00. KeritPSullivaH Pa, id Polson *r Paula 0'Lca n' — / --- � � § � \i ` , > . � ! ) ! ! ! ! ■ ! ! ! ! ! ƒ\ , ` « � } ' ; a )\j,. \ ! ) r / ) § . & _ ; ! $ \ § )/ � ~ � ! _ \_ 2 k; � ) - § \ ) . _ , � � � § � April 18, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Trouble Truck 40 Ft. On January 23, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle, Lynnfield Villager, North Reading Transcript and Wilmington Town Crier requesting proposals for one Trouble Truck 40 Ft. for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was sent to the following 22 companies: RMLDReading Municipal Light Department Boston Freightliner, Inc. aeuasu vuwsn s rauan ons oa c CUES 230 Ash Street LLC P.O. Boa ISO Reading, MA01867-0250 Fredrickson Bros., Inc. Tel: (781) 944.1340 James A. Kiley Co. Pu: (781)942-2409 Mid -State International Trucks, Web: www.rmld.cmn April 18, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Trouble Truck 40 Ft. On January 23, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle, Lynnfield Villager, North Reading Transcript and Wilmington Town Crier requesting proposals for one Trouble Truck 40 Ft. for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was sent to the following 22 companies: Alter Industries, Inc. Baker Equipment Boston Freightliner, Inc. Coastal International Trucks, CUES DC Bates LLC Dejana Truck Equipment Fredrickson Bros., Inc. G & S Industrial, Inc. James A. Kiley Co. Liberty Chevrolet Mid -State International Trucks, Minuteman Trucks Inc. NESCO Moore GMC Truck Inc. Morse Manufacturing, Inc. Nutmeg International Trucks, Patriot International Trucks of Place Motor, Inc. Inc. Stoneham Ford Boston, LLC Sunrise Equipment Company Taylor& Lloyd, Inc. Bids were received from four companies; Altec Industries, Inc., Boston Freightliner, Inc., James A. Kiley Co., and Taylor& Lloyd, Inc. 'rhe bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. February 28, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-22 for: one Trouble Truck 40 Ft. be awarded to: James A. Kiley Co. for $182,744.00 as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. 1'he F12014 Capital Budget amount for this item is $f90,0W.0i � 1 Ke`'In ItI vn p/ L I lac id Yukon Paula ll'Lran. r &� R� E « \ ) ! ! § § ! f f #! !| >! &� R� E April 18, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Deck Repair Project On February 6, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle, Lynnfield Villager, North Reading Transcript and Wilmington Town Crier requesting proposals for one Deck Repair Project for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was sent to the following 12 companies: AI McKay All Starr Fence, Inc. Amor Fence & Supply Co., Inc. AVO Cedar Fences Caruso and McGovern Co. Colter Construction Distinctive Fences, Inc. Edward H May Fence Co. Kneeland Construction Corp. Mike's Construction Co., Inc. Omjoza Construction, Inc. Perfection Fence ®Bids were received from one company; Infrastructure Ltd The bid was publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. March 19, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bid was reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-23 for: Deck Repair Project be awarded to: Infrastructure Ltd. for $38,690.00 as the only responsible and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. The FY2013 Operating Budget amount for this item is $30,000.00. Approximately $13,000 will be allocated to the Operating Budget for demolition. Approximately, $26,000 will be allocated to the Capital Budget for Reconstruction work. Kevi Sullivan— David Poison �b1 67 Paula O'Lcan' 0 RMLD1,40) Reading Municipal Light Department � • arL1Aa L! POWER FOR cdeealnoes 230 Ash Street P.O. Boa 150 Reading. MAO 1$67-0250 Tel, (781) 944-1340 In: (781) 942-2409 Web: www.rmld.com April 18, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Deck Repair Project On February 6, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle, Lynnfield Villager, North Reading Transcript and Wilmington Town Crier requesting proposals for one Deck Repair Project for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was sent to the following 12 companies: AI McKay All Starr Fence, Inc. Amor Fence & Supply Co., Inc. AVO Cedar Fences Caruso and McGovern Co. Colter Construction Distinctive Fences, Inc. Edward H May Fence Co. Kneeland Construction Corp. Mike's Construction Co., Inc. Omjoza Construction, Inc. Perfection Fence ®Bids were received from one company; Infrastructure Ltd The bid was publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. March 19, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bid was reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-23 for: Deck Repair Project be awarded to: Infrastructure Ltd. for $38,690.00 as the only responsible and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. The FY2013 Operating Budget amount for this item is $30,000.00. Approximately $13,000 will be allocated to the Operating Budget for demolition. Approximately, $26,000 will be allocated to the Capital Budget for Reconstruction work. Kevi Sullivan— David Poison �b1 67 Paula O'Lcan' 0 Reading Municipal Light DepartmentRMLD RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS 230 Ash BtEGRt ® P.O. Box 150 Reading, MA 01867-0250 Tel: (781) 944-1340 FEE: (781) 942-2409 Web: www..ld... April 24, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Lynnfield URD Excavation Project 2013 E E On March 27, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting proposals for the Lynnfield URD Excavation Project 2013 for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was emailed to the following: Annese Electrical Services Inc. Dowling Corporation K&R Construction Co., LLC M. Keane Excavating Inc. W.L. French R.S. Hurford Co., Inc. Target Construction, LLC Botti Co. Inc. R.H. White Pecora Contracting Mennino Construction Fischbach & Moore LaRovere Design/Build Corp. Joseph Bottico, Inc. P.M. Zilioli, Inc. Strength in Concrete, LLC Tim Zanelli Excavation K.B. Aruda Construction T Ford Company Rotondi Construstion Camdele Construction Co., Inc Mattuchio Construction Co., Inc. KORO Utility Construction Corp. McLaughlin Bros. Contracting Corp. Power Line Contractors, Inc Systems Electrical Services Inc. Ventresca,Inc. Murphy & Fahy Construction Co., Inc. Tro-Con Corporation Caruse and McGovern Contractors Bids were received from K&R Construction Co., LLC, Tim Zanelli Excavating LLC, Vantresca, Inc., Mattuchio Construction Co., Inc., Annese Telecom & Utility Construction LLC, Meninno Construction, Blue Diamond, E.B. Rotundi, Rene Lamarre, Co., Inc., Target Construction, LLC, and Camdele Construction. The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. April 11, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-25 for the Lynnfield URD Excavation Project 2013 be awarded to: Tim Zanelli Excavation, LLC for $91,975.00 Item 1 Labor, Equipment and Materials for Excavation $91,975.00 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager File: BidIMMyauPfield URD F..a .h./2013-25 Reading Municipal DepartmentRVLD CO) rO0. GENERAIONt 230 Ash Street. P.O. Box 150 Reading, MA 01869-0250 • This project will be paid for from the Upgrading of Lynnfield Center URD's Capital Project allocation. The allocation for this work will be from the Operating Budget funds. Kevin Sfrflivan Peter Pricepp (4�— Brian Smith • • Pile: Bid/P 13/Lvnnfield URDexcavation/2013-25 Lynnfield URD Excavation Project 2013 Bid 2013-25 List of Certified Time in Previous All forms Check or Authorized Bidder Unit Price Business Projects filled out Bid Bond signature K&R Construction Co., LLC Annese Telecom & Utility 10 years I yes I yes yes yes Item 1 $54,800.00 Estimated Completion: not listed yes es withdrew bid 4.24-13 Item 1 $104,353.00 Estimated Completion: 6 weeks Tim 2anelli Excavation, LLC 8 years yes es yes yes Item 1 $91,975.00 Estimated Completion: 4 weeks Item 1 $113,000.00 Estimated Completion: 4 weeks Ventresca, Inc 6 years es Blue Diamond Equipment Co., LLC 26 years es yes yes es yes yes es Item 1 $95,900.00 Estimated Completion: to be determined E.B. Rotund! 81 years esyes Mattuehio Construction Co., Inc. 30 years I yes Item 1 $123,456.00 Estimated Completion: I yes yes yes Item 1 $97,000.00 Estimated Completion: 3-6 weeks es es Item 1 $142,238.00 Estimated Completion: 6 weeks 2013-25 Excavation Analysis.xls Page 1 Annese Telecom & Utility Construction, LLC 6 years yes I yes yes es Item 1 $104,353.00 Estimated Completion: 6 weeks Meninno Construction 78 years yes yes es yes Item 1 $113,000.00 Estimated Completion: 4 weeks Blue Diamond Equipment Co., LLC 26 years es yes yes es Item 1 $117,111.00 Estimated Completion: 18 weeks E.B. Rotund! 81 years esyes yes as Item 1 $123,456.00 Estimated Completion: 6 weeks Rene Lamarre, Co., Inc. 50 years es es es es Item 1 $142,238.00 Estimated Completion: 6 weeks Target Construction, LLC 11 years I yes yes yes yes Item 1 $142,700.00 Estimated Completion: 5 weeks Camdele Construction Co., Inc. 30 years I yes yes yes yes Item 1 $158,300.00 Estimated Completion: 8 weeks 2013-25 Excavation Analysis.xls Page 1 R_ _g Municipal Light DepartmentRMLD •L WEP FpP G EP.1 r1UxS 230 Ash street ® P.O. Box MA Reading. MA 018b]-0250 'hl: (781) 964-1340 Fax (781)962-2409 Web: www.rmld.com April 17, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: Hourly Rates for Professional Manpower, Vehicles, Trade Tools and Equipment for Underground Electrical Distribution Construction On March 20, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting proposals for Hourly Rates for Professional Manpower, Vehicles, Trade Tools and Equipment for Underground Electrical Distribution Construction for the Reading Municipal Light Department. An invitation to bid was mailed to the following: ElecComm Corp. DAD Line Construction, Inc. Grattan Line Construction Group Hamilton Electric Co., Inc. Hi Volt Line Construction & Maintenance Mass Bay Electric Corp. McDonough Electric Construction Maverick Construction Power Line Contractors Utility Service & Assistance, Inc. O Rocha Pole Line Electrical Const., Inc. Hawkeye K.B. Aruda Construction, Inc. Construction Bids were received from Fischbach & Moore Electrical Group, LLC, Power Line Contractors Inc., Thirau LLC and Hawkeye The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. April 11, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-26 for Hourly Rates for Professional Manpower, Vehicles, Trade Tools and Equipment for Underground Electrical Distribution Construction be awarded to: Fischbach & Moore Electrical Group, LLC for $900,681.60 Year 1 $291,824.00 Year 2 $299,852.80 Year 3 $309,004.80 Total --$900,681.90 * Projected cost for a typical crew including Foreman, Journeyman and vehicle • as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. 1d, nid. I ) I I L 0.,µnnnnl 11-t nntr k I'll \.•n RMLD\ ])o,bh N67 4125 I5u 'IA 0 This project will be paid for from the various operating and capital accounts as the work dictates. KePub Sulliv'dnJ Peter Price Thomas O'Connor • • 1n, 1n, i.1i i; L ...1, ,r,,,n,I i It, t u,.c i.an;,2., I « = w ¥ a «! \}|\�«I � \ � . U.M G - - ,' 1 41�, g4! a4, a e;9 \ .I � { � RMLD i%, t Reading Municipal night Depanmem -- uau euvea i w - ci -iu Nr 230 Ash Sum Po. Box ISO Reading, MA01867-0250 Tel: 080944.0.10 Fat: 080942-2409 Web: www.tmldcom April 17, 2013 Town of Reading Municipal Light Board Subject: 750 MCM Cable On March 27, 2013 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting proposals for 750 MCM Cable for the Reading Municipal Light Department. Specifications were emailed to the following: The Okonite Company WESCO Yale Electrical Supply Graybar Electric Arthur Hurley Company Hasgo Power Shamrock Power Pirelli Cables & Systems Power Sales Group HD Supply, Inc. Hendrix Wire & Cable Corp Champion Wire & Cable Anixter Wire & Cable Yusen Assoc HD Supply Utilities MetroWest Electric Sales Power Tech - UPSC E.L. Flowers General Cable USA Power Cable Robinson Sales Eupen Cable Power & Telephone Enterprise QBids were received from General Cable, Graybar Electric, Arthur Hurley Company, Yale Electric, The Okonite Company and WESCO. The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. April 16, 2013 in the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts. The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the Interim General Manager and the staff. Move that bid 2013-29 for 750 MCM be awarded to: Yale Electric East LLC for a total cost of $54,585.00 Item uan it Description Total Cost 1 3,075' 750 MCM CU 15 kV concentric neutral power cable $54,585.00 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the Interim General Manager. This purchase is to replenish inventory that was used for a cable fault. Kevivi Sulli , n 1J� r n Peter Price I,h, (;"I IN Ii (Afl.. -,,,I I,,, { 0 E 0 !) !; /}},t,i,, °§ � ` ,■ 2 �\ ![| ■rE:! !� /§�■■■;!! :|§777 ) $ { 0 E 0 I G u lu ,A,� All ,. |;|! ;| ;!| ;! '\�: !�� | )}§ �! .. ; go- § )\ )|§ Q ( , \� �( §�| ;!| );] !■ )}§ Q ( , \� �( §�| ;!| );] !■ PFom: Jeanne Foti Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:00 AM To: Accounting Group Cc Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Subject: Account Payable Warrant - April 12 Good morning. There were no Account Payable Warrant questions for April 12. Thanks. Jeanne Foti Reading Municipal light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax lase consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Jeanne Foti From: Jeanne Foti Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2013 9:54 AM To: Accounting Group Cc: Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Subject: Payroll Tracking: Recipient Delivery Read Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan Delivered: 4/9/20139:54 AM Patricia Mellino Delivered: 4/9/20139:54 AM Read: 4/9/20131:03 PM bfournier®RMLD.com Delivered: 4/9/2013954 AM skazanjian®RMLD.com Delivered: 4/9/20139:54 AM wmanidewicz®RMLD.com Delivered. 4/9/10139:54 AM Wendy Markiewia Read: 4/9/2013 2:16 PM Good morning. There were no Payroll questions for April 8. Thanks. • Jeanne Foti Reading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Jeanne Foti `am: Jeanne Foti Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 7:20 AM To: Accounting Group Cc: Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Subject: Account Payable Warrant - April 5 Tracking: RecipieW Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan Patricia Mellino bfournier®RMLD.com skazanjian@RMLD.com wmarkimia®RMLD.cam Good morning. There were no questions for the Account Payable Warrant - April 5. Thanks. '9lanne Foti Reading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Delivery Delivered: 4/8/2013 7:20 AM Delivered: 4/8/2013 7:20 AM Delivered: 4/8/2013 7:20 AM Delivered: 4/8/2013 7:20 AM Delivered: 4/8/2013 7:20 AM Jeanne Foti Good morning. There were no Account Payable Warrant questions for March 29 Thanks. • Jeanne Foti Reading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. 0 From: Jeanne Foti Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 5:58 AM To: Accounting Group Cc: Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Subject: Account Payable Warrant - March 29 Tracking: Recipient Delivery Read Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan Delivered: 4/1/2013 5:59 AM Patricia MNlino Delivered: 4/1/2013 5:59 AM bfuumiw@RMLD.com Delivered: 4/1/20135:59 AM skazanjian®RMLD.com Delivered: 4/1120135:59 AM wmarcewicz®RMLD.com Delivered: 4/1/20135:59 AM Wendy Markiewicz Read: 4/1/2013 8:07 AM Good morning. There were no Account Payable Warrant questions for March 29 Thanks. • Jeanne Foti Reading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. 0 Jeanne Foti C ­ Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Tracking: Good morning. Jeanne Foti Tuesday, March 26, 2013 6:59 AM Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Payroll - March 25 Recipient Accounting Group Kenn Sullivan Patricia Mellino broumier®RMLDcom skaranjian®RMLDcom wmarki.w cz@RMLDcom There were no Payroll questions for March 25. Thanks. Wrine Foti ading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. DNlway Delivered: 3/26/2013 7:00 AM Delivered: 326/2013 7:00 AM Delivered: 3/26/2013 7:00 AM Delivered: 3/26/2013 7:00 AM Delivered: 3/262013 7:00 AM m Read: 3/26/2013 7:16 AM Read: 3262013 7:29 AM Jeanne Foti From: Jeanne Foti Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Tracking: Good morning. Monday, March 25, 2013 7:03 AM Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan; Patricia Mellino Account Payable Warrant - March 22 Reciplent Accounting Group Kevin Sullivan Patricia Mellino bfournier@RMLD.corn skazanpan®RM1D.corn wmarkiewicz®RMLD.com Bob Fournier Wendy Markiewicz oeRvery Delivered: 3/25/2013 7:03 AM Delivered: 3/25/2013 7:03 AM Delivered: 3/25/2013 7'03 AM Delivered: 3/25/2013 7:03 AM Delivered: 3/25/2013 7:03 AM There were no Account Payable Warrant questions for March 22. Thanks. Jeanne Foti Reading Municipal Light Department Executive Assistant 230 Ash Street Reading, MA 01867 781-942-6434 Phone 781-942-2409 Fax Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Read Read: 3/25/2013 7:24 AM Read: 3/25/2013 7:31 AM Read: 3/25/2013 8:22 AM Read: 3/25/2013 8:56 AM • 0 ® Mr. John Stempeck, chairman RMLD Board of Commissioners April 24, 2013 Dear Chairman Stempeck, In advance of tonight's meeting, 1 wanted to ask your consideration in delaying Operating and Capital budget votes now on the agenda, in order to give the Board more time to consider them. Deferral to May would be consistent with past years' practice. Also, our time to discuss budget issues at the last meeting was constrained by the revisiting of a past Board vote—a matter likely to consume more time tonight. In particular, 1 am hoping we can see how the budgets can address these two topics: 1: Fund and procure a Master Plan for the Ash Street campus. I share the enthusiasm for preserving Station One, and was impressed by the study already done. But we need a site plan. A: While we have $850,000 proposed for rehabbing, we don't know the final use, which might influence things like restoring window openings or modifying entryways. B: While we have $150,000 proposed for covered storage on campus, we don't know where or how it connects with other buildings. C: We have discussed a PV array onsite, but not whether, jn how big, or where. D: Today Kevin Sullivan writes that plans to rehab the rear porch of HQ are being rethought after code issues surfaced. We need a plan that knits these pieces together, and can be reviewed as a whole. It will help all of these good projects succeed. 2: Address goals of load management, owned -generation, and PEC proceeds. Portions of RMLD's 2008 strategy document called on RMLD to "...maximize value through energy egiciency and load management" and that we should include "...consrderation of ownership ofgeneration." And after last year's REC-selling debates, there was agreement on spending the proceeds on in-house PV or a similar -spirited project. 1 think these budgets can do more to advance these matters. Is there not more we can do on demand-side load management; on storage (I believe Mr. Sullivan cited a 10 -year payback on 3M W storage); on PV arrays if we can see payback numbers; and, in particular, on the REC proceeds? Given the expertise in the room and the past discussion on these topics, I am inclined to think we can take some action. Sincerely. David Talbot, commissioner CC: RMLD Board, Citizens Advisory Board, Staff 11