HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-23 RMLD Audit Committee Minutesorq ^�GEiV--
e.
Town of Reading r04b',CL
Meeting Minutes R'='�0!t�dG. MA
0 1*r
2613 JUN
Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 20 P„ 44
RMLD Audit Committee
Date: 2022-05-23 Time: 6:00 pm
Building: Reading Municipal Light Building Location: Winfred Spurr Audio Visual Room
Address: 230 Ash Street Session: Open Session
Purpose: Review of RMLD 2021 Audit Version: Final
Findings
Attendees: Members - Present:
RMLD Board of Commissioners: Philip Pacino, Vice Chair, Sub -Audit
Committee Chair, Robert Coulter, Commissioner.
Town of Reading Audit Committee: Jeanne Borawski, Acting Chair, Finance
Committee; Shawn Brandt, ; Stephen Herrick, Carla Nazzaro,
Members - Not Present:
Town of Reading Audit Committee: Edward Ross, Finance Committee; Mark
Dockser, Select Board.
Others Present:
RMLD Staff: Coleen O'Brien, General Manager; Hamid Jaffari, Director of
Engineering and Operations; Wendy Marklewicz, Director of Business &
Finance; Gregory Phipps, Director of Integrated Resources; Janet Walsh,
Director of Human Resources; Erica Morse, Executive Assistant.
Presenter: Zachary Fentross, CPA, Audit Manager, Melanson.
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Philip B. Pacino
Topics of Discussion:
Call Meeting to Order
Mr. Pacino called the RMLD Board of Commissioners (BoC) Sub -Audit Committee meeting to
order at 6:00 PM.
Chair Borawski called the Town of Reading Audit Committee meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
Opening Remarks and Introductions
Chair Borawski asked all attendees to identify themselves.
Mr. Brandt, Mr. Haley, and Ms. Angstrom attended remotely.
Presentation of 2021 Financial Audit Findinas
Zackary Fentross, CPA, Melanson, presented the 2021 Financial Audit findings.
Key points included:
RMLD had positive operating results, a well -funded OPEB (Other Post -Employment
Benefits), and there was no management letter. RMLD received a clean opinion with
no exceptions, consistent with prior years.
Page I 1
• The Management's Discussion and Analysis section offers a narrative summary of
operational results and major financial areas.
• Mr. Fentross discussed the statement of net position, which was presented on a
comparative basis, and highlighted the changes between 2020 and 2021.
• Unrestricted cash and short-term investments decreased by $3.3 million, due to the
use of operating funds for capital improvements in 2021.
• Capital assets net of accumulated depreciation increased by $3.3 million, largely due
to capital improvements made in 2021, which were funded through operating cash
rather than bonding.
• Mr. Fentross provided examples of various capital Improvements in 2021 and
emphasized that the two largest were overhead and underground conductors.
• The net pension liability was largely unchanged from the prior year and represents
RMLD's proportional share of the total unfunded liability for the Reading Contributory
Retirement System, which is about 79% funded.
• Mr. Fentross discussed the pension trust, which was dissolved in January 2022, and
noted that this will result in a swing between restricted and unrestricted cash next
year.
• Mr. Fentross discussed the net OPEB liability (essentially health insurance), which
decreased by $3 million from 2020 due to a change In benefit terms. This change
allowed the actuary to reduce RMLD's long-term liability.
• RMLD's OPEB liability is 55% funded, which is a good financial position compared to
other towns and cities.
• Mr. Fentross addressed a question concerning the rationale and consequences of the
benefit term change, explaining that it pertains to Part A and Part B premiums,
resulting in an increased liability for the Town. Ms. Angstrom further clarified that the
change is due to Individuals over 65 who were on the Blue Cross Blue Shield plan
being transitioned to the more cost-effective Medicare supplement.
• In response to Chair Borawskl's query about when RMLD can expect to fully pay off
the OPEB and Pension Trust liabilities, Ms. Angstrom indicated that the Pension
Trust's target date has been extended from 2029 to 2030, and the OPEB is likely to
follow a similar timeline, as RMLD is currently ahead of schedule.
• Mr. Fentross presented the Statement of Revenues, Expenses, & Change In Net
Position on a comparative basis, emphasizing the increase in purchase power
expenses and the decrease in operating expenses.
• Purchase Power increased by 3 million dollars, due to RMLD making a concerted
effort to Increase their energy buying portfolio to contain more non -carbon resources
(wind, hydro etc.), which are more expensive than carbon resources.
• Mr. Fentross noted that the increase in purchase power expenses was offset because
power supply is a pass-through charge to the rate payers.
• Operating expenses decreased by 2.3 million dollars, due to the decrease in the
OPEB liability. Fentross noted that this decrease is slightly misleading. When there is
a change in benefit terms, the associated income statement Impact for that Item hits
within 1 year. Although there appears to be a decrease, operating expenses were
about the same as last year.
Page 1 2
• Mr. Pacino raised a point regarding purchased power and Renewable Energy
Certificates (RECs), confirming that when RMLD sells RECs, the purchased power
number is reduced.
• Mr. Fentross clarified that a REC is acquired when RMLD purchases renewable
energy, and the department can either sell or retire the certificates. Currently, there
Is no accounting treatment for RECs, and they have always been recorded as a
reduction in purchased power expenses. RMLD's REC holdings as of December 31,
2021, are not recognized as an asset, and their valuation is only noted in the
financial statement footnotes on pages 39 and 41.
• Mr. Coulter emphasized that this situation applies to anyone purchasing RECs, not
just RMLD, as it is an industry-wide practice.
• The discussion clarified that the credits on the statements represent the selling of
RECs. Mr. Herrick inquired about RECs, and Mr. Phipps explained RMLD's process of
retiring and selling RECs according to Policy 30 to meet 2021 Climate goal targets.
Mr. Phipps emphasized that to avoid rate shock, RMLD retires certificates at a level
of 23% of annual 2021 kWh sales, with the retirement level Increasing by 3%
annually through 2030.
• Chair Borowski confirmed that RECs are solely an asset with no liability, and Phipps
noted that they have a shelf life, as they must be transacted, retired or sold, within
six months of year end.
• Mr. Pacino mentioned that GASB Is working on a research project for an accounting
standard related to RECs. Mr. Pacino also asked Mr. Fentross if he had more
information about the Environmental Social Governance reporting and International
Sustainability Standard Board.
• Mr. Fentross responded that he was unaware of both and would provide more
Information to the Boards later.
• Mr. Fentross discussed the change In net position, essentially RMLD's net income,
noting that the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) guidelines state that any MA
Light Department cannot make more than 8% of their capital assets each year.
Melanson calculated the net income for CY21 at a 4.26% rate of return, well below
the 8% limit.
• The requirement of 8% of net plant applies specifically to RMLD only. A question
arose regarding the consequences of exceeding 8% of net plant. Mr. Fentross
explained that occasional exceedances would not cause Issues, but consistent
violations could result in the DPU inquiries to RMLD.
• Ms. Markiewicz mentioned that RMLD had previously exceeded the 8% limit and had
allocated the excess funds to the rate stabilization fund. Mr. Pacino added that
during the 1990s, excess funds were returned to the ratepayers.
• Mr. Fentross confirmed that RMLD has good internal controls in place and assets are
being appropriately safeguarded. Mr. Fentross thanked the RMLD staff and General
Manager for their efficient work and well-maintained records.
• Mr. Fentross mentioned that any areas of improvement would be recommended in a
formal management letter, which the RMLD has not received in ten years.
Approximately only 10% of Melanson clients do not receive a management letter,
putting RMLD in high esteem.
Page 1 3
• Mr. Pacino referenced the Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) issuing
Statement No. 87 Leases, which the Department will be required to Implement next
year.
• Mr. Fentross clarified that GASB No. 87 pertains to situations where RMLD serves as
both lessee and lessor. In some cases, RMLD may lease out to others or lease from
others. As a result, new liabilities and assets may appear on the balance sheet next
year in connection with GASB 87.
• Mr. Fentross pointed out that situations where RMLD Is a lessor should be
considered, particularly in cases where RMLD rents pole space to companies like
Verizon. This could lead to a new asset for RMLD if there is a 20-30 year agreement
to utilize RMLD poles.
• Mr. Coulter asked whether this Issue was already addressed under state law.
• Mr. Fentross responded that, from an accounting perspective, it was not.
Government accounting typically lags a few years behind commercial practices, and
the reporting requirement will not be finalized until next year.
• Mr. Herrick confirmed that RMLD has no debt and noted that it is a capital -Intensive
organization with significant projects on the horizon, such as the new substation. He
asked how often companies like RMLD operate without debt and whether this is a
positive attribute or indicative of missed opportunities.
• Mr. Fentross stated that one or two Municipal Light Plants (MLPs) audited by
Melanson have no debt, while the majority of other MLPs have some debt on their
books. He could not determine If this was good or bad, as it Is a management
decision, and he needs to maintain independence. Mr. Fentross suggested consulting
with an expert who could better advise on the advantages and disadvantages of
debt.
• Ms. Markiewicz explained RMLD's strategy regarding debt, emphasizing that RMLD
has not needed to issue bonds and that the associated interest from bonding could
become a burden for customers.
• Chair Borawski inquired about the liquidation of the pension trust fund. Fentross
replied that it would occur In 2022. Currently, the $5.5 million from the pension trust
fund is listed under noncurrent assets, restricted cash, and short-term investments.
Next year, the funds will move to current assets, unrestricted cash, and short -tens
Investments.
• Chair Borawski asked why the pension trust fund was being treated differently. Ms.
Markiewicz responded that It was based on legal advice. RMLD was informed that the
trust was no longer necessary and the funds are now considered operating expenses.
• The below -the -line payment to the Town of Reading was discussed. Ms. Markiewicz
explained that, prior to 2018, the payment was calculated based on the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) percent change for the year. In 2019, the Board directed RMLD to
make payments from the available below -the -line unappropriated earned surplus for
calendar years 2019 and 2020 at the rate currently in place for FY39. In 2020, the
Board of Commissioners (BoC) voted to extend the 2020 payment for the dates of
June 30, 2021, and December 31, 2021. In a separate vote, the BoC decided to
change the calculation to 3.875 mils/kWh based on the previous 3 -year average of
kWh sales from audited financial statements, beginning with the payment date of
June 30, 2022.
• Mr. Pacino added that using the CPI formula was not sustainable in the long run, as
RMLD would eventually need to draw from capital funds, harming the system. The
Page 14
new formula provides a better balance.
• Mr. Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Herrick, that the Town of Reading Audit
Committee recommend to the RMLD Board of Commissioners to accept the audit
dated May 23rd, 2022. Motion Carried: 5:0:2 (5 in favor, 2 absent). Roll Call:
Jeanne Borawski, Aye; Shawn Brandt, Aye; Stephen Herrick, Aye; Carla Nazzaro,
Aye; Philip Pacino, Aye. Edward Ross and Mark Dockser were absent from the
meeting.
• Mr. Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Coulter, that the RMLD Board of
Commissioners Sub- Audit Committee recommend to the RMLD Board of
Commissioners to accept the audit dated May 23rd, 2022. Motion Carried: 2:0:0
(2 in favor). Roll Call: Philip Pacino, Aye; Robert Coulter, Aye.
Adiournment
Mr. Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Coulter, to adjourn the RMLD Board of
Commissioners Sub- Audit Committee. Motion Carried: 2:0:0 (2 in favor). Roll Call: Philip
Pacino, Aye; Robert Coulter, Aye.
Mr. Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Herrick, to adjourn the Town of Reading Audit
Committee meeting. Motion Carried: 5:0:2 (5 in favor, 2 absent). Roll Call: Jeanne
Borawski, Aye; Shawn Brandt, Aye; Stephen Herrick, Aye; Carla Nazzaro, Aye; Philip
Pacino, Aye. Edward Ross and Mark Dockser were absent from the meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 6:47 PM.
Materials
Town of Reading, Massachusetts, Reading Municipal Light Department, Annual Financial
Statement for the Year Ended December 31, 2021.
All meeting materials can be found on the RMLD website (www.rmld.caW in the BoC
meeting packet.
As approved on June 15, 2023
Page 1 5