Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GUS_09.09.2011 Minutes of the Meeting of the Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Friday, September 9, 2011 The Georgetown Utility System Advisory Board of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Friday , September 9, 2011. Board Members Present: John Nett - Chair, Robert Young - Vice Chair, Fred Beach - Secretary, Patty Eason, Brian Lindsey, Bill Sattler, Arthur Yaeger Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Jim Briggs, Glenn Dishong, Paul Elkins, Michael Hallmark, David Thomison, Jimmy Sikes, Rache l Osgood, Kathy Ragsdale, Micki Rundell, Chris Foster, Leticia Zavala, Bridget Chapman, Mike Stasny, John Zamarripa, Daniel Potter, Brad Broussard, Sheila Mitchell OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Savage, Todd Jackson, Delton Robinson, Carlene Boyd, Tony Corbett, David Wolf/Wolf Properties, Gary Hertel/Texas Disposal Systems, Jim Wimberly/Texas Disposal Systems, Tom Mistler/Texas Disposal Systems, Jennifer McKnight/Chisholm Trail Special Utility District, Mary Wilson/Chisholm Trail Special Utility District Minutes Regular Meeting Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. CALL TO ORDER Called to order at 2:02pm I. STAFF BOARD COMMENTS/QUESTIONS: (This is a short informational time regarding items where specific actions are not requested or needed) A. Introduction of Visitors - due to a very full agenda and the large number of attendees, visitors will be introduced as items are discussed on the agenda. Jim Briggs stated he had received a letter from Electric Supervisor John Zamarripa regarding the actions of two Electric Department employees, Daniel Potter and Brad Broussard in response to a line down call received from Georgetown Fire Department during a grass fire on the evening of August 27, 2011. Briggs gave an overview of the call stating once the scene was assessed it was determined the line belonged to Pedernales Electric; we did not have service in the area. The linemen determined the line was energized and immediately secured the area, removed the firefighters from working in the area and stayed on the scene until Pedernales arrived to de -energize the line. Briggs thanked Zamarripa for bringing this to his attention and presented Potter and Broussard with a small token of appreciation for a job well done; keeping everyone safe and returning home to their families at the end of the day. B. Project Progress Reports Discussion: Reports are included in packets for review. No questions. -- Council Actions - no items presented at Council C. Industry Updates Discussion: Briggs reviewed a presentation given at the August Gulf Coast Power Association (GCPA) meeting by Tripp Doggett of ERCOT regarding generation adequacy in ERCOT. Beach commented on coal plants scheduled for decommission. Discussion on increased water consumption associated with power plant usage. Briggs noted upcoming BRA meeting and possibility of Georgetown moving to watering 2 days a week instead of 3 days, starting in October to possibly continue into 2012. Nett asked and Dishong commented on the low level of Lake Stillhouse. II. LEGISLATIVE REGULAR AGENDA: (This is for specific action items considered by the Board – greater than $50,000 in value) D. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the regular GUS Board meeting held on August 12, 2011. -- Sheila Mitchell Discussion: None. Action: Motion by Beach, seconded by Lindsay to approve the minutes from the regular GUS Board meeting held on August 12, 2011. Approved: 7-0-0 E. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve the contract for the San Gabriel Wastewater Treatment Plant Chemical Feed Modifications to Cunningham Constructors & Associates, Inc. of Georgetown, Texas, for the amount of $447,800.00. -- David Thomison/Glenn Dishong Discussion: Thomison noted item is for secondary containment at the San Gabriel Wastewater Treatment Plant. Nett asked and Thomison stated this is regulato ry driven; noting containment is needed to keep from going to the San Gabriel river. Action: Motion by Sattler, seconded by Young to approve the contract for the San Gabriel Wastewater Treatment Plant Chemical Feed Modifications to Cunningham Constructors & Associates, Inc. of Georgetown, Texas, for the amount of $447,800.00. Approved: 7-0-0 F. Consideration and possible recommendation to approve Task Order CDM -11-001 with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. of Austin, Texas, for professional services related to Pump 3 & 4 addition to Sun City Lift Station, in the amount of $85,000.00. -- David Thomison/Glenn Dishong Discussion: Thomison stated item is for expansion of the Sun City Lift Station due to continued growth. Pumps are needed to move wastewater out. Beach asked and Hallmark/Dishong stated this would provide an approximate 50% capacity increase. Sattler asked and Hallmark stated this is for full design and bid. Beach ask ed and Dishong stated this will be 2012 construction. Sattler asked and Rundell stated all funds are accounted for; engineering in this Fiscal Year budget and construction in next Fiscal Year budget -- based on budget to be approved at next council meeting. Action: Motion by Young, seconded by Yaeger to approve Task Order CDM -11-001 with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. of Austin, Texas, for professional services related to Pump 3 & 4 addition to Sun City Lift Station, in the amount of $85,000.00. Approved: 7-0-0 G. Consideration and possible recommendation to renew contracts for the Electric System Underground Construction & Maintenance and the Electric System Trenching & Conduit Installation Labor to Pedro S.S. Services, Inc. of Austin, Texas, in the estimated amount of $2,075,000.00. -- Paul Elkins Discussion: Elkins stated this is for the yearly renewal and Pedro has performed satisfactory work this past year. If next year's budget is approved at the September 27th Council meeting this will move forward and if changes are made, amounts will be adjusted accordingly. Yaeger asked and Elkins stated Pedro SS has been doing our underground construction for the last 2 years; about 90% of our work. Briggs noted some funds are recuperated in development costs and the balance is paid for in capital infrastructure. Sattler asked and Elkins stated all projects are budgeted. Action: Motion by Beach, seconded by Yaeger to renew contracts for the Electric System Underground Construction & Maintenance and the Electric System Trenching & Conduit Installation Labor to Pedro S.S. Services, Inc. of Austin, Texas, in the estimated amount of $2,075,000.00. Approved: 7-0-0 H. Consideration and possible recommendation regarding CCN transfer requests from Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) customers in the CTSUD CCN. -- Glenn Dishong/Jim Briggs Discussion: Briggs stated staff and council have received several requests from people wanting to transfer water service from CTSUD to Georgetown. Dishong looked into the requests and prepared an evaluation, not just for a specific neighborhood, but for all areas they could transfer service to. Beach asked and Briggs responded from a legal prospective, under recent state law, residents can file to transfer service and their current provider can challenge those requests. Beach stated this would obviously have a financial impact on the Georgetown system and a negative impact in CTSUD. Nett asked and Chapman stated this is a matter than can be handled in open session today for discussion purposes. David Wolf, resident of Georgetown and property owner (has requested release from CTSUD through TCEQ) for future development of his property. Dishong spoke and discussed possible costs associated and noted a full analysis would be needed of our 10-year CIP for future properties. For current customers of CTSUD. Georgetown would need to be able for those customers to connect immediately. Dishong reviewed the presentation and discussed each tract to be considered for inclusion, noting staff recommendations. Dishong also discussed areas included in Jonah Special Utility District. Briggs spoke on some discussions with JSUD and relations to the South East Arterial 1 (SE1) development. Beach asked and Dishong responded and additional 12,000 acre feet would be needed to service areas to be transferred. Briggs stated that if directed to move forward and Council approves, then negotiations will be entered into with appropriate parties. This presentation identifies the areas recommended for and against transfer. Nett asked and Briggs explained the decision on areas under consideration are areas which make geographical sense to add to the system. Briggs noted that due to drought and recent wildfires it is going to be more difficult to get new water. Young stated he feels we should move forward with exploring adding areas to system. Dishong discussed assistance would be needed from the Brazos River Authority (BRA). Sattler asked and Briggs responded that in order to perform a full analysis, Georgetown would need to visit with the two providers and probably not close to determination until first quarter of 2012. Current immediate need is Water Oaks. Briggs stated staff recommendation is to take identified properties adjacent to the City which will be eventually in the annexation plan, investigate the transfers and bring the cost analysis to Council for consideration and approval, after dialog with CTSUD relative to the feasibility of those transfers. Action: Motion by Sattler, seconded by Young to recommend to Council for staff to explore the options regarding CCN transfer requests from Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) customers in the CTSUD CCN. Approved: 6-1-0 (Beach opposed) I. Consideration and possible recommendation for the initiation of contract negotiations with Texas Disposal Systems (TDS). -- Rachel Osgood/Kathy Ragsdale Discussion: Osgood stated we are currently in a five year contract with TDS which expires in September 2012 and TDS has requested an extension as allowed in the contract. Osgood provided background of history of operations of solid waste services. Staff is asking to enter into negotiations with TDS to expand services based on determined needs. Osgood discussed results from the citizen survey conducted this year; considering single-stream recycling, a reward program for volume of recycling, etc. Nett commented on a possible process for weighing customers garbage in addition to looking at weighing recycling; recycling weight increased would award customers with credits to use at local merchants. Sattler asked and Briggs stated a proposal has been received from TDS. Should Council approve for negotiations to occur, the City would not seek other formal proposals at this time. Briggs stated the process of negotiations with TDS could take about 30 days and be complete by the end of October to be able to come back to Council with pricing and extension information; with the option to proceed with the Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Eason stated the surveys also stated citizens wanted more recycling options, realizing there would be associated costs. Sattler asked and Briggs stated if we decide to bid out instead of renewing the contract, the RFP can be sent out by first quarter of next year; returning to Board/Council around April/May 2012. Action: Motion by Young for the initiation of contract negotiations with Texas Disposal Systems (TDS). With further questions received, conversation returned to discussion. Discussion: Further discussion continued on process and Chapman clarified this is a renewal, not an extension, of the contract with amendments for additional services. Sattler asked and Briggs stated there would be no proprietary services. Sattler asked for clarification on time frame of outcome of proposal returning to GUS Board and Briggs stated we would plan to bring back to October GUS Board meeting. Action: Motion by Young, seconded by Sattler for the initiation of contract negotiations with Texas Disposal Systems (TDS) during a 30-day period; services will include ancillary and base costs. Approved: 7-0-0 Item J pulled from agenda - no competitive matters to discuss. III. RATES: EXECUTIVE SESSION Called to order Sec. 551.071 Consultation with Attorney and Sec. 551.086 Competitive Matters The GUS Board will go into Executive Session under Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code to consult with its attorney as provided under Section 551.071 and to discuss matters or take action on a "competitive matter" of the Energy Services Department as provided under Section 551.086 J. Discussion of contract issues related to Texas Disposal Systems (TDS) in order to address contract renewal as allowed by the current contract. -- Rachel Osgood/Kathy Ragsdale ITEM PULLED FROM AGENDA (No competitive matters to discuss) RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION K. Action from Executive Session Discussion: None. Action: None. Approved: N/A IV. STRATEGIC ISSUES: L. Discussion related to changes to GUS Utility Operations Management and Governance structure. -- Jim Briggs Discussion: Briggs discussed the possibility of GUS Board operating a little more independently other than just advisory, stating this has been on Council project log for quite awhile and has been on Council agenda for discussion, however no action was taken. Briggs stated item has now been placed on the next Council agenda by a Council member for discussion along with upcoming Budget items. Briggs provided some background for the two new GUS Board members. Briggs noted there had been talks about the GUS Board operating as an independent Board. A lot of the dialog about GUS Board operations is items they deal with are handled more in a business-like, very detailed fashion. Changing the operations of the GUS Board should help relieve some of the load from the Council, giving them more time to deal with larger issues and policies. Question is -- should GUS Board have more authority to deal with decisions? Briggs stated the original proposal was for the GUS Board to be independent and have complete authority, which is why the item did not have further action by the Council. Therefore, the discussion is coming back to Council for other considerations on structure of the GUS Board. Sattler asked and Briggs/Rundell agreed there may be an option to have a Utility Consent Agenda section on the Council Agenda to keep them informed on GUS Board decisions, however they felt that process would still require the same staff time, preparations and availability at Council meetings. Briggs noted that if the GUS Board's authority level changes, it would cut down staff time for preparations for Council meetings and allow actions to move along more efficiently. Further discussion occurred on what type of items Council has to approve, would the charter need to change, etc? Briggs stated all those things would have to be looked into and revised if needed. Sattler feels GUS Board is capable on handling items for dec ision. Further discussion continued on the administrative process and other cities we can gather information from. Briggs noted this item is scheduled for Council on September 13th for further exploration and consideration. ADJOURN Motion by Young, seconded by Lindsey to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 5:00PM. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 05:00 PM. Approved : Attest: _______________________ ________________________ John Nett - Board Chair Fred Beach - Secretary