Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-18 RMLD Citizens Advisory Board Minutes �N OF � y _ Town of Reading AN Meeting Minutes , ERK 0pq i, sJ9 nvcoaQo Z Ak s ' z L$ Board - Committee - Commission - Council: RMLD Citizens Advisory Board 114 JJ 126 It: QZ Date: 2018-04-18 Time: 6:30 PM Building: Reading Municipal Light Building Location: Winfred Spurr Audio Visual Room Address: 230 Ash Street Session: Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Final Attendees: Members - Present: George Hooper, Chair (Wilmington); Jason Small, Vice Chair (North Reading); Neil Cohen (Reading) Members - Not Present: Dennis Kelley, Secretary (Wilmington); Vivek Soni (Lynnfield) Others Present: David Talbot, Board of Commissioners Coleen O'Brien, Hamid Jaffari, Wendy Markiewicz, Jane are t u, Kathleen Rybak i Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: George Hooper, Chair Topics of Discussion: 1. Call Meeting to Order - G. Hooper, Chair Chair Hooper called the meeting of the Citizens' Advisory Board.to order at 6:30 PM and noted that the meeting was being audio recorded. 2. FY19 Operating Budget - C. O'Brien, General Manager Materials: FY19 Budget; Operating Budget Presentation Slides (Handout) Ms. Markiewicz presented slides which provide a high-level summary of the FY19 Operating Budget. Ms. Markiewicz reviewed the FY19 Operating Budget Highlights (Slide 1). FERC accounting allocations were changed as part of the budgeting process; the FY17 and FY18 Operating Budgets reflect changes to FERC allocations so that the comparison would become relative to the FY19 Budget. The bottom line for each year is the same, but the amounts in each FERC account (primarily Operating and Maintenance) were changed. Ms. O'Brien noted that FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) accounting system is the standard for utilities. These revised allocations will allow RMLD to more accurately track and trend what we are doing, where we are focusing, and where we need to focus. Ms. Markiewicz then reviewed the remaining bullet points on Slide 1. Ms. Markiewicz noted that FY18 year-end estimates include 8 months actuals and four months projections. The March storms cost approximately $700k and these costs were anticipated as part of the year-end projection. As of February 28, we were under budget by 4%, so some of these costs could be absorbed through year-end. Ms. O'Brien noted that RMLD will not receive MEMA reimbursement for the first or second storm; we have not heard on the third storm. Ms. Markiewicz then reviewed the "Actual and Projected Fixed and Semi-Variable Costs" (FY19 Budget - page 94). Of note, Employee Benefits/Pension has increased 25% due mostly to funding the OPEB obligation. Legal and Professional Services is one area where FERC accounting had a huge impact on the figures. Some services (such as Page 1 1 engineering) really should have been considered outside professional services, but were being charged to other areas; costs in other areas (such as, Other Operating and Maintenance Expense) went down proportionately. Bad Debt Expense was reduced for FY19. Ms. Markiewicz reviewed "Supplemental Information" (FY19 Budget - Page 95), which shows the total overall costs by category and what areas are impacted by what is being pulled out of operating expenses for capital allocations. Ms. Parenteau began review of the "Six-Year Plan" (FY19 Budget - Page 91). As discussed with last year's budget review, in order to arrive at the Net Income, which is include as part of the motion for the Operating Budget, we look at'net revenue (and specifically base revenue). The only way base revenue will go from $26,136,738 (FY18 estimate) to $27,786,190 in FY19, is either through growth in sales (additional kilowatt hours sales) or with a base rate increase. Year-to-date (through March) sales are down approximately 1.8%. The current forecast is a 1% decrease in sales FY19-23. In order to earn the budgeted net income, arrive at a rate of return of 7.96%, and meet all obligations and expenses, there will be a required rate increase associated with the approval of the FY19 Budget. Ms. Parenteau continued review of the Operating Revenues. Purchase Power (Capacity/Transmission and Fuel) is a pass through to customers; we do not make a return on that. Capacity was at its peak in FY18; for FY19 there is an approximately $2m decrease in capacity charges expected. An increase in transmission charges is anticipated (a little less than $1m) and fuel is anticipated to be flat. This results in a $1mJdifferential (less) between FY18 projection and FY19 estimate for Purchase Power. Purchase Power expenses are broken out on Page 96 of the Budget. Based on the overall budget (including operation and maintenance expenses), we are projecting (on average) a 1-3% overall rate increase by class (depending on customer usage). Ms. Markiewicz noted that going forward, we anticipate an estimated 0-3% increase overall over the next six years. Ms. Markiewicz presented Slide 4, which illustrates the anticipated net income per year and where the rate of return falls with that net income. For now, we are trying to hold the rate of return as close to 8% as we can, but then it goes downward with the net income, which means less rate increases. Chair Hooper noted that the impact of energy efficiency measures on sales should eventually level off and asked if that had been considered in the projections. Ms. Parenteau responded that this leveling-off will happen over 10-20 years. RMLD has been conservative in their estimates over the next five years. The group discussed the impact on sales of technology changes, new construction, and commercial growth. Ms. O'Brien stated that the electrical utility world is in transition. Technology is moving quickly. Ms. O'Brien noted that the Board had voted to keep the rate of return at 8% for several years with the six-year budget. This would provide RMLD enough money in the operating fund to make transfers to capital to complete the necessary improvements to the infrastructure and avoiding substantial bonding. As illustrated on the Six-Year Plan, the rate of return is projected to decrease down to 6.29% by FY23. Part of the potential study (per the Subcommittee to the Payment to the Town of Reading request) will look at what the correct rate of return should be, what the correct payment to the Town should be, and how this impacts rates moving forward. As an example, net plant is going up; if you can earn 8% of net plant, that would mean that in FY23 RMLD could make $10m: However, the only way to make that, if kilowatt hour sales are going down, is to keep raising the rate, which we don't want to do. We are trying to balance the rate increases'with our obligations for payments, and the decline in kilowatt hour sales. As costs increase and sales are coming down, there will be a convergence at some point and that is what we need to study further. Mr. Talbot questioned whether Page 1 2 such a study would produce anything we don't already know, and suggested we have a report out of the Department prior to committing funds to a study. Ms. Markiewicz presented Slide 5, which shows the 1% decrease in kilowatt hour sales and how that relates to the rate of return percentages. Slide 6 (Budgeted Capital Funds Balances and Budgeted Capital Spending) illustrates where the Capital funds come from and what they are supporting. The Beginning Balance represents what we are projecting to have at the end of the prior year to start the fiscal year. Depreciation (3% of net plant) is the money that is reserved for capital projects only. Operating Fund Transfers is what we have determined is the amount we need to transfer from our operating fund to continue to fund capital projects, while also ensuring we maintain enough money in the operating fund (two months expenses). The Bond Proceeds include anticipated bonding and other proceeds such as force jobs from the State of Massachusetts. RMLD is planning to go out to bond for the new Wilmington substation. That concluded the presentation. Chair Hooper asked if there were any questions. There were none. Ms. O'Brien followed up on a question raised at the Capital Budget presentation relative to the LED lighting project at the RMLD facilities and the cost of engineering and design services related to that project. RMLD does not qualify for rebates, and may be subject to different procurement laws than the Wilmington project referenced during the Capital presentation. However, the suggested consultant was contacted regarding the lighting survey at RMLD. There were other components in the engineering/design services (i.e., create the specs and the punch-list); RMLD will consider doing the punch-list in-house. The $8,000 remains as an earmark, but there may be savings with the lighting survey. Chair Hooper called for motions. Mr. Cohen made a motion that the Citizens'Advisory Board recommend to the RMLD Board of Commissioners the Fiscal Year 2019 Operating Budget with a Net Income of $4,053,233 as presented, seconded by Mr. Small. Hearing no further discussion, motion carried 3:0:2 (3 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 absent). Mr. Cohen made a motion that the Citizens'Advisory Board recommend to the RMLD Board of Commissioners the Fiscal Year 2019 Capital Budget in the amount of $7,570,489 as presented on April 11, 2018. Any significant changes are to be submitted to the Citizens'Advisory Board for review and recommendation, seconded by Mr. Small. Hearing no further discussion, motion carried 3:0:2 (3 in favor, 0 opposed, 2'absent). 3. Proposed Rate Adjustment - J. Parenteau, Director of Integrated Resources Materials: FY2019 Proposed Rate Increase Comparative Rates Present/Proposed (Handout) Ms. Parenteau began the presentation by reviewing the current strategy of reducing subsidizations within each rate class and bringing the residential rates to a zero rate of return. This strategy was presented to the CAB and Board after last year's Cost of Service Study was completed. The FY19 rates represent across the board increases, with small adjustments to bring rates in line with this strategy. Ms. Parenteau reviewed the various rate scenarios outlined on the FY 2019 Proposed Rate Increase spreadsheet. Of note: • The low-income rate does not include a customer charge, so that increase is slightly smaller. • The commercial rates include a demand component and an energy component and are based on assumptions using a sample of demand and energy. • The LED conversion project for streetlights is near completion, and the old rates will no longer be in place. As lights are converted, adjustments are made to billing and credits issued to the towns. Page 1 3 • RMLD implemented the PPCT (purchase power, capacity, and transmission) demand component for the Industrial Time of Use. This component is being phased in over three years and will go to from $4 (in FY18) to $8 for FY19 (year 2). • The large industrial TOU customers show a decrease in their actual rates, which is related to the conversion of the PPCT charge from an energy component to a demand component. Mr. Talbot asked about the TOU assumptions. Ms. Parenteau noted the calculation is an average that includes all components of the rate including on-peak (20%) and off- peak (80%) for both fuel and PPCT. Savings may be considerably more depending on off-peak versus on-peak usage. Mr. Talbot suggested, when presenting proposed rates the emphasis should be towards the peak(rather than showing it uniformly across two time- periods) to incentivize people to shed and encourage off peak use. Ms. Parenteau noted the RMLD will be looking at revising the TOU rates. The way the rate for the residential TOU is currently structured, the distribution charge is configured on and off peak. As discussed, distribution charges aren't aligned to on/off peak; it is a fixed component. We are trying to restructure that, as part of this phasing-in process, so that the fixed components are actually fixed, and the fuel and PPCT (which is how RMLD buys its power) are aligned with actual use on and off peak; that should encourage people to use electricity off peak: Ms. O'Brien remarked, that as with the Budget, we are trying to align everything to "cost of service," so we know exactly what it is that we are spending on the various components. We need to align it to be able to study it further and more easily do the analysis. Chair Hooper stated that he would not entertain the motion on the rates as two CAB members were absent. CAB members present did not object. A follow-up meeting was tentatively scheduled for April 23rd. 4. Adjournment - C. Hooper, Chair Mr. Cohen made a motion to adjourn,the Citizens' Advisory Board meeting, seconded by Mr. Small. Hearing no further discussion motion carried 3:0:2 (3 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 absent). The Citizens'Advisory Board Meeting adjourned at 7:41 PM. As approved on June 20, 2018. Page 4 OPERATING BUDGET PRESENTATION APRIL 18, 2018 FY19 OPERATING BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS ➢ FERC ACCOUNTING - FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, UNIFORM SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES ➢ There have been changes made to FERC allocation throughout the entire budget. Most of these allocations have been reworked in FY17 and FY18 for relativity ➢ FIXED COSTS REPRESENT 81.73% OF THE OVERALL OPERATING BUDGET ➢ The increase in fixed costs from FY18 to FY19 is 1.25% ➢ SEMI VARIABLE COSTS REPRESENT 18.27% OF THE OVERALL OPERATING BUDGET ➢ The increase in semi variable costs from FY18 to FY19 is 7.98% ➢ THE OVERALL OPERATING BUDGET INCREASE FROM FY18 TO FY19 IS,PROJECTED TO BE 2.41% ➢ AS OF 2/28/18, THE FY18 BUDGETED EXPENSES ARE PROJECTED TO'COME IN AT 2.71% HIGHER THAN ANTICIPATED DUE TO UNPRECEDENTED STORM COSTS IN MARCH READING MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT FISCAL YEAR 2019 OPERATING BUDGET ACTUAL AND PROJECTED FIXED AND SEMI-VARIABLE COSTS - 1 1 FIXEDCOSTS: FY17BUDGET FYI7ACTUAL FY18BUDGET I FY18-8 ACT/4 BUD I FYI9BUDGET %OFFY198UDGET Purchased Power-Fuel $ 33,174,492_$ 31,534,934 $ 31,291,810 $ 32,564,234 $ 32,190,196 33.40% IPurchased Power Capacity 20,943,651 20,101,145 24,476,161 25,138,916 ' 22,884,320 23.74%I Purchased Power-Transmission 13,378,627 13,067,359 1 13,612 817 14 034,206 14,992,983 15.55%I _. _ -- - _ --- - --- - r - f Depreciation Expense 4,134,000 4,101,308 4,362,000 I 4,305,989 4,516,000 4.69%: - - _ i . - - 'Voluntary PILOT Payment to Reading 2,384,668 2,384,668 1 2,420,438 2,419,770] - 2,480,506 2.57%; Town Payments 1,445,420 1,433,143 1,500,000 1 1,496,714 i 1569,789 1.63% Misc Deduction_Losses on Disposal 150,000: 74,698 150,000 150,000 150,000 0.1691. SUB-TOTAL - 75,610,858 72,697,256 77,813,226 80,109,8291 78,783,794 81.73% ,SEMI VARIABLE COSTS: Labor 6,559,885 5,883,643 6,394,381 6,216,899 1 6,423,097 6.66%; 'Employee Benefits/Pension 2,922,673 4,334,971 1 3,000,437 3,760,646 3,772,990 ) 3.91%, 'Conservation Expenses 871,575 ; 778,281 952,565 712,978 975,712 1.01 Overtime 561,520 1 727,092 - - -- - - - - - - - - i- - - o --- i 763,517 --' - _ 979,889 . _ 971,7311 --- 1.01/0; , Tree Trimming 786,958 ' 862,024 886,340 754,942 898,865 0.93%1 -- - - Legal&Professional Services 406,800 851,876' 471,900 , 662,322 ! 811,908 1 0.849/., Other General and Admin Expenses 481,530 426,133_ 543,762 511,748 591,646 - 0.61%! Customer Processing Fees 509,000 747,354 484,599 I 462,341 532,600 0.55%', Maint of Building and Garage 406,000 364,844 476,400 362,501 497,550 0.52%• ,Property Insurance 424,500! 335,591! --_427,200! 367,626 426,200 _ 0.44%'. IOther Operating and Maint Expenses 465,986 714611 473,756 631,686 - 383,622 ; 0.40%i - - ---. - - -- - - - Maint of General Plant 180,000 1 336,003 281,880 j 329,024 335,148 0.35%1 1Vehicle Expense 549,598 253,122 j 391,116 322,478 311,200 0.32% - 1 - - VehicleCapital Clearing - (300,000)' (245,780)1 (301,596); (324,267), (300,000 -0.30%! .Transformer(hazardous material) 300,000 34,801 1 300,000-1 183,064 300,000 0.31%1 Training/Tuition 234,575 127,282 _ _289,691 j4 166,621.1 243,893 0.25%I iRentEx 2121000 81,116 212,000 i 212,000 0.22%1 BaurDeb&Damages -- t 150,000 185 707 150 000 - -150,0 0 --105,000 -- -0.11% P - 57,215 73,255 ! 52,613 62,104 47,449 I - - i 0.05/' - - - -- --- 3,913 19,360 30,000 -- -- 0.03% - - -' SUB TOTAL1 IRM_ LB CAB 22,500 30000 Office Supplies 25,000� 18,758 1 25,000 j 15,692 20,000 I 0.02%, 15,827,315 16,894,596 , 16,305561 ! 16,559,655 ' 17,606,171 I 18.27%; i 1 ' 'TOTAL EXPENSES $ 91,438,173 $ 89,591,851 1 $ 94,118,787 j $ 96,669,484 1 $ 96,389,965 100.00%i READING MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT -- - --- --SIX YEAR PLAN - -- - MARCH 31,2018 BUDGET ,ACTUAL BUDGET IBACT14BUD BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FY17 FY17 FY18 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 'FORECASTED kWh SALES 675,536,970 662,548,949 655,923,460 649,364,225 642,870,583 636,441,877 630,077,459 OPERATING REVENUES: SALES OF ELEC-BASE $ 25,500,000. .$ 25,601,354 1 1$ 26,337,621 $ i6,136,738 !$ 27,786,190 $ 28,758,707 $ 29,621,468 $ 30,510,112 $ 30,815,213 SALES OF ELEC-FUEL - - -- 34, _ - ----tr , 34,365,591 34,697,247, , , , , 3, , , , , , , , SALES OF ELEC-CAPACITYITRANSMISSION 34,322,278 33,237,804 38,088,978 39,173,122 37,877,303 34,582,425 32,972,372 1 32,789,952 34,460,703 FORFEITED DISCOUNTS 688,500 854,167 800,000 784,102! 833,586 862,761 888,644. 975,303 924,456 -- - - -- _ - --r--- i ENERGY CONSERVATION 673,000. 663,806 675,000 662,549 655,924, 649,364, I 642,877 � 636,442 l 630,078 ) , , (1208457 _ NYPA (900,000' )I (1,200,000), 1 (1,200,000)iI (1,200,000 ! _ ), (1,200,000) I (1,200,000)i (1,200,000)I _ (1,260,000)' ,TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 94,358,270 92,616,757 97,193,409 99,320,745 99,343,198! 97,365,354 96,962,573 98,017,400 100,327,697 'OPERATING EXPENSES: PURCHASED POWER-FUEL 33,174,492 31,534,934. 31,291,810; 32,564,234 32,190,196 32,512,097 32,837,218 33,165,591 33,497,247 PURCHASED POWER-CAPACITY 20,943,651 20,101,145 24,476,161 25,138,916 22,684,320 18,589,910 16,355,149 15,672,963 16,379,786 PURCHASED POWER-TRANSMISSION 13,378,627 13,067,359 13,612,817 14,034,206 14,992,983 15,992,515. 16,617,223 17,116,9 89 18,080,917 OPERATING&MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 5,369,935 ,5,350,517 51569_029 5,588,934-i 5,599,394 5,767,376' 5,940,397 6,118,609 6,302,167 GENERAL 8:ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE 10,455,280 11,539,403 10,734,032 10,956,721 11,990,777 12,350,500; 12,721,015 13,102,646 13,495,725 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE 4,134,000 4,101,308 4,362,000 4,305,989 4,516,000 4,713,000 5,029,000 5,329,000 5,549,000 TOWN PAYMENTS - 1,445,420 1,433,143 1,500,000 1,496,774 1,569,789 1,601,240 1,678,270 1,786,480 1,846,300 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 88,901,405 87,727,811 91,545,849 94,085,714 93,743,459 91,526,638 91,178,272 92,292,278 95,151,142 i , ,488946 TOTAL OPERATING INCOME 5,456,865 5 5,647,560 i 5,235,031 I ; 5,599,739 5,838,716 i 5,784,300!_.,� 5,725,723 5,176,555 i i 'NONOPERATING REVENUES IEXPENSESI: 1 INTEREST INCOME 125,000 271,658 150,000 250,000 250,000, 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 OTHER INCOME 890,000 1,176,086 890,000 900,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 VOLUNTARY PILOT PAYMENT TO READING (2,384,668) (2,384,668) (2,420,438) (2,419,770)' (2,480,506); (2,542,579; _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ ) - (2,606,082)'x, (2,671,234), (2,738,074) LOSS ON DISPOSAL OF ASSETS (150,000)1 (74,698)' (150,000): (150,000)1 (750,000) (150,000)7 (150,000) (150,000)1 _ (150,000) CUSTOMER DEPOSIT INTEREST EXP2,100 ( ) (4s74); (2s00)1 (14,000); (16,000)1 _ ' (1e,000)1 . (te,000); _ (ta,000) (18,000), P G P TOTAL NONOERATINREVENUES(EXPENSE (1,521,768) (1,016,296) (1,532,938 . _ .- - ) (1,433,770)1 (1,546,506)i (1,610,519); (1,674,082)1 (7,739,234)1, j (1,806,074); NET INCOME $, , , , , , , , , , , , 4,110,219 $ - 3,985,889 $ 3,370,540 RATE OF RETURN - 7.81%, 7.27%' 7.75% 7.77% 7.96%; 7.70%' 7.22%i 7.00% - - - 6.29% 'PROJECTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS F $ 8,009,000 $ 7,570,000 i $ 11,510 000` $ 11,017 000 $ 8,313,000 I $ 8,463,000 The WILD is allowed up to 8%rate of return,however strategic planning targets a balance of keeping rates low,funding the capital infrastructure plan and supporting nonoperating expenses. Budgeted Net Income Compared to Budgeted Rate of Return FY18— FY23 $4,228,198 8.00% $4,200,000 4,1 6-25 $4,110,219 $4,053,233 7.50% $ $4,000,000 3,985,889 7.00% $3,800,000 $3,600,000 ------ - 6.50% $3,400,000 ____$3370,540 6.00% $3,200,000 5.50% $3,000,000 -_ --- ------- 5.00% FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 �Net Income —RateofReturn% - Budgeted kWh Sold Compared to Budgeted�������~.=~�u vx=~~. ��x nv���urn ��� � � ���� n n '��� n n "�~, 850% 670'000,000 662,548,949 8.00%8.00% 660'000'000 655,923,460 649,364,.225 7.50% 650^000'000 642,870, 640'000.000 7.00% 630,077,459 6.50% 630^000'000 ------� --_-'- � 620'000\000 - __-_-_-- 6.00% 610'000'000 ------- �--- ----------'-- -----''------�- ------------ -' __ _- 5.5096 600'000'000 .- - ---�����--�--- -,------�����-------��-----�����n------,-'---������n- ' -� -, -_-_�����o'_'_�__--_-__�����'- - - , 5.00y6 FY18 FY19 FYZO rY21 Fvzz FY23 MH Sales —Rate ofReturn Y6 ^ ' , ^ ~ ' ---------------- -'----'-------- -----$16,040------ -- - ---'----Budgeted Capital Cap^taNFunds Balances $16,000 ' and $14,00 (in thousands) $12,00 °11=94 $10,000 $`.^^^ $6,0v , $'.noo ' /---_---_------ �_----------_- ----_-------__ __-_---_------ ---�~~�~~~��~~' ~~~~~~�~~~�~�' $o � � FY� � �� �� �a �~�— �-- -` -^ ~^ " � mmBeginning Balance NNDepreciation oOperating Fund Transfers NN�Bond Proceeds mNCapital Improvement Budgeted Cash totals inRED '