HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GTEU_08.19.2021Notice of Meeting for the
Georgetown Electric Utility B oard
of the City of Georgetown
August 19, 2021 at 4:00 P M
at Georgetown P ublic L ibrary 402 W. 8th Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 F riends/
Hewlett Room
T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable
as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's
O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin
Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay
Texas at 711.
The Geor getown E le ctr ic U tility B oard is now me eting in-per son with a
quor um pr esent and public is we lc ome to attend. If spec ial acc ommodations
ar e nee de d, ple ase contact the B oard L iaison, K r ess
Car son at kr ess.c arson@ge orge town.org or 512-930-2010 for assistanc e.
Regular Session
(T his R egular S es s ion may, at any time, be rec es s ed to c onvene an Exec utive S es s ion for any purpose
authorized by the O pen Meetings Act, Texas G overnment C ode 551.)
A C all to O rder- R obert C as e- Board C hairman
B P ublic Wis hing to Address the Board- R obert C ase- Board C hairman
C Introduc tion of Visitors - R obert C ase- Board C hairman
D R eview and Approval of Minutes - Kress C ars on- Board Liais on
E C ons ideration and possible recommendation to award the Tree Trimming and Vegetation Management
C ontrac t to Townsend Tree S ervic e LLC . of Munc ie, Indiana, in the es timated amount not to exc eed of
$300,000.00. – Mike Westbrook, Elec tric O perations Manager
F G eneral Manager's Monthly R eport- Daniel Bethapudi- G eneral Manager of Elec tric Utility
E xecutiv e Session
In c omplianc e with the O pen Meetings Ac t, C hapter 551, G overnment C ode, Vernon's Texas C odes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be dis cus s ed in c los ed session and are s ubjec t to action in the regular
s es s ion.
G S ec . 551.086 C ompetitive Matters- P urc hased P ower R eview- Daniel Bethapudi- G eneral Manager of
Elec tric Utility
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of
Page 1 of 32
Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily
acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2021, at
__________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said
meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 2 of 32
City of Georgetown, Texas
Electric Utility Board
August 19, 2021
S UB J E C T:
R eview and Approval of Minutes- Kres s C arson- Board Liaison
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Kres s C arson- Board Liaison
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
7/15 Minutes Cover Memo
Page 3 of 32
Minutes of the Meeting for the
Georgetown Electric Utility Board
Thursday, July 15th, at 2:00 PM
at the Friends Room in the Georgetown Public Library, 402 W. 8th St.
Georgetown, TX 78626
Board Members Present:
Robert Case - Chairman, Rick Woodruff- Vice-Chairman, Sam Jones–Secretary, Mike
Triggs, Ben Butler
Staff Present:
Daniel Bethapudi, Letica Zavala, Mike Westbrook, Cindy Pospisil, Jose Torres, Leigh
Wallace, Laurie Brewer, Chris Bryce, David Morgan, Jennifer Flor, and Kress Carson
Via Teleconference (Zoom): None
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.
• All Board Members Present
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
• June 17th Meeting- Motion to approve by Jones, seconded by Woodruff
• Minutes approved as read 5-0
Page 4 of 32
F. SW Bypass Construction Cost Reimbursement- Mike Westbrook, Electric Operations
Manager
• This is a project is to be completed in association with PEC (Pedernales Electric
Cooperative. The project came to fruition because PEC needed to relocate and
extend a feeder to the new Hillwood development and simultaneously
Georgetown needed a feeder to provide backfeed, or redundant feed
capabilities to help provide grid stability in the area. Georgetown’s cost share of
the project is $128,577.53 to be paid to PEC. If the project were to be completed
by the City itself, the costs would have costed an estimated $275,000. PEC will
be the owner of the poles in addition to the maintenance for the proposed.
• Jones asks for clarification whether the design for the respective lines between
the two utilities will be feeding different areas.
o Westbrook confirms that this is the case.
• Butler asks for confirmation whether Georgetown is the top circuit on the
service line.
o Westbrook confirms. Butler follows and asks how the maintenance costs
are different from the top circuit compared to the bottom and why the
placement of the circuits is as such. Westbrook answers there is not a
difference in maintenance costs. The reason PEC is on the bottom circuit
is because they own the poles and when their service comes off the pole
from the riser to serve the development and they don’t want to come
over the top of the City’s circuit. This is ultimately done to make ease in
construction and eliminate clearance issues between the two utilities.
Butler then follows if there are instances that we need permission from
PEC to service our line. Westbrook confirms that this is not the case.
• Motion to approve the costs associated with SW Bypass Project- Motion by
Woodruff, seconded by Jones. Vote passes 5-0
G. Fiber Relocation Project- Mike Westbrook- Electric Operations Manager
• TXDOT is widening, adding, and extending the frontage road along Interstate
35 and Airport Drive. Electric facilities have already been relocated, however,
there is still a matter of relocating the City’s fiber facilities to allow TXDOT to
continue their project. The City’s IT Department received a bid for a service to
relocate the fiber from BryComm through a DIR contract to not exceed $80,000.
This encompasses the wire, the contractor, and the road closure to complete the
work. The important aspect that the costs that are taken by the city to fund this
project will be fully refunded by TXDOT at the end of the project.
• Case asks how long it would take to see the refund from the project, and that
Page 5 of 32
there is documentation to confirm these matters.
o Westbrook answers that it typically takes a year receive compensation
from these types of projects. He adds that all documentation has already
been completed, and that the Utility is familiar in working on these
projects with TXDOT.
• Butler asks for clarification if this is the City’s owned fiber network.
o Westbrook confirms that this is the case. This line in particular ties the
Westside Service Center into the City’s IT fiber network.
• Butler asks if TXDOT has any ruling considering there that this was a
noncompetitive bid.
o Westbrook explains that this was done through a DIR contract in which
the State allows the City to contract straight through the vendor without
having to offer competitive bids. Bethapudi further explains DIR is
similar to a purchase co-op in which the vendors are previously vetted
that are allowed to work through these types of projects. The rates and
services performed by this vendor are inherently competitively bid
through the State. Chris Bryce, IT Director, adds that they did compare
the rates and services to others to verify that the DIR rate set by the
vendor couldn’t be bested. The DIR contract through BryComm did
indeed offer the cheapest services.
• Motion to approve the Fiber Relocation Project- Motion by Woodruff, seconded
by Butler. Vote passes 5-0.
Regular Session (cont.)
H. General Managers Monthly Report- Daniel Bethapudi- General Manager of Electric
Utility
• Customer Service and Billing- Leticia Zavala-Customer Care Director
o Available Services: 87 new connections; total of 680 new connections of this
fiscal year
o 30,627 available services total; Active services are to be provided by the next
board meeting
o 29,358 Electric customers/accounts, 31 estimated “bad meter reads”
o Overall Average June 2021 bills nearly $30 cheaper than June 2020
Billing numbers lower than last year due to a combination of lower
average monthly temperatures and reduced PCA
o Electric Revenue Breakdown and Receivables presented- roughly 66% of
yearly budgeted amount collected.
o Account receivables aging report presented- Receivables are down from
Page 6 of 32
May numbers
o First full month of collections reported from Credit Systems International
At the end of May roughly 2500 accounts were given to the
collection agency for the amount of $1.4 million; the first check
received from the agency was roughly $30,000 in June.
o Next month there will be a report included those reviews credit card
payments and collections
• Case suggests that the City implement a convenience fee for
customers who pay by credit card to pay their monthly bill. The
reason for this being that this is used to cover the cost of the fee that
is charged by credit card companies to the City and so that
customers who pay by check or cash are not underwriting the cost
of this in their rates. This also coincides with the Utility’s credit
card payment processing renewal.
• Zavala answers that this is something that is going to be
reviewed by the Utility. Historically, the Utility has
absorbed this fee, particularly due to the fact the City was
much smaller. However, due to growth, the City has
recognized that this is an issue that needs to be addressed
as soon as possible.
• Leigh Wallace, Finance Director, adds that the cost of such
fees equates to $1.3 million total for the City. The number is
doubled from what it was prior to the pandemic as online
payments became mor in demand. The City is initiating a
project in which all departments are implementing this
recovery into their revenue. This process may take a couple
of months as every department uses different credit card
processors.
• Zavala adds that they have asked their credit card
processors to give proposals for appropriating this cost.
This includes three proposals- one is the absorption model,
of which the Utility currently utilizes and wants to move
away from; another is the convenience fee model in which
all customers are charged a convenience fee, and lastly a
hybrid model that the Utility and customers share the costs.
There are also models in which various splits between
customer groups can be split.
Woodruff asks if all card companies charge the same percentage
fees. If so, how does the City go about recovering the fees
appropriately.
• Bethapudi answers that are multiple ways of covering the
expense. One being that this is done through a
convenience fee or consider the $1.3 million as a cost of
doing business and recover the amount through the
charged rates.
Page 7 of 32
Case asks if the Utility has seen how other cities have
implemented convenience fees and how many other have
adopted the model.
• Zavala explains that this is mixed throughout the state
when comparing to other municipalities. More research
will be done on this in the coming months.
• Electric Engineering and Operations Report- Mike Westbrook- Electric
Operations Manager
o Electric Reliability (SAIFI)- .57 (Good Metric)
o Electric Outage Duration (CAIDI)-89.233(Good Metric)
o Training- 100% (Good metric)
o Safety, 100% attendance
o Service Order Completion, 100%
o Preventative Maintenance, 100%
o Corrective Maintenance, 100%
o Top 5 Outages Report
In many cases the cause of outages was failed transformers, of
which there were 4 instances in the month of June.
I. FY 2022 Budget Overview- Daniel Bethapudi- General Manager of Electric Utility
• CIP Budget- $7.4 million
• Electric Sales Revenue- $85,541,593
o FY2021 Projected Budget is $84,818,619- this number is likely to be adjusted
due to unusually mild weather in July, a typical yearly high sales month
o Case asks if there are forecasting models in place to help predict revenues
• Bethapudi answers that there is a model exist in which there is 10
years’ worth of data. However, this process is being refined as the
model will reflect meter reports rather than weather.
o Woodruff asks how much simulation plays in budget compilation.
• Bethapudi answers the budget is developed on typical weather
and yearly historical activity. 2019 numbers, rather than 2020
numbers, were used in developing the budget due to the odd
nature of 2020.
• Purchased Power- $55,493,445
o FY 2021 Projected Budget is $108,346,600. This includes the $48 million
expense incurred due to Winter Storm Uri
o Excluding the Storm, purchased power budget is on target with usual
numbers when comparing to 2020 budgeted numbers
• Budgeted amounts are expected to meet the Fiscal Policy mandated reserve
requirements
Page 8 of 32
• Service Level Requests
o Administration
• $8,035 for training for 2 new analysts
o Transmission and Distribution
• $20,000 for remote disconnect meters, which are the standard in
the industry
• $150,000 for preventive maintenance of aging underground
infrastructure
• $10,000 for standby pay for lineman based on their hourly pay
• $408,500 for an additional pressure digger for keeping up with
growth and system improvement projects
• Butler asks what the cost is of hiring a contractor or
renting a pressure digger to perform work versus
owning the pressure digger.
Westbrook answers that the issue with a
contractor in the nature of the electric business
that the Utility needs to provide service on a
24/7 basis where the contractor does not.
o Electric Engineering
• $86,673.60 for an Engineering Analyst to provide adequate
support and maintenance of AMI and MDM applications
Case asks if this is a fully loaded cost
Bethapudi answers that this is just the salary; a
good rule of thumb that the fully loaded cost is 20-
25% higher than the salary
o Electric Fund Review- Leigh Wallace- Finance Director
• Case asks if storm expenses, and reserves are included in the
electric fund
Bethapudi answers that some of these numbers are built
into the operations expense numbers, He adds that an
advantage that the Utility has in storm situations in which
disasters are declared is that cost incurred during such
events can be reimbursed through FEMA. This is a reason
why a large reserve fund isn’t created for this.
• Butler asks where is the 48 million purchase power expense
referenced in the electric fund.
Wallace answers that this found in purchased power
Page 9 of 32
operating expenses and in non-operating revenue in bond
proceeds accounts. The first payment for this amount is
going to be made in FY2022 which is a $5 million principal
payment.
• Butler asks if there is a disconnect in collection of funds in which
all Georgetown residents do not use services provided by the
Electric Utility and use other utilities such as PEC and that the
Utility also serves areas outside of Georgetown.
David Morgan, City Manager, answers that an advantage
of City-owned Utility is that they collect a return on
investment from investor-owned utilities in which their
customers pay city taxes on their utility bill. This is called
Payment in Lieu of Taxes that are then paid towards the
City. This return on investment from investor-owned
utilities are tied into the City’s rate structure. In the fall,
there will be City-wide allocation study by a consultant in
which the City will view recommendation upon allocation
of funds.
• Butler asks for clarification of the Utility customers who are
outside of the city limits.
Morgan answers that there are customers in Round Rock
in which Georgetown pays a franchise fee to the City of
Round Rock; just as PEC pays a franchise fee to
Georgetown.
• FY 2022 will be 3rd year in 4-year plan in which fiber property is
transferred from the Electric Fund into the IT fund. Which lies in a
Sale of Property account.
• Georgetown is no longer on negative credit watch according to
S&P. This means the City funds will not be reviewed every 90
days by S&P, but more likely to be review annually. The City still
remains on negative outlook. These terms are not exclusive to just
Georgetown in reaction to the winter storm in February as its
effects affected the State. The participation in the ERCOT market
in general is the largest reason for the low credit rating.
• The credit rating change is mostly due to the Utilities use of a
renewed risk management policy and portfolio.
• Woodruff asks for clarification for what negative outlook means.
Wallace answers the actual rating held at A+ and remains
on negative outlook which is a long-term scenario view of
the industry.
J. Energy Risk Management Policy Updates- Daniel Bethapudi- General Manager of Electric
Utility
Page 10 of 32
• In January 2021 evaluation was provide by ACES to improve Georgetown’s Risk
Management Policy. They were tasked with provide high level recommendations to
bring policy in line with best practices in the industry and that fit the structure of
the Utility.
• This includes modifying and enhancing the governance and responsibilities of those
involved, enhancing hedging guidelines, define authorized trading activity,
develop a credit policy, credit exposure monitorization, and incorporate stochastic
portfolio modeling.
• This includes creation Risk Oversight Committee consists of Electric Manager and
Staff, City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and the Finance Director. This
committee is responsible for policy itself and for some of the portfolio related
decisions.
• Below this is the Risk Management Committee. Which consists of the QSE/ Energy
Manager, which is Shell Energy, the Electric Manger and Staff, and an independent
consultant which is Crescent Power. This group handles more of the day-to-day
activities of risk management.
• ACES Recommended a change in governance in which this includes the Risk
Oversight Committee being served by the Electric Board, reporting to this group is
the general manager led portfolio management team consisting of an energy risk
management support services provider, an energy portfolio provider, and an
External Energy Manger or QSE. This group will be performing the actual day to
day energy portfolio management tasks.
• The other reporter to the ROC is the Internal Risk Oversight Committee. This
consists of the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Finance Director, General
Manager, and a senior Utility staff member. This group performs the independent
risk management function.
• The combination of the Internal Risk Oversight Committee and portfolio
management team reports to the ROC who then will recommend actions and
policies to the City Council.
• Case asks if Shell has approved of the Risk Management Policy.
o Bethapudi answers that Shell is obligated to abide to the risk management
policy
MOTION by Woodruff, second by Butler to adjourn the Regular Session and move into
Executive Session. APPROVED 5-0 at 5:26 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.
K. Section 551.086: Competitive Matters
• Purchased Power Update
Page 11 of 32
MOTION by Jones, second by Woodruff to adjourn Executive Session. APPROVED 5-0 at 6:25.
Regular Session (cont.)
• Bethapudi gives an ERCOT update- to ensure there are not any winter storm like events they
have significantly increased the obligation for non-spin reserves up to 6MW. In contrast this
used to be less than a megawatt. These resources tend to be expensive, the cost associated
with these non-spend reserves average $1000.
Adjournment
MOTION by Jones, second by Woodruff to adjourn the Board Meeting. APPROVED 5-0
Electric Board Meeting Adjourned at 6:28 PM.
Page 12 of 32
City of Georgetown, Texas
Electric Utility Board
August 19, 2021
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible rec ommendation to award the Tree Trimming and Vegetation Management
C ontract to Towns end Tree S ervice LLC . of Muncie, Indiana, in the estimated amount not to exceed of
$300,000.00. – Mike Wes tbrook, Electric O perations Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
T he Tree Trimming and Vegetation Management is an annual c ontract with optional four (4) one (1) year
extensions . T he term of the last agreement ended S eptember 30, 2020. We put the c ontract out to bid and
received one bidder, Townsend Tree S ervic e LLC . T he main s ervic es include sc heduled trimming of
existing main and lateral lines to a planned 5 year trim c yc le. S ervic es also inc lude tree trimming and
removal of trees for extensions and upgrades to existing fac ilities. T he contrac tor will bill for labor services
rendered bas ed upon labor units and hourly time and equipment billing as outlined with this agreement in an
amount not to exceed $300,000.00.
S taff R ecommendation: renew the c ontract with Towns end Tree S ervice LLC of Munc ie, Indiana, in the
es timated amount not to exc eed of $300,000.00
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Annual costs not to exc eed $300,000
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mike Wes tbrook- Elec tric O perations Manager
Page 13 of 32
City of Georgetown, Texas
Electric Utility Board
August 19, 2021
S UB J E C T:
G eneral Manager's Monthly R eport- Daniel Bethapudi- G eneral Manager of Electric Utility
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Daniel Bethapudi-G eneral Manager of Electric Utility
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
8/19 Presentation Pres entation
Page 14 of 32
Georgetown Electric Advisory
Board
08/19/21
City of GeorgetownPage 15 of 32
AGENDA
I.Regular Session:
(* -indicates legislative action)
A.Call to Order
B.Roll Call
C.Introduction of Visitors
D.Public Wishing to Address the Board
E.Review and Approval of Minutes*
F.Tree Trimming Contract Renewal*
G.General Manager’s Monthly Report
II.Executive Session:
H. Purchased Power Update
*-indicates legislative action
Page 16 of 32
Review of Minutes
•July 15th 2021 Minutes
City of GeorgetownPage 17 of 32
Tree Trimming Bid Award
•SUBJECT: Consideration and possible recommendation to award the Tree Trimming and
Vegetation Management Contract to Townsend Tree Service LLC. of Muncie, Indiana, in the
estimated amount not to exceed of $300,000.00. –Mike Westbrook, Electric Operations
Manager
•ITEM SUMMARY: The Tree Trimming and Vegetation Management is an annual contract with
optional four (4) one (1) year extensions. The term of the last agreement ended September 30,
2020. We put the contract out to bid and received one bidder, Townsend Tree Service LLC. The
main services include scheduled trimming of existing main and lateral lines to a planned 5 year
trim cycle. Services also include tree trimming and removal of trees for extensions and upgrades
to existing facilities. The contractor will bill for labor services rendered based upon labor units
and hourly time and equipment billing as outlined with this agreement in an amount not to
exceed $300,000.00.
•STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation is to renew the contract with Townsend
Tree Service LLC of Muncie, Indiana, in the estimated amount not to exceed of $300,000.00.
•FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this expenditure are budgeted in the Electric Operations
•Budget: Electric Operations
•SUBMITTED BY: Mike Westbrook, Electric Operations Manager
City of GeorgetownPage 18 of 32
General Manager’s Monthly Report
City of GeorgetownPage 19 of 32
Customer Service and Billing –
Electric Services
Leticia Zavala-Customer Care Director
Page 20 of 32
•All Available Services*
Meters:June July
Residential 26,669 26,729
Net Metering 520 524
General -Small 2,539 2,542
General -Large 333 333
Industrial 22 23
Industrial -Large 1 1
School Services 25 25
Municipal 248 250
Municipal -Pumping 42 42
Total Services Count 30,399 30,469
Security Lights May June
Residential 95 95
General -Small 127 127
Municipal 6 6
Total Services Count 228 228
*Active & Inactive service delivery points
Customer Statistics
Page 21 of 32
•Breakdown by Active Electric Customers (unique) :
June July
Residential 25,996 26,179
Builder 751 763
Commercial & Industrial 2,320 2,320
Municipal/Schools 291 292
Total Electric Customers:29,358 29,554
•Electric Billing Collection:
•Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI): 99.7%
–Usage data automatically transmitted to billing office
•Automated Meter Reading (AMR): .3%
–Usage data is collected via a drive by system
•# of Customer Estimations: 53
•Account did not get a “good” READ; or
•Account did not get “ANY” READ (work order put in for metering to
investigate)
Customer Statistics
Page 22 of 32
•Billed Meters/Services*
Meters:June July
Residential 26,483 26,554
Net Metering 501 507
General -Small 2,331 2,342
General -Large 324 328
Industrial 20 21
Industrial -Large 1 1
School Services 25 25
Municipal 182 194
Municipal -Pumping 39 39
Total Services Count 29,908 30,011
Security Lights May June
Residential 95 95
General -Small 127 127
Municipal 6 6
Total Services Count 228 228
*Meters with an active customer contract
Customer Statistics
Page 23 of 32
•Average Monthly Electric Bill July 2021 July 2020
•All Customers $ 255.92 $307.52
•Average YTD Electric Bill FY2021 FY2020
•All Customers $ 219.13 $ 250.75
•Residential Customer -FY2021 FY2020
•Cost per 1000 kWh $134.35 $144.35
(including PCA + Base)
•Average kWh 1093 1215
•Electric Bill (based on Average kWh) $149.78 $ 178.89
–PCA reduced Jan1st to $0.01375 (from $0.02375)
Customer Billing Statistics
Page 24 of 32
Electric Revenue
•YTD Revenue by Service Period –Billings thru 7/31
•1st QTR Revenue Comparison –(Oct/Nov/Dec)
•2nd QTR Revenue Comparison –(Jan/Feb/Mar)
•3rd QTR Revenue Comparison –(Apr/May/Jun)
•4th QTR Revenue Comparison –(July/Aug/Sep)
2020 Actual 2021 Actual % of Service Dates Billed % of 2020 Actual
$18,061,625 $17,830,945 100%99%
2021 Budget 2021 Year to date Actual % of Service Dates
Billed
% of
Budget
$78,982,278*$59,378,896 77%75%
*Lowered budget by $5M due to PCA reduction on 1/1/21
2020 Actual 2021 Actual % of Service Dates
Billed
% of 2020 Actual
$19,640,581 $19,447,737 100%99%
2020 Actual 2021 Actual % of Service Dates Billed % of 2020 Actual
$21,686,623 $19,414,125 94%90%
2020 Actual 2021 Actual % of Service Dates Billed % of 2020 Actual
$26,344,487 $2,686,089 13%10%
Page 25 of 32
Aged Receivables Report –thru 7/31/21
Electric AR –Active & Inactive Accounts
Electric AR –Combined Aging Breakdown
Electric Prior Month Variance
31 –60 Days $96,931.24 $55,516.52 $41,414.72
61 –90 Days $37,400.50 $32,950.85 $4,449.65
91 –120 Days $28,851.27 $31,617.45 ($2,766.18)
120 –365 Days $359,504.57 $403,669.74 ($44,165.17)
> 365 Days $1,055,425.61 $1,008,675.35 $46,750.26
Total $1,578,113.19 $1,532,429.91 $45,683.28
Customer Count 4097 3666 431
Electric Prior Month Variance
Active Accounts $196,693.25 $184,410.26 $12,282.99
Inactive Accounts $1,381,419.94 $1,348,019.65 $33,400.29
Total $1,578,113.19 $1,532,429.91 $45,683.28
Page 26 of 32
Collection Agency Review
City of GeorgetownPage 27 of 32
ELECTRIC ENGINEERING AND
OPERATIONS
MIKE WESTBROOK
ELECTRIC OPERATIONS AND
ENGINEERING MANAGER
City of GeorgetownPage 28 of 32
Top Five Outages & Event
Date Start Time Duration (min)Customers
Affected
Customer
Minutes Cause Area
7/1/2021 4:23pm 360 182 59,434 Failed Trans.Sun City
7/1/2021 6:45pm 228 8 1,824 Failed Trans.Sun City
7/2/2021 6:05pm 117 2 234 Bird Rivery
7/26/2021 3:16pm 43 4 172
Burned up sec.
leg on trans East Georgetown
7/27/2021 5:06am 122 83 10,126 Blown arrestor South Georgetown
Date Start of Event End of Event # of Outages Average
Duration Cause Area
7/19/2021 3:00pm 6:05pm 10 188
Lightning /
Replaced 2
Trans/ Blown
Fuses Various
City of GeorgetownPage 29 of 32
Performance Metrics
City of Georgetown
July 2021
Electric / June Electric / July
Good Caution Alert
Training 100%98%>90%90%-80%<80%
Safety 100%100%>90%90%-80%<80%
SO OTC 100%100%>90%90%-80%<80%
PM WO OTC 100%100%>90%90%-80%<80%
CM WO OTC 100%100%>90%90%-80%<80%
Electric Reliability (SAIFI)0.57 0.57 <1 1-2 >2
Electric Outage Duration (CAIDI)89.233 90.229 <116 116-200 >200
Page 30 of 32
Questions?
Page 31 of 32
Executive Session:
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter
551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the item listed below will be discussed in
closed session and is subject to action in the regular
session. –Daniel Bethapudi, General Manager of the
Electric Utility
Sec. 551.086 Competitive Matters
•Purchased Power Review
Page 32 of 32