HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GTEU_02.17.2022Minutes of the Meeting for the
Georgetown Electric Utility Board
Thursday, February 17th at 4:00 PM
at the Friends Room at Georgetown Public Library, 402 W. 8th St.
Georgetown, TX 78626
Board Members Present:
Robert Case - Chairman, Rick Woodruff- Vice-Chairman, Sam Jones- Secretary, Ben Butler
Board Members Absent: Mike Triggs
Staff Present:
Daniel Bethapudi, Daniel Potter, Daniel McReynolds, Mike Westbrook, Cindy Pospisil,
Kress Carson, Jennifer Flor, Jose Torres, and Richard Pajestka
Public Attendees: None
Regular Session
(This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any
purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.)
A. Call to Order -- Robert Case, Board Chairman
• Meeting called to order at 4:00 pm by Case.
B. Roll Call of Board Members -- Robert Case, Board Chairman.
• Triggs absent
C. Introduction of Visitors -- Robert Case, Board Chairman
D. Public Wishing to Address the Board
• None present
Legislative Session
E. Review and Approval of Minutes- Kress Carson, Board Liaison
• January 26th Meeting- Motion to approve by Jones; seconded by Butler
• Minutes approved as read 4-1 (Triggs absent)
Regular Session (cont.)
F. General Managers Monthly Report- Daniel Bethapudi- General Manager of Electric
Utility
• Customer Service and Billing- Cindy Pospisil-Customer Care ERP Applications
Administrator
o 30,922 Available Services
o 30,009 Electric customers/accounts, 188 estimated “bad meter reads”
o 30,326 Billed Electric Meters
o Overall Residential January 2022 bills nearly identical compared to January
2021 as there hasn't been a change in rates
o Average monthly and YTD electric bills for January 2022 compared to
January 2021 are roughly $23 lower
▪ Billing numbers lower than last year due to a combination of higher
monthly temperatures and reduced PCA
o Electric Revenue Breakdown and Receivables presented- roughly 24% of
yearly budgeted amount collected
o 92% of 1st Quarter billings (Oct, Nov, Dec) collected and 12% of 2nd Quarter
(Jan, Feb, Mar) billings collected
o $65,000 increased total in Aged Receivables
o Roughly $100,000 collected in outstanding bills since the collection agency
commenced collections in May to collect the bad debt
o Case asks what the typical reason is why customers are missing payments
on their bills.
▪ Pospisil answers that they simply don’t have the money in most
cases
▪ Bethapudi adds that as the Utility has gained insight on the aged
receivables, the Utility will begin taking a more proactive approach
to try to collect the outstanding receivables from certain types of
accounts
o Case asks if there is an application of which someone could apply to receive
funds for payment assistance, particularly the fund in which customers can
donate a dollar or on their bills to help fund this type of assistance.
▪ Pospisil answers that Customer Care does not vet who receives
these funds and is done through a third party called Caring Place.
The utility simply collects them. This service provided an additional
$42,000 to help relieve the outstanding funds
• Electric Operations Report- Electric Operations Manager and Danny Potter-
Electric Safety and Employee Development Manager
o Westbrook delivers the following report:
o Electric Reliability (SAIFI)- .447 (Good Metric)
o Electric Outage Duration (CAIDI)-73.78(Good Metric)
o Training- 100% (Good metric)
o Safety, 100% attendance
o Service Order Completion, 100%
o Preventative Maintenance, %
o Corrective Maintenance, 100%
o Top 5 Outages Report
▪ No major outages, primarily typical; largest was due to a car
hitting a padmount transformer.
o Potter delivers a report over Winter Storm Landon
▪ Emergency Operations was on standby from 2/3 from 2/3 through
2/5
▪ No major outages witnessed throughout the event
▪ There were a total of 4 outages through out the event and none of
the outages lasted more than two hours
▪ Woodruff asks if the outages were residential.
▪ Potter answers one of the four was commercial, and the
other three were residential outages
▪ Woodruff follows is there a way for the City to determine who is
using gas versus electric heating.
▪ Bethapudi answers at this time, the City does not have that
information
▪ Westbrook follows that the majority of new developments
are a combination of the two services.
▪ Case asks if the City markets all electric services to new customers
or construction
▪ Bethapudi answers that the only push for marketing comes
withing the dually certified areas of Georgetown
▪ Richard Pajestka, Electric Engineering Supervisor, adds
that it primarily depends on the builder
▪ Case follows that is this something that the City plans on doing in
the future to help generate more revenue to the City.
▪ Bethapudi answers that one time the City had “key
accounts” staff to help market this, and due to financial
issues of the past, the City had to cut. This is on the Utility’s
radar for future growth
G. Electric Line Extension Policy and DER Updates/ Proposed Changes- Daniel
McReynolds; Electric Engineering Manager
• DER Updates:
o DER interconnection policy adopted on 06/22/2021 in which new
application requirements and an updated fee structure was
implemented.
o In additional, a new online application portal was implemented to
process these applications
o This process is being outsourced to Schneider Engineering to ensure the
interconnection standards are enforced. This results in the Utility cost of
application review and preliminary inspection of $325.
o All costs are recovered by the DER application fees
o Woodruff asks to what would trigger the $1,000 fee for a facilities study.
▪ Bethapudi gives an example for which there is an event in which
electric infrastructure in a particular area may need to updated
due to the load being put on the system after preliminary
review. This recovers the internal costs to perform a study.
o Butler asks if the DER meters allow the City to use the meters in the
future or will that need to be changed out.
▪ Bethapudi answers that no change of the meters are necessary.
In the past there used to be use of two meters for a DER facility,
but this now done with one meter.
• Line Extension Updates
o The Electric Line Extension and Electric Meter Connect Policy was
adopted on March 24, 2020, and revised July 27, 2021
o The policy outlined cost recover for electric infrastructure additions
driven by customer requests. Costs were adjusted to cover material cost
increases due to COVID-19 and supply chain interruptions. However,
the analysis did not include labor cost adjustments for inflation.
o Upon additional review, it was found that supply chain issues remain
persistent and there is significant labor inflation costs.
o As a result, the recommended changes are an increase of $400 to the
single family per dwelling unit charge to a total of $3775, $100 to the
multi-family per dwelling unit charge to a total of $1100 and a decrease
for the single residential lot or residential upgrade application from $510
to $260 per application.
o Case asks what is included in a line extension fee?
▪ Pajestka answers that is the flat-rate lot fee for any infrastructure
that needs to be put on a lot in order for the area to receive
power.
▪ Bethapudi adds that these fees are intended to cover the cost per
unit charges. Anything that goes above that is charged at cost.
o Woodruff and Case both ask what does the base fee of $3775 cover?
▪ Bethapudi answers the base fee includes a 75kVA transformer
and the line needed. Essentially this includes the typical
infrastructure
o Case asks if that fee is what is charges if a customer were to transfer
overhead service to underground and they have an existing home.
▪ Pajestka answers that this typically charged at cost in this
situation. However, a new lot/ home would be subject to the
charge.
o Butler asks why was the line extension application reduced for the single
family lots.
▪ Bethapudi answers because of the effort it takes. For instance, a
business or a multifamily unit requires more management of the
application, whereas a single unit family takes less effort.
o Other changes include the recognition of validity of the cost estimate
from 90 days to 45 days due to the volatility of material prices and lead
times.
o The payment of 50% of the estimated costs was also reduced to 45 days
for this reason.
o The complete payment of the line extension fees need to be collected no
later than 90 days from the issuance of the cost estimate in order to
ensure all outstanding fees are paid.
o Case asks that are all estimated costs and fees paid prior to construction.
▪ McReynolds confirms this is the case
• Motion to approve the Line Extension Policy Updates by Woodruff, seconded
by Butler. Votes passes 4-1 (Triggs absent)
H. Risk Management Credit Policy Updates
• This item was removed from the agenda prior to meeting
Board moves into Executive Session at 4:54 PM
Executive Session
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas
Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to
action in the regular session.
I. Section 551.086: Competitive Matters
• Purchased Power Update
Board moves back into Regular Session at 5:28 PM.
Adjournment
MOTION by Jones, second by Butler to adjourn the Board Meeting APPROVED 4-1 (Triggs
absent)
Electric Board Meeting Adjourned at 5:28 PM.