Jun 13, 2022 Electric Utility Commission

I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT UM, MR. BEULAH, CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOU SEND AT, AT ANYTHING YOU WRITE OR WANT US TO GET, UM, CENTER LIAISON JUST TO MAKE SURE WE ALL GET IT BECAUSE I PERSONALLY SOMETIMES MISS EMAILS, BUT IF IT COMES, UH, YOU KNOW, IF IT COMES FROM OUR LIAISON, I TEND TO PAY MORE ATTENTION.

I THINK IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA TO JUST, UH, YEAH, AND THEN SHE CAN DISTRIBUTE IT AND THAT WAY WE, WE ALL MAKE SURE WE GET IT.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

UH, MOVING ON TO NEW

[NEW BUSINESS – CONSENT]

BUSINESS.

UH, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP ITEMS NUMBER TWO THROUGH FIVE HEARING

[00:05:01]

NONE.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBERS TWO THROUGH FIVE.

SO MOVED.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

COMMISSIONER.

READ ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES ITEMS. NUMBER TWO THROUGH FIVE ARE APPROVED NOW, MOVING ON TO, OH, EXCUSE ME.

GO AHEAD.

OH, I ALWAYS FORGET THAT.

I DIDN'T PUT THAT ON MY, UH, HOT, WE SKIPPED IT, UH, APPROVAL OF THE

[1. Approve minutes of the May 9, 2022 meeting.]

MINUTES.

EXCUSE ME.

UH, THE LAST MONTH'S MEETING, MAY I BELIEVE IT WAS THE NINTH.

LET'S SEE.

UM, MAY 9TH, UH, MINUTES WERE CIRCULATED IN YOUR PACKET ON FRIDAY, ALONG WITH THE MEETING MATERIALS.

ARE THERE ANY CHANGES? I THINK, UM, I HAD, UH, I MIGHT REQUEST A CHANGE.

MR. BULOW WAS, UM, INTERESTED IN HIS COMMENTS BEING REFLECTED ON THE MINUTES.

UM, I KNOW THAT THERE IS, THERE WAS ONE SPEAKER, BUT IT MIGHT BE NICE TO HAVE LIKE A SENTENCE ON THE TOPIC AT LEAST THAT HE SPOKE ON TO ENSURE THAT THAT'S REFLECTED.

I DON'T HAVE ANY PROPOSED LANGUAGE.

MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE, UM, OUR LIAISON COULD GO BACK AND PROPOSE FOR US.

YES, WE'LL REVIEW THE TAPE.

COPIES TO ROBIN.

SHE GOT A COPY OF MY BAD.

SO WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE THAT UP NEXT MEETING IF THAT, THAT WORKS FOR FOLKS.

STAFF BRIEFINGS AND REPORTS, ITEM NUMBER SIX, BASE RATE REVIEW PROCESS AND COMMUNICATION OUTREACH OR COMMUNITY OUTREACH, UH, LOOKS LIKE MS. COOPER'S HERE TO PRESENT ON BEHALF OF AUSTIN ENERGY.

LET'S MOVING ON TO

[6. Base Rate Review Process and Community Outreach Update]

UH, GOOD EVENING.

AND WHILE THE SLIDES ARE GETTING PULLED UP, I JUST WANT TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT TO INTRODUCE EVERYONE TO AMY EVERHART, WHO IS OUR NEW DIRECTOR, LOCAL GOVERNMENT ISSUES.

UH, SHE'S REPLACING JEFF WEISS WHO RETIRED RECENTLY IF YOU'LL RECALL.

AND AMY COMES TO US MOST RECENTLY FROM COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS'S OFFICE.

THEN PRIOR TO THAT HAD BEEN AT THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IN A VARIETY OF OTHER CITY HALL PLACES.

SO AGAIN, WELCOME.

I KNOW YOU'LL BE WORKING CLOSELY WITH HER AND WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE HER ON BOARD.

ALRIGHTY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED HERE IF YOU'LL HIT THE NEXT SLIDE.

WAS DUE THIS WEDNESDAY, BUT THAT HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO THE 22ND.

I JUST WANTED TO, UM, TAKE A MOMENT THIS EVENING TO UPDATE YOU ON WHERE WE ARE IN THE BASE RATE REVIEW PROCESS AND SHARE SOME DETAILS ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY OUTREACH EFFORTS.

THIS WAS A PRESENTATION GIVEN TO THE UOC LAST WEEK.

WE TYPICALLY WE DO THAT IN REVERSE ORDER, BUT JUST WITH THE WAY THE TIMING IT WORKED OUT, UM, UH, I DID THE UOC BRIEFING FIRST.

SO THIS SLIDE, UH, IS, IS KIND OF SHOWS YOU A VERY DETAILED TIMELINE ON WHERE WE ARE IN THE BASE RATE REVIEW PROCESS.

UH, AND I WILL KNOW WE'LL GET TO SOME UPDATES IN IT AND JUST MOMENTARILY.

UH, BUT, UH, BASICALLY AS YOU'LL SEE IN, ON APRIL 18TH, WE FILED THE BASE RATE FILING PACKAGE AND WE ENGAGED IN COMMUNITY OUTREACH FOR THE NEXT MONTH.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITY GOING ON, UH, OVER NEXT FEW MONTHS AS WE CONTINUE THIS PROCESS.

AND IT IS A VERY BUSY TIME FOR AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE PARTICIPANTS, UH, FORMAL PARTICIPANTS, UH, HAVE JUST FINISHED, UH, ENGAGING IN DISCOVERY AND WILL BE FILING POSITION STATEMENTS NEXT WEEK.

SO, UH, RIGHT BEFORE OR RIGHT AFTER THE HOLIDAY, I THINK THE MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY, UH, THE EXTENSION TO, UH, REVISE THE PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE WAS REQUESTED BY SEVERAL PARTICIPANTS.

AND THE REVISED SCHEDULE WAS FILED ON JUNE 3RD.

AND THAT'S WHY, UH, THIS SLIDE, WHICH WAS PREPARED FOR THE UFC MEETING, DOESN'T REFLECT SOME OF THOSE UPDATES, UH, BUT ULTIMATELY THE INTEGRITY OF THE SCHEDULE AND ITS KEY DATES BEGINNING WITH THE FINAL CONFERENCE, WHICH WE CAN ALSO CALL THE HEARING ON THE MERITS THAT HAS NOT CHANGED.

UH, MANY OF THE DATES TOWARDS THE END COULD NOT BE REMOVED DUE TO EXISTING COMMITMENTS, PARTICULARLY THAT WITH THE IMPARTIAL HEARING EXAMINER.

UH, BUT BASICALLY, UH, WE DID ACCOMMODATE, UH, SOME OF THE PARTIES REQUESTS.

AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT AGAIN.

UH, I BELIEVE THIS PROBABLY I CAN'T READ IT VERY WELL FROM HERE, BUT, BUT, UH, THE, THE PARTIES, UH, ORIGINAL POSITION STATEMENT

[00:10:01]

UH, AND THEN THERE WILL BE A DISCOVERY PERIOD FOR THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WILL THEN FILE.

IT'S A REBUTTAL AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO, UH, HAVE SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS AND THE, THE FINAL, UH, HEARING THE WEEK STARTING JULY 11TH.

AND THERE WILL BE PARTICIPANT CLOSING BRIEFS, AUSTIN, ENERGY'S CLOSING BRIEF ON AUGUST 1ST.

AND THEN BY AUGUST 31ST, WE ARE EXPECTING THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER.

AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SLIDE AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE SHOWN THIS TO YOU BEFORE THAT THE EUC WILL CONSIDER THE HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION, UH, IN ITS OCTOBER MEETING.

AND THEN IN NOVEMBER, COUNCIL WILL SET A PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR NOVEMBER 17TH.

AND AGAIN, OUR GOAL HERE IS TO HAVE THE NEW RATES IN PLACE BY JANUARY 1ST, 2023.

SO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

QUICK QUESTION ON THE TIMELINE, UH, IF, UH, COUNCIL, UH, OR THE PARTIES AND EVENTUALLY COUNCIL NEED ADDITIONAL TIME.

IS THERE ANYTHING MAGIC ABOUT JANUARY ONE THAT, THAT THEY, IF THEY NEED MORE TIME THAT THEY COULD PUSH IT BACK? WELL, UM, CERTAINLY THAT'S THE GOAL.

WE'RE, WE'RE OBVIOUSLY IN A DEFICIT, UH, UH, SITUATION AND WE'D LIKE TO START REVIEWING OR RECUR RECOVERING THE NEW RATES AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

ALSO, UM, THE FURTHER YOU GET INTO THE NEW YEAR, THEN THE CLOSER YOU ARE IN A LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING ALSO TO BE MINDFUL OF AS WELL.

OOPS.

I THINK I LOST THE NEXT SLIDE THERE.

SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU THE LIST OF THE FORMAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE BASE RATE REVIEW.

I THINK WE'VE UPDATED YOU PREVIOUSLY THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR, UH, UH, CUSTOMERS HAVE THE OPTION TO PARTICIPATE FORMALLY.

UH, AND, AND THIS IS THE LIST OF PARTIES THAT ARE PARTICIPATING AS FORMAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROCESS.

SO NEXT SLIDE.

OH, EXCUSE ME.

I THINK COMMISSIONER RAID HAS A QUESTION.

I DIDN'T SEE THAT.

IT'S MORE OF A COMMENT.

I WANT FOLKS TO KNOW THAT OBVIOUSLY I WORK FOR SIERRA CLUB, UM, AND I HAVE PUT IN A REQUEST TO AUSTIN ENERGY TO LIAISON JUST TO, TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING I SHOULD BE DOING, BECAUSE I'M BOTH REPRESENTING SIERRA CLUB IN MY JOB, BUT I'M ALSO HERE ON THE EUC.

SO IS IT APPROPRIATE? AND WE HAVE POSITIONS IN THE RATE CASE, IS IT APPROPRIATE ONCE WE GET TO THE REVIEW FOR ME TO, YOU KNOW, IS THERE ANYTHING I NEED TO DO? DOES IT CREATING ANY KIND OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST? SO I'M, I'M WAITING FOR, UH, SOME SORT OF FORMAL RESPONSE FROM AUSTIN LEGAL.

I CALLED UP WITH LEGAL THIS AFTERNOON, UH, TO SEE THE STATUS OF THAT REQUEST AND THEY THEY'RE TRYING TO GET SOME MEETINGS SCHEDULED.

AND SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE A RESPONSE TO YOU SHORTLY.

AND THANK YOU, UH, CYRUS FOR, YOU KNOW, I JUST INFORMING THE COMMISSION.

UM, AND, AND ALSO, UH, WE ALSO, UH, GOT CONFIRMATION THAT WHAT I WOULD CALL WHAT I SAID, LOOSELY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.

IT DOESN'T APPLY.

SO WE AS COMMISSIONERS CAN, UM, INTERACT, UM, AND DISCUSS THE RATE CASE ISSUES WITH INDIVIDUALS AND INTERVENERS, AND THAT'S NOT PRESENTING ANY PROBLEM, UM, OUR ROLE ON THE COMMISSION.

SO, UM, THAT, JUST TO WRAP THAT UP TOO, AS WELL.

UM, NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES, ONE MORE.

UH, SO TO PROMOTE COMMUNITY AWARENESS OF THE BASE RATE REVIEW, WE ENGAGED IN A SERIES OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY OUTREACH THAT WE ENGAGED IN.

AND WE USED A VARIETY OF MEDIUMS TO COMMUNICATE TO OUR CUSTOMERS ABOUT THE UPCOMING MEETINGS.

WE USE THE AUSTIN ENERGY WEBSITE, CUSTOMER EMAILS, SOCIAL MEDIA, LOCAL PRESS, AND OTHER MEANS TO ALERT THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE BASE RATE REVIEW AND OPPORTUNITIES TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK.

WE ALSO POSTED FLYERS POSTERS AND HAD PAPER FEEDBACK FORMS AND LIBRARIES AND UTILITY CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTERS.

THERE WERE BILL INSERTS ON BILL MESSAGING, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A NOTE ON THE BILL.

AND WE ALSO RELEASED NEWS RELEASES AS WELL AS PROVIDING INTERVIEWS TO NEWS MEDIA IN BOTH ENGLISH AND IN SPANISH.

AND ATTEND COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETINGS.

SO HERE'S A SAMPLE OF THE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER EMAIL.

I REALIZE THIS IS QUITE A BUSY EMAIL, AND IT'S DIFFICULT TO READ FROM YOUR VANTAGE POINT.

UH, BUT IT SHOWS THAT THE CUSTOMER OUTREACH, WE BOTH A COMBINED EDUCATION FOR CUSTOMERS EXPLAINING, UH, THE, WHAT THE BASE RATE REVIEW WAS SEEKING AND INFORMED THEM ON HOW THEY COULD PARTICIPATE

[00:15:01]

AND THIS IS A SAMPLE OF THE ON-BILL MESSAGING AND THE UTILITIES NOW, BILL INSERT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO ALL CUSTOMERS.

AND THIS SLIDE ALSO SHOWS, UH, THE CITY CLERK'S WEBSITE, WHERE THERE IS DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE BASE RATE REVIEW AND WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN ACCESS ALL OF THE FILINGS MADE BY AUSTIN AND ENERGY AND ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS IT'S ALL UP THERE ON THE INTERNET.

WE ALSO ESTABLISHED A SPEAK-UP AUSTIN PAGE, WHICH PROVIDED MULTIPLE LANGUAGE TRANSLATIONS FOR OUR CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING ENGLISH, SPANISH, SIMPLIFIED CHINESE, ARABIC, VIETNAMESE, AND KOREAN.

WE ALSO HAD INTERPRETERS AVAILABLE AT EACH VIRTUAL AND IN-PERSON COMMUNITY MEETING UPON REQUEST.

SO WE HOPE FIVE VIRTUAL AND THREE IN-PERSON COMMUNITY MEETINGS, 45% OF THE PEOPLE THAT REGISTERED ATTENDED.

AND WE VARIED THE TIMES AND LOCATIONS TO PROVIDE MULTIPLE OPTIONS FOR OUR CUSTOMERS TO ATTEND.

SOME OF THE MEETINGS WERE IN THE EVENING, SOMEWHERE ON A WEEKEND, UH, SOME DURING THE DAY NEXT SLIDE.

AND WE ARE CURRENTLY STILL, UH, ACCEPTING CUSTOMER FEEDBACK THROUGH SPEAK-UP AUSTIN, UH, IS THE DATE OF THIS SLIDE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FEEDBACK FROM 264 COMMONERS.

I ACTUALLY THINK THAT NUMBER IS HIGHER.

I FEEL LIKE I, I TOLD, UH, COUNCIL LAST WEEK THAT IT WAS OVER 300, UM, AND THIS FEEDBACK HAS NOW BEEN FILED, UH, IN, IN THE, UH, THE DOCKET ON THE CITY CLERK'S WEBSITE, SO THAT IT CAN BE AVAILABLE TO THE IMPARTIAL HEARING EXAMINER, THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE, UH, AND ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS AS WELL.

WE JUST EMAILED THE LINK TO THE EUC MEMBERS THIS AFTERNOON, SO THAT YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK DIRECTLY AND, AND REVIEW THE, THE OPEN-ENDED FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERS.

UH, IN ADDITION TO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, WE ALSO CONDUCT CONDUCTED ADDITIONAL OUTREACH TO MANY OF THE DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, UH, INCLUDING OFFICIALS IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES.

WE SERVE.

WE ALSO ENGAGED OUTREACH WITH OUR CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, COMMUNITY PARTNERS, THE EQUITY OFFICE, AND WE HAD TABLES AT VARIOUS COMMUNITY EVENTS, NEXT SLIDE.

AND SO FOR CUSTOMERS AND THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAY NOT HAVE TIME FOR A FORMAL MEETING, THERE'S A WEALTH OF INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE, INCLUDING ON-DEMAND VIDEOS THAT EXPLAIN THE PROCESS AND PROPOSALS.

SO WE'VE GOT THE LITTLE SHORT ANIMATED VIDEO, AND WE ADDITIONALLY DID A RECORDING OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETING THAT LASTS ABOUT A HALF HOUR IS AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE TO VIEW ON OUR WEBSITE.

COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL LOOKS LIKE.

AND SO HERE YOU WILL SEE THERE'S A SPECIFIC DEDICATED EMAIL, UH, RATE'S 20 TWENTY2@AUSTINENERGY.COM WHERE CUSTOMERS CAN SUBMIT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BASE RATE REVIEW AND THE PROCESS.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

YES, THANK YOU.

UM, TAMMY, I, UH, LOOKED WITH INTEREST AT THE, UH, FEEDBACK FORMS THAT WERE SENT TO US LIKE THIS AFTERNOON.

AND MY QUESTION IS, UM, HOW IN FACT ARE THOSE TO BE TREATED BY THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER AND THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE? ARE THEY TO, IS IT YOUR INTENTION THAT THEY BE CONSIDERED, UH, UM, IN, UH, IN THE SAME, GIVEN THE SAME WEIGHT AS, UH, STATEMENTS OF POSITION BY THE FORMER PARTIES? I THINK WE WOULD CONSIDER THOSE AGAIN, COMPARING OUR PROCESS TO THE PUC PROCESS, SIMILAR TO HOW COMMENTS ARE TREATED.

UM, AND THE PUC PROCESS.

I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S NECESSARILY EVIDENCE, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT MAY NOT MEET ALL OF THAT CRITERIA, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I THINK, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN, THEY CAN PERHAPS GIVE THEIR OWN AMOUNT OF WEIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME STRICT, UH, PROCEDURAL RULES THAT THE PUC DOES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, UP TO THEIR DISCRETION, HOW THEY CONSIDER IT WELL.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE CITY IN RETAINING THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER, DOESN'T GIVE THEM A DIRECTION ON WHAT THEY CAN CONSIDER, WHAT THE LENDER CAN CONSIDER.

I MEAN, UP WITH HIS RECOMMENDATION, WELL, THERE, THERE ARE PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES AVAILABLE, UM, THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE HEARING EXAMINER.

ABSOLUTELY.

BUT THEY DO NOT GO TO THE SPECIFIC LEVEL OF DETAIL, UM, IN TERMS OF, OF, OF HOW YOU MIGHT COMPARE IT TO THE PUC.

I THINK THAT, UH, THERE'S A LITTLE MORE LATITUDE IN OUR PROCESS FOR THAT.

AND IN, IN PARTICULAR, WE TRIED TO MAKE THE PROCESS MORE, UH USER-FRIENDLY FOR CUSTOMERS, AND WE'RE NOT REQUIRING ALL OF THE SAME SORT OF EVIDENTIARY CONSIDERATIONS, BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK W YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T PUT A PROCESS

[00:20:01]

IN PLACE THAT SAID, UH, WHAT LEVEL OF WEIGHT THEY HAVE TO GIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND, UM, I, WASN'T SUGGESTING THAT YOU DOING IT IN CONFORMANCE WITH, YOU KNOW, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT HEARING.

I JUST AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THE PEOPLE WHO TOOK THE TIME TO FILL OUT THESE FORMS SHOULD HAVE ANY REALISTIC EXPECTATION THAT ANYBODY'S GOING TO REALLY TAKE THEM INTO CONSIDERATION IN REACHING A RECOMMENDATION.

WELL, I WOULD CERTAINLY THINK SO.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE FILED IT, SO THAT, THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, EVERY IT'S PART OF, PART OF THE, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CONSIDER A RECORD, UH, IN, IN THIS PROCEEDING, COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL.

ANY, ANYTHING ELSE? NO, THANK YOU.

UM, COMMISSIONER, I THINK COMMISSIONER BOWMAN HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

THANKS, TAMMY.

UM, I'M JUST A QUESTION ON THE TIMELINE, DS, THE MEETINGS THAT WERE HELD, WHERE THEY HELD, WHAT WAS THE TIMEFRAME FOR THOSE MEETINGS? THEY WERE CONDUCTED ALL THROUGHOUT THE MONTH OF MAY.

WE, I BELIEVE WE HAD, I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY I SAID THAT WE HAD, UM, WE, YEAH, WE HAD EIGHT MEETINGS, SO WE BASICALLY, IT WAS ABOUT TWO A WEEK FOR THE MONTH OF MAY.

SO THERE WERE MEETINGS THAT WERE, I'M JUST THINKING THROUGH THE TIMELINE WHERE THE BASE RATE FILING PACKAGE WAS PUBLISHED, APRIL 18TH AND THE DEADLINE FOR, TO PARTICIPATE WAS MAY 18TH.

SO IF A, IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAME TO A MEETING AND DECIDED THEY WANTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO SO BY MAY 18.

AND THAT'S WHY WE DID THEM BEFORE MAY 18TH, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT ANYONE TO MISS THAT DEADLINE.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD THE INFORMATION THEY NEEDED, UH, TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WANTED TO FILE A REQUEST TO PARTICIPATE IN.

BUT TH BUT THERE WERE SOME HELD AFTER MAY 18TH.

NO, NO.

THEY WERE ALL HELD BEFORE.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

CAN I SHOW READ, I THINK YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS.

W UM, QUESTION NUMBER ONE WAS, UH, SINCE YOU STILL HAVE THAT, UH, THAT WEBSITE OPEN FOR COMMENTS, DOES THAT MEAN ALTERNATIVES? HE PLANS TO FILE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON JULY 1ST IN THE, IN THE CITY CLERKS.

YES, WE ARE KEEPING IT OPEN.

THIS WAS BASICALLY OUR FIRST BATCH.

WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND GET, GET EM, YOU KNOW, THE ONES WE HAD OUT THERE SO THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY WAS, WEREN'T DELAYED.

SORRY.

I'VE TOLD I NEED TO SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MIC.

I APOLOGIZE IF THIS SEEMS LOUD AND EVERY ONCE A YEAR I'VE BEEN TOLD I NEED TO BE FAR AWAY FROM THE BIKE.

SO, UM, SO YES, THAT WAS THE FIRST BATCH.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO JUST SIT ON THEM TOO LONG SINCE WE HAD THEM FROM, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THEN FROM THE SPEAK-UP AUSTIN WEBSITE, BUT THEN WE WILL FILE THE, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT ROUND, UH, BY THAT DATE.

AND I, I, I DO APPRECIATE IT.

I THINK IT'S, IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE THOSE.

UM, AND THEN THIS WAS A QUESTION MORE ON THE TIMELINE.

SO THE EUC ITSELF, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO CONSIDER THE RATES AT THAT ONE MEETING IN OCTOBER.

THAT'S RIGHT.

SO WE'LL, WE'LL REVIEW THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER.

SO THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION WILL COME OUT ON SEPTEMBER 15TH.

AND THEN, SO WE'LL HAVE ABOUT A MONTH TO REVIEW IT INDIVIDUALLY, DIGEST IT.

UM, I THINK IF, IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY TO COME PREPARED TO DISCUSS THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO GET THOSE AUSTIN ENERGY BEFORE THE OCTOBER 17TH MEETING.

UM, AND, AND SO THAT WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE CONVERSATION ON THE 17TH THAT ADDRESSES ANY QUESTIONS WE HAVE, AND THEN WE'RE PREPARED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT DATE, OCTOBER 17TH.

AND IF I MIGHT JUST INTERJECT, ACTUALLY THE IAGS RECOMMENDATION IS SCHEDULED TO COME OUT AUGUST 31ST.

IT IS THE EXCEPTIONS THAT THE PARTICIPANTS WILL FILE TO THE RECOMMENDATION THAT ARE DUE SEPTEMBER 15.

SO YOU'LL ACTUALLY HAVE ABOUT SIX WEEKS.

SO, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS IT COMES OUT AND WE CAN PROVIDE IT TO YOU ALL AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN START REVIEWING.

THAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE MY SUGGESTION.

I KNOW THIS BLEEDS INTO THE NEXT ITEM IS WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO, UM, ALSO IN SEPTEMBER, AT LEAST HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

OBVIOUSLY WE, WE WOULDN'T TAKE ACTION, BUT AT LEAST WE COULD START TALKING ABOUT IT, ASK QUESTIONS, KNOWING THAT THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE EXCEPTIONS FILED.

MEETING AND BE PREPARED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AT THAT TIME OR NOT, OR NOT.

GOOD CALL.

I, I ACTUALLY DIDN'T REALIZE THAT, UM, THAT THE, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE OUT BEFORE THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.

SO I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

WE CAN HAVE A, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE S ON, AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL POST FOR ACTION AT THE OCTOBER

[00:25:01]

ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER, UH, READ.

IS THAT, IS THAT ALL OKAY.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK GOD, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, LIKE TO DEFINITELY HEAR FROM, UH, THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE AT THAT MEETING AND ANY OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING AND, AND USE THAT TO DEVELOP OUR RECOMMENDATION OR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE OCTOBER MEETING.

I THINK, UM, I HAVE, I HAVE A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT.

I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, AND IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WHEN WE, WHEN WE GET TO YOUR, UM, THE WORK GROUP, UM, DISCUSSION, I THINK IT'S ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

AND SO MAYBE LET'S OKAY, GREAT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. COOPER? OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT HELPFUL PRESENTATION OR ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON TO

[7. Discussion and possible action from Budget and Audit Workgroup (Sponsors: Chapman; Hopkins)]

UH, AND NOW I THINK THIS WILL PROBABLY TAKE UP THE BULK OF OUR MEETING.

WE'VE GOT A BUDGET AND AUDIT WORKING GROUP, UM, DISCUSSED, UH, POSTED FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

AND THERE ARE FIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AND I WILL, UH, OBVIOUSLY LET COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN WALK THROUGH THESE.

I THINK WE SHOULD DO IT ONE AT A TIME.

AND THEN, UM, HAVE A, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, UM, AFTER COMMISSIONER CHATMAN, AFTER YOU PRESENT YOUR, THE ITEM I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY, WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE, IF, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN.

UM, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, ABOUT EACH ITEM.

SO INDIVIDUALLY, SO LET'S JUST TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME.

LET ME, LET ME START, LET ME START.

UH, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, SOME THIS IS A CONSENSUS PROJECT, AND IF IT'S OKAY, I WILL GO AHEAD.

I'LL DISCUSS REG THE FIRST COUPLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND HOWEVER MUCH LET'S DO IT, DO IT THAT WAY.

UH, ALL OF WHICH IS THE REC RECOMMENDATIONS.

ONE AND TWO, I WILL SPEAK, I WILL SPEAK TO, UH, WHICH IS AS, AS MS. COOPER'S, UH, STATED THERE HAVE BEEN 300, 300 COMMENTS, AND I'M GLAD THEY ARE POSTED PEOPLE.

THEY ARE HEARTFELT COMMENTS.

THEY ARE.

IF, IF I HAVE NOT HONESTLY PERSONALLY READ EVERY SINGLE ONE, BUT I IDENTIFIED THREE OF THE 300 THAT DID NOT SUPPORT THE RIGHT PACKAGE AS PROPOSED.

THE FACT IS MANY OF THE PEOPLE RETIRED SCHOOL TEACHERS, RETIRED CITY EMPLOYEES, OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE WORKING TWO JOBS, UH, AND TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET.

UH, IT DOES NOT.

WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HAVING A ROUGH TIME SUNDAY'S FRONT PAGE HEADLINE THAT SPOKE TO THE RISING RENTS AND PEOPLE SAYING ENOUGH, I'VE LIVED HERE ALL MY LIFE.

I'M LEAVING AUSTIN.

IT, IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE, IT REFLECTS MANY OF THE COMMENTS, THE 300 COMMENTS THAT ARE REFLECTED IN THE, IN THE EMAIL THAT YOU RECEIVED TODAY, POSTED ON THE COUNCIL ON THE CITY CLERK'S WEBSITE, THE TIMING FOR A RATE INCREASE.

IT COULD NOT BE WORSE WITH INFLATION, GENERALLY PEOPLE HAVING A HARD TIME.

I, I ASK, I ASK A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT THE TIMING OF THE RIGHT REVIEW.

IS THIS REALLY THE TIME TO BE INCREASING RIGHTS, PARTICULARLY FOR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS? I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE TO CONSIDER IS I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT.

I HAVEN'T, THAT'S NOT OUR JOB,

[00:30:02]

BUT ALL THE, WHICH IS WE'LL SEE WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE.

WHETHER EVERY DOLLAR THAT IS BEING ASKED FOR IS NECESSARY.

AND IN ORDER TO LOWER THE LOWER THE DEFICIT, OR KEEP UP THE RESERVE, UH, OR TO MAINTAIN THE, UH, RATINGS WITH THE NEW YORK BANKERS, REGARDLESS, PEOPLE ARE HAVING A ROUGH TIME AND THE REFLECTED THERE, I CHANGED THE WORDING THAT EACH OF YOU HAVE.

UH, AND, UH, AND BEFORE YOU BOTH, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST MONTH, I RECOMMENDED A DELIBERATIVE POLL AND ITEM ONE.

AND THAT TAKES TIME THAT DOES TAKE TIME.

THE PUC, UH, HAD A PROCESS IN EVERY IOU SERVICE AREA YEARS AGO, AND THEY BROUGHT IN OUTSIDE EXPERTS TO DO THAT.

UH, WHAT I CHANGED, WHAT I CHANGED HERE IN ITEM ONE WAS TO DROP THE WORD DELIBERATIVE.

SO IT WOULD BE A POLL.

NOW WE HAVE 300 AUSTIN ENERGY THAT A GREAT JOB, GREAT JOB IN TERMS OF OUTREACH, AS YOU DISCUSSED, BUT ALL ARE, WHICH IS THE CON CONCEPT IS STILL THERE TO GET A CONSUMER CONCERN ACROSS SECTION OF CONSUMER INPUT.

SO THAT THE INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER AND COUNSEL KNOW THAT THOSE 300 COMMENTS WHO HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING, THIS IS THE STRAW THAT BREAKS THE CAMEL'S BACK.

THAT THAT WAS HER, NOT JUST COMMENTS FROM, FROM A FEW ARE THAT WERE LOOPED TOGETHER BY A BUNCH OF GROUPS.

LET'S, LET'S HEAR IT FROM A CROSS SECTION, AUSTIN ENERGY, IN MY OPINION, COULD UTILIZE EXISTING STAFF TO DO THAT, OR THEY COULD DO, UH, INTERAGENCY CONTRACT, UH, WITH ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY TO GO OUT AND START FRESH AND DO AN RFP WOULD TAKE TOO LONG.

WE, WE AGREE, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS, AND IF WE SAY POSTPONE THIS TILL NEXT YEAR, UH, THE RATE INCREASE WILL BE IN EFFECT NEXT YEAR, UH, UTILITY AND THAT'S FOR FIVE YEARS.

SO IF WE, IF WE WANT COUNSEL AND SETTING RIGHTS TO KNOW WHAT CONSUMERS ARE SAYING BEYOND THE 300 COMMENTS, WHICH AT LEAST 300, I COUNTED 308, BUT AT LEAST 300 SAID, NO, IF THE TIME FOR INPUT IS NOW, AND THAT THAT'S THOUGHTS, THE RECOMMENDATION ONE WAS CHANGED.

SO IT WOULD BE A SIMPLE POLL, NOT, NOT THE DELIBERATIVE POLL, WHICH REQUIRES A LOT MORE TIME AND PROCESS.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, THIS AUSTIN ENERGY CARE TO WEIGH IN ON, ON THAT RECOMMENDATION.

A BROADER SCOPE, THAT'S WHY IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO TAKE ON, YOU KNOW, THIS IN A WAY THAT DOES, UH, HAVE A, UH, A BROADER, UM, YOU KNOW, REVIEW WITH, WITH THE PROFESSIONAL, UH, YOU KNOW, POLLING CONSULTANT.

UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE EDITS THAT YOU HAVE MADE, UH, RECOGNIZING I THINK WE BOTH HAD EXPERIENCED WITH THE DELIBERATIVE POLL AND THAT, THAT IS QUITE AN UNDERTAKING.

UM, I, I STILL DO LOOK, YOU KNOW, SORT OF TO THE TIMING OF EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE, UM, AND, AND HOW WE STILL MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THAT DONE THE, THE INTER-AGENCY AGREEMENT, UNFORTUNATELY, REALLY DOESN'T ELIMINATE SOME OF THE, UH, THE PROCUREMENT RE TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE.

UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF, IN TERMS OF OUR STAFF, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY EXPERTS, UM, IN, IN DOING SOME OF THESE POLLS AND, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT, UM, YOU KNOW, GET A BENEFIT FROM HAVING A THIRD PARTY, I GUESS I WOULD ALSO ASK, LIKE, WHAT, WHAT MORE ARE YOU TRYING TO ASK? LIKE, WHAT DO YOU SEE THIS POLL ASKING? YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU THINK THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE BETTER WITH THE CUSTOMERS AND GET A, MORE OF A RESPONSE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALREADY EMAILED THEM ALL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THINGS AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT QUESTIONS ARE YOU GOING FOR? AND AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT IN TERMS OF, OF THE BASE RATE REVIEW, BUT TO THE EXTENT THIS HAS

[00:35:01]

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

PLEASE GO AHEAD AND RESPOND TO THEN LET'S HAVE A CONVERSATION AMONG THE GROUP.

SO SORTA, CERTAINLY, UH, ALL OF WHICH IS IF IT, I MEAN, WE DISCUSSED THIS OVER A MONTH AGO, THE CONCEPT OF OVER A MONTH AGO, I DON'T WANT ANYONE, IN MY OPINION, TO BE DISMISSIVE THAT THESE ARE JUST 300 ANGRY CUSTOMERS AND DON'T REPRESENT A CROSS SECTION OF AUSTIN ENERGY CUSTOMERS, BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND CON AND, AND COMMERCIAL.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE CONCEPT.

UH, CERTAINLY, UH, CERTAINLY WE CAN LOOK AT QUESTIONS FROM PAST POLLS THAT I REFERENCED, UH, AND CERTAINLY THE PEOPLE ON THE WORK GROUP CAN HELP IN DEVELOPING THE QUESTIONS.

PER RATE PROPOSAL WAS PRESENTED, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S CERTAINLY ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, AND THIS IS ONLY THE SECOND TIME, UH, THAT AUSTIN ENERGY'S ATTEMPTED TO DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS.

UM, ANYBODY ELSE ON THE COMMISSION LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? YEAH, THIS IS CARRIE.

I, I'M NOT SURE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT EXACTLY WE'RE TRYING TO PULL FOR IS DO YOU, RANDY AND ENVISION, THIS IS JUST AN UPPER DOWN, DO WE LIKE THE PROPOSAL OR NOT LIKE THE PROPOSAL, BECAUSE I READ QUITE A FEW OF THE COMMENTS AND WHILE THEY WERE YOU'RE CORRECT.

OVERWHELMINGLY NEGATIVE ABOUT ANYTHING THAT WOULD INCREASE RATES OR AT LEAST INCREASE THE BASE RATE.

UM, AT THE SAME TIME THEY HAD MANY, MANY, MANY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO HOW WE SHOULD GO AT IT, WHAT WE SHOULD DO INSTEAD, WHO SHOULD BENEFIT, WHO SHOULD PAY.

AND I, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW A POLL HELPS US GET AN ANSWER TO THAT.

UH, ALL OF, ALL OF WHICH IS I DON'T WANT ANYONE SINCE I DEVELOPED THE QUESTION ONE, I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO BE DISMISSIVE OF THOSE 300 PLUS COMMENTS.

ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, IF I UNDERSTAND IF ADDITION AND I THROW THIS OUT, IF ADDITIONAL TIME IS REQUIRED TO DO A FULL PLEDGE DELIBERATIVE POLL, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WOULD SUPPORT, EVEN IF IT DOES NOT FIT WITHIN THE JANUARY OR CITY COUNCIL DEADLINE FOR THE RIGHT REVIEW? I THINK WE'D HAVE TO JUST HAVE A DISCUSSION MORE ON, ON WHAT WE WOULD BE POLLING ABOUT, UM, AND, AND HOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT INFORMATION ARE WE REALLY TRYING TO GET FROM CUSTOMERS.

SO THERE'S CERTAINLY A DISCUSSION WE CAN HAVE AND TALK FURTHER ABOUT THAT.

ALL OF WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT CHARGE, WHICH IS ADOPTED ANNUALLY BY COUNCIL SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE RIGHT REVIEW, THIS WOULD BE DATA THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THEM FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY, LOW INCOME AND LOW INCOME PROGRAMS. AND THEREFORE IF IT SPILLED OVER, UH, IF IT SPILLED OVER INTO THE FOLLOWING YEAR, 2023, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IF, IF YOU WOULD SUPPORT THAT CONCEPT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ALL OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY, SENIOR MANAGEMENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE, WE'RE, WE WOULD SUPPORT EXPLORING FURTHER WITH YOU ON IF THAT IS THAT, IS THAT ENOUGH OF A QUALIFIER? I THINK, YOU KNOW, UM, I JUST, MY 2 CENTS, I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF A POLE.

I THINK THAT IT COULD BE VERY USEFUL.

UM, I AM ALSO, I GUESS, SORT OF I'M STRUGGLING WITH, UH, HOW TO FIT IT IN, INTO THE EXISTING PROCESS.

UM, AND, AND SORT OF IN MY MIND, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, IN AN IDEAL WORLD, WE, WE WOULD HAVE, UM, HAD A POLE IN PLACE.

UM, YOU KNOW, W WHEN THE, AS SOON AS THE RATE FILING PACKAGE WAS PRESENTED, UM, OR THE WAY RATE

[00:40:01]

AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT THAT COULD BE A PROCESS IMPROVEMENT FOR THE NEXT, UH, RATE REVIEW, UM, PUT THAT IN, IN ADVANCE, THAT'D BE SOMETHING THAT THEY, YOU SEE, UM, HAS RECOMMENDED, OR, YOU KNOW, ENSURE THAT A, THAT, YOU KNOW, PUTS THAT IN PLACE AS A PART OF THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

SO THAT TO ADDRESS YOUR, YOUR, UM, POINT COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN ABOUT, UM, THE, THE FOLKS WHO ARE ACTIVELY REACHING OUT SOMEHOW THEIR, THEIR VOICES BEING DISCOUNTED BECAUSE, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE RESTAURANT REVIEWS, LIKE ONLY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE REALLY UPSET ARE REVIEWING.

UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THOUGH THAT, YOU KNOW, I ALSO LOOKED AT THE COMMENTS AND I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO, IF YOU ARE A, IF YOU'RE THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER AND YOU READ THOSE, WHICH I WOULD EXPECT THAT THEY WOULD DO, UM, THAT THEY WOULD BELIEVE THAT TO BE A PART OF THEIR, UM, CHARGE.

I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO IGNORE THOSE COMMENTS.

I MEAN, I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF THEM AND, AND THERE ARE VERY CLEAR.

UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION, I THINK WE DO HAVE THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER OR CONSUMER ADVOCATE WHO IS THERE TO ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE, UM, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL, UM, UH, CUSTOMER CLASS.

SO I, I'M JUST, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT HOW TO FIT IT IN.

UH, AND I THINK IT COULD BE A PROCESS IMPROVEMENT FOR THE NEXT RATE REVIEW, AND THEN SEPARATELY, I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER POLLING, UM, ON EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROGRAMS THAT, UM, THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET TO HERE NEXT AND LIKE ITEM NUMBER THREE.

UM, BUT THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT CHARGE BEING ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS IF WE, AS A COMMISSION AND TAKE UP THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT CHARGE AS SOMETHING WE'D LIKE TO REVIEW FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS WE GET, UH, POLLING DATA ON THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM.

UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW COMPLICATED THAT WOULD BE, BUT I, I GUESS I, I, I DON'T SEE HOW ADDITIONAL POLLING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PENDING RATE REVIEW WILL ADD SIGNIFICANT VALUE.

I'M HAVING DIFFICULTY SEEING THAT THOSE ARE MY 2 CENTS.

I THINK I SHOULD.

OH, I'LL GO.

THEREFORE FOR RIGHT NOW, I, I WITHDRAW THIS RECOMMENDATION, UH, BUT ONE ASKED THAT IT BE KEPT ALIVE AND, UH, KEPT ALIVE AS A FUTURE DISCUSSION ITEM.

I JUST, I WAS GOING TO SAY, I THINK I SHARE SIMILAR CONCERNS AT THIS JUNCTURE BECAUSE OF AUSTIN ENERGY'S EFFORTS TO DATE OF KIND OF PUTTING THE MARKETING OUT, GETTING THE EMAILS OUT, POSTING ALL OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA AND HOSTING THE MEETINGS THAT IF THAT THEN GETTING A POLL PUSHED OUT AT THIS POINT AFTER ALL THAT'S ALREADY HAPPENED, IT MIGHT BE CONFUSING TO FOLKS TO WHO HAVE ALREADY SEEN COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN THE PROCESS TO THEN RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL CAUSE I'M ASSUMING YOU WERE ENVISIONING THIS BEING PUSHED OUT TO ALL THE CUSTOMERS THROUGH EMAIL, OR I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION.

HOW, HOW WOULD, HOW DID YOU KIND OF ENVISION PUSHING THE POLL OUT TO THE PUBLIC? OKAY.

ALL, ALL OF ALL OF WHICH HAS THE RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS SENT OUT WAS BEFORE THE 300, UH, CAME IN 300 PLUS CAME IN.

SO ALL OF THAT, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, IF, IF WE'RE SATISFIED, IF WE'RE SATISFIED THAT AUSTIN ENERGY DID A OUTSTANDING OUTREACH THROUGH CUSTOMER BILLS, BILL INSERTS AT COMMUNITY MEETINGS, THIS MAY NOT BE NECESSARY NOW.

UH, ALL, UH, LIKE I SAY, THIS WAS PROPOSED AT OUR LAST MEETING BEFORE WE HAD THE BENEFIT OF READING THOSE 300, UH, COMMENTS AND THERE, THEREFORE, UH, I DO THINK THIS A AS COUNCIL REVIEWS NEXT FOR NEXT YEAR, UH, THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT CHARGE, UH, PUSHING IT OUT TO FIVE YEARS, FIVE YEARS NEXT STRIPE REVIEW 2027, I TOO, TOO FAR OUT.

BUT I THINK HAVING, UH, PUBLIC INPUT REGARDING FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR WOULD BE HELPFUL.

AND THEREFORE,

[00:45:01]

THIS IS COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL.

I'D LIKE TO, UM, ASK IF WE, YOU WOULD CONSIDER RANDY MODIFYING THIS TO, UM, A RECOMMENDATION THAT EITHER THE, THIS, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY ITSELF IN THE HEARING OR, AND OR THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE, UH, THAT WE, THAT WE URGE THEM TO, UM, MAKE CERTAIN THAT ALL OF THE, UH, FEEDBACK FORMS, UH, AND ALL THE INFORMATION IS PRESENTED TO THE, UM, HEARING EXAMINER AS PART OF THE HEARING PROCESS.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE FACT THAT THEY'RE JUST FILED, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS, AND IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THE CITY'S GUIDELINES FOR THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER ARE, UM, NOT RESTRICTED, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WOULD DIRECT HIM TO CONSIDER THESE MATTERS.

SO I JUST, UH, I AGREE THAT IT'S A, IT'S A VERY POWERFUL, UH, UM, LIST OF, UH, PEOPLE WHO I WOULDN'T CHARACTERIZE THEM AS THE COMPLAINER'S.

I WOULD CHARACTERIZE THEM AS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE, WHO ARE SO SIGNIFICANTLY INVESTED IN THEIR OWN GENERAL ECONOMIC WELFARE AND THE, OF THE CITY'S, UH, UH, COST OF LIVING THAT THEY TOOK THE TIME TO SUBMIT THEM.

AND THEY OUGHT TO BE GIVEN SIGNIFICANT WELL, THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN DUE, WAIT, I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S REALLY FAIR COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL.

AND I CERTAINLY DIDN'T MEAN TO IMPLY THAT, THAT THE FOLKS WHO FILED COMMENTS WERE, WERE JUST CON COMPLAINER'S.

CAUSE I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

AND I THINK THAT, UM, AS I'M, AS I MENTIONED, I THINK ANYONE WHO, WHO READS THOSE WILL WILL UNDERSTAND, UM, THE, THE REAL IMPACT THAT, THAT A RATE INCREASE WILL HA WILL HAVE ON, ON, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL CONSUMERS.

AND I THINK THAT, THAT, UH, I WOULD SUPPORT A MODIFICATION TO, UH, RECOMMENDATION NUMBER ONE, ALONG ALONG THOSE LINES.

IF, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE COMMISSIONER CROSS-SELL, I WAS SIMPLY GOING TO ASK IF YOU COULD, UH, UH, GRAPH THAT LANGUAGE.

UH, SO WE COULD HAVE THAT BEFORE US, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION LATER IN THE MEETING.

DO YOU WANT TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO THEN WHILE COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL IS WORKING ON THAT? CERTAINLY ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, SPOKE TO THIS LAST TIME ABOUT AUSTIN ENERGY.

AS, AS WE HEAR ON CAPE VIEW EVERY NIGHT, BOOMTOWN AUSTIN, UH, IS GROWING AT EXPONENTIAL RIGHTS, AND THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT THAT'S MAYBE THE GROWTH RATES COULD SLOW DOWN, BUT ALL THE WITCHES PEOPLE WERE CONTINUING TO MOVE TO OUR GREAT CITY AND WITH THAT BUSINESSES ARE MOVING HERE.

UH, AND, UH, IF I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE, UH, IF I, IF I SAW ABOUT A THOUSAND PEOPLE MOVING HERE WEEKLY COULD BE WRONG ON THAT NUMBER, BUT IT'S A LARGE NUMBER.

AND, UH, AND ALL OF WHICH IS W AUSTIN ENERGY HAS PICKED UP OVER 30,000 NEW CUSTOMERS SINCE THE LAST GREAT REVIEW.

IF I UNDERSTAND IT, CORRECT, I'M SORRY, 80,000, EXCUSE ME, 80,000 NEW CUSTOMERS.

UH, ALL OF WHICH, ALL OF WHICH IS YES.

SINCE 2009, RIGHT? THE LAST GRADE REVIEW WAS 2016.

SO IT'S NOT SINCE THE LAST BREAK REVIEW.

ADDITIONAL TREE TRIMMING DUE TO THE VERY CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT, UH, AND APPROVED THAT AT THESE VARIOUS MEETINGS, NEW MATERS, NEW EVERYTHING, AND, AND, AND HAS RESOLVED, UH, THE NUMBER OF FTES MAY BE STABLE, BUT ALL OF WHICH HAS AUSTIN ENERGY IS SUBJECT TO RISING COSTS.

ALL OF, ALL OF WHICH HAS, UH, AS I, AS I SPOKE LAST MONTH, UH, WE KNOW THAT THE USAGE IS DOWN AS INDICATED IN THE RIGHT REVIEW COST.

AUSTIN ENERGY HAS RISING COSTS DUE TO INFLATION, DUE TO

[00:50:01]

THE QUESTION IS WHO PAYS THOSE COSTS AS WE SAW, UH, LA LAST MONTH THERE, UH, 3,500 PEOPLE, UH, WERE CUT OFF FOR HOURS BECAUSE OF SYSTEM OVER OVERLOAD, NEW SUBSTATION JUST CAME ON TO SERVE THE ADDITIONAL CUSTOMERS IN THAT FEEDER SERVED BY THAT FEEDER.

WE ARE LOOKING AT GROWTH, EXPONENTIAL GROWTH IN THE QUESTION IS RAINY STREET IS A GOOD EXAMPLE.

LOOKING AT HIGH RISE, HIGH RISES, NEW DEVELOPMENT.

WHO'S PAYING FOR THAT, OBVIOUSLY THE BUILDER OR DEVELOPER, UH, WHO PASSES THAT ALONG AND PEOPLE PAY IT IN, IN A, EVENTUALLY IN A 30 YEAR MORTGAGE, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIFELONG RESIDENTS, UH, SHOULD NOT BE COUCHED WITH THE COST OF SERVING NEW LOAD.

THEREFORE, THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, ABOUT THE ASSIGNMENT OF COST, UH, IS THAT THOSE COSTS FOR GROWTH BE APPROPRIATELY ASSIGNED.

THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.

AND I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

SO AGAIN, I THINK I'D APPRECIATE, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY'S, UH, INPUT ON THIS ONE.

UM, BEFORE WE HAVE A, A LARGER DISCUSSION, IF YOU'D, IF YOU'D LIKE TO WEIGH IN, HI, MARK NEBRASKA, I'M THE CFO OF AUSTIN ENERGY.

SO, UM, YOU'RE RIGHT.

WE HAD HAD A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN OUR CUSTOMER COUNT OVER THE LAST DECADE.

UM, AND WE DO ASSIGN COSTS TO CLASSES OF CUSTOMERS BASED UPON THE DEMANDS THAT THEY PUT ON THE SYSTEM.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL, OR THEY TAKE PRIMARY OR SECONDARY SERVICE.

UM, AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, UM, YOUR DESCRIPTION IS, UH, WE WOULD HAVE A, UM, AN ALLOCATOR BASED UPON WHEN YOU BEGAN TAKING SERVICE.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE AN ASSIGNMENT BASED UPON, UM, SOME SORT OF DATE.

SO YOU HAVE MULTIPLE CLASSES OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS, NEWER CUSTOMER VERSUS OLDER CUSTOMERS, NOT NECESSARILY HOW THEY USE THE SYSTEM, BUT HOW LONG THEY'D BEEN AT CUSTOMER.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.

I DON'T, AM I, AM I WRONG IN THAT? NOT ATTACK.

THAT HOUSE TO, TO THE NEAREST POLE.

NOT EXACTLY.

ALL OF WHICH IS IT'S NOT WHEN YOU MOVE TOWN, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SUGGESTING ARE W WHERE YOU MOVE FROM NOT, NOT SUGGESTING OR GOING THERE, THE REC THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMEND, I, THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING IN MANY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE HOUSES BEING BULLDOZED, GOOD HOMES THAT ARE 1200, 1500 SQUARE FEET, UH, THAT ARE BEING BULLDOZED FOR REPLACEMENT HOMES THAT ARE 4,000 SQUARE FEET THAT ARE BEING BUILT WITH TWO SYSTEMS, WAS SWIMMING POOL OUT BACK, AND SOME CASES, UH, THAT THE, UH, AND SELLING IN, IN THE RANGE TWO TO $10 MILLION, THAT ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, UH, NEAR WHERE I LIVE AN ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER IS WAITING BULLDOZED.

AND IT'S GOING ON BOTH IN SOUTH AUSTIN, NORTH AUSTIN, SHOPPING CENTERS, BEING BULLDOZED AND DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND DOING GOOD WORK TO DEVELOP REPLACEMENT.

UH, BUT THE CHARGE WOULD NOT BE THE CHARGE WOULD BE TO THE BUILDER DEVELOPER AS WE MOVE FORWARD AT NOT, NOT CREATING SUBCLASSES, BUT THAT THOSE CHARGES THAT ARE PAID ARE NOT JUST THE $200 TO STRING A LINE FROM

[00:55:01]

AND, UH, BUT RATHER THE CONCEPT IS THAT THE BUILDER DEVELOPER, AS PART OF THE FEE, LOOK AT THE ENTIRE OVERHEAD OF AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF POWER TO SERVE THIS INCREASE OF CUSTOMER INCREASE OF CUSTOMERS.

SO NOW IT WOULD NOT BE REFLECTED AS A, UH, SPECIAL TARIFFS WITHIN ANY COMMERCIAL PLANTS.

IT WOULD BE PAID THROUGH ENTIRELY THROUGH DEVELOPMENT AND BELT OR FEES.

SO TO THE EXTENSOR AND BUILDS A LARGE HOME, THAT STANDARD RESIDENTIAL SERVICE COULD NOT SERVE.

THEY PAY A CONTRIBUTION TO ANY CONSTRUCTION, AND THERE ARE HOMES IN AUSTIN THEY'RE LARGE ENOUGH THAT REQUIRE THREE PHASE TYPE SERVICE.

AND THEY, THEY, THEY PAY FOR THAT.

I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS THOSE TYPES OF LONG-TERM SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE AS THE CITY ITSELF GROWS.

AND THOSE ARE ASSIGNED BY CLASS.

AND I DON'T HAVE A WAY TO ASSIGN THAT TO AN INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMER.

FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEONE BUILDS A HOME SOMEWHERE IN AUSTIN AND SAYING A YEAR OR TWO FROM NOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INCREASE OUR BILLING SYSTEM FOR MORE CUSTOMERS TO GO TO THAT CUSTOMER AND SAY, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO CHARGE YOU X DOLLARS BECAUSE OF THE DECISION I HAVE TO MAKE A YEAR FROM NOW OR FIVE YEARS FROM NOW.

SO THEY, THEY PAY THE COST, CONNECT THEM THROUGH THE LINE EXTENSION FEE, UM, AND ANY NON-STANDARD SERVICE THEY PAY AS AS WELL.

UM, BUT I DON'T HAVE A WAY OTHER THAN ASSIGNING COSTS TO CLASSES, A CUSTOMER TO ASSIGN IT TO A SUB SET OF THOSE CUSTOMERS WITHOUT HAVING THEM BE A CLASS OF CUSTOMER.

AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED ABOUT THE DATA ISSUE.

AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS THE RECOMMENDATION.

THE WORDING IS THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WORK IN CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE UNDERLYING RATIONALE.

ALL OF WHICH IS WE'RE NOT ALL OF WHICH IS THIS IS GOING TO TAKE TIME.

THIS IS GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME.

AND, AND TO, TO LOOK AT, TO LOOK AT THE HARD COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUILDING, BOOM THAT WE ARE SAYING.

SO NOT ALL OF WHICH IS IT, THIS IS A GENERAL POLICY CONCEPT AND NOT, NOT SOMETHING, UH, ANYTHING MORE THAN THAT.

UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ASKING AUSTIN ENERGY CITY COUNCIL PUT ON YOUR THINKING CAPS, THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.

WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND WE, I MEAN, WE HAVE A WHOLE SECTION ON HOW HE ASSIGNED COSTS FOR THE COST OF SERVICE.

AND, UH, WE ALWAYS TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ALLOCATING THOSE COSTS TO EACH CLASS OF CUSTOMER BASED UPON HOW THAT CLASS USES THE SYSTEM.

AND NOT ONLY DO WE LOOK AT SORT OF THE STANDARD APPROACHES USING INDUSTRY, BUT WE ALSO LOOK AT SOME UNIQUE AND SAY, WOULD THIS BE A MORE RATIONAL WAY TO DO IT? SO WE DO TAKE THOSE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE DO OUR COST OF SERVICE, BUT WE HAD TO HAVE A MORE IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION ON, ON HOW WE DETERMINE THOSE COSTS WITH YOU.

UM, SO MARK, IS THERE SOME KIND OF WRITTEN DOCUMENT THAT DESCRIBES THE COST CAUSATION ANALYSIS YOU WERE JUST DESCRIBING THAT WE COULD REVIEW? YES.

IT'S IN OUR RATE REVIEW REPORT THAT WE FILED, IT'S A ONLINE, SOMEBODY SEND US THE LINK TO THEM.

I MEAN, IT HELP US DIVE INTO THE SPECIFIC, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WADE THROUGH A LOT.

SURE.

MARK.

IT, IT SOUNDS TOO, ARE YOU, ARE YOU DONE DAVE? YEAH.

BUT I GUESS I JUST, MY VIEW OF THIS IS IT SOUNDS LIKE BASED ON THE TEXT OF THIS PROPOSED ITEM, I'M HEARING THAT AUSTIN, ENERGY'S ALREADY DOING THIS.

I WAS JUST GONNA ASK BASED ON HOW THIS IS WRITTEN, YOU KNOW, RECOMMEND, AND THIS IS KIND OF WHAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, RECOMMEND THAT AUSTIN ENERGY AND CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE UNDERLYING RATIONALE FOR THE REVENUE DEFICIT.

IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING AUSTIN ENERGY ALREADY DOES.

WELL, I'M HAVING TO INTERPRET SOME OF THE WORDS ON IT, BUT JUST, JUST TAKING A COST OF SERVICE STUDY DOES, IT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

IT'S OUR RATES AREN'T GENERATING ENOUGH REVENUE FOR OUR TEST YEAR.

SO THEN WE SET THOSE RATES TO ACHIEVE THAT LEVEL OF REVENUE FOR THAT TEST YEAR.

UM, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT COSTS TO SERVICE DOES.

AND THEN YOU ALL, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALL DO AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE GROWTH AND HOW TO ASSIGN THOSE EXPENSES.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THAT'S OUTLINED IN OUR RATE REVIEW.

UM, I GUESS MY POINT IS, IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME OF THIS IS ALREADY BEING DONE AND THERE MAY BE A WAY FOR US TO KIND OF DIG INTO IT AT THE COMMISSION LEVEL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.

[01:00:01]

WE JUST MAY NEED TO DIG IN A LITTLE BIT INTO AREAS WHERE WE HAVE QUESTIONS.

UH, COMMISSIONER BOWEN.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT IS THE, UH, THE ANALYSIS FOR THE RIGHT REVIEW WAS BASED ON THE TEST HERE.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND WHAT'S MISSING.

WHAT IS MISSING IS AUSTIN ENERGY HAS A REVENUE DEFICIT AS WE, AS WE HAVE LEARNED.

AND THEREFORE, HOW DO YOU MAKE UP FOR THAT REVENUE ESTIMATE? DO YOU CHARGE IT GENERALLY AMONG THE EXISTING RIGHT CLASSES OR DO YOU TO ACCOUNT FOR GROWTH? WE APPROVE CONTRACTS, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR, FOR NEW MA FOR, UH, NEW METERS, UH, NOT NECESSARILY REPLACEMENT MATERS BECAUSE THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE LARGELY INSTALLED, BUT RATHER METERS TO MEET THE FUTURE NEEDS SUBSTATIONS, UH, EMPLOY EMPLOYEES, TRUCKS, ALL OF WHICH IS THE QUESTION IS, DO WE SADDLE IT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE ARE A GRADE THAT AUSTIN ENERGY NEEDS MORE MONEY IS WHO'S GOING TO PAY THE COST.

AND MY, MY RECOMMENDATION ITEM TO, UH, THE SECOND SENTENCE IS THAT THE REVIEW INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH.

AND THE PROPER ASSIGNMENT WERE AGREED.

THE FIRST SENTENCE COVERS COVERS WHAT, WHAT MARK JUST DESCRIBED, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE IN MY VIEW, AS I LOOKED, AS I LOOKED AT THEM ARE MARGINAL, UH, COMMISSIONER REED.

I THINK YOU, YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST THAT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN A WAY THAT'S CLEAR THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ISN'T NECESSARILY, UM, WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE IN THE RATE REVIEW BECAUSE CLEARLY THEY'VE DONE AN ANALYSIS ALREADY OF PROPER ALLOCATION OF COSTS TO THE DIFFERENT CUSTOMER.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS REVIEWING A NEW IDEA OF ASSIGNING SOME COSTS TO NEW GROWTH GOING FORWARD.

I'M NOT SURE HOW TO WRITE IT IN A WAY THAT'S CLEAR, BUT I CAN SEE READING THIS.

IT'S NOT QUITE CLEAR.

SO MAYBE THERE'S A SUCH AS CLAUSE SUCH AS LOOKING AT NEW DEVELOPMENT FEES OR SOMETHING TO THAT EXTENT.

UM, THAT MAKES IT CLEAR.

WE'RE NOT ASKING US TO ENERGY TO REDO THEIR COST ALLOCATION STUDIES IN THE MIDDLE OF A RATE CASE.

WE'RE ASKING CITY COUNCIL TO LOOK AT, UH, POTENTIALLY A POTENTIAL NEW WAY TO ALLOCATE COSTS THAT WOULD PUT SOME OF THAT COST ON NEW DEVELOPMENT AS IT COMES ON.

UM, I HAD TO COMMENT ON IT.

I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING.

SO THERE'S TWO BASIC WAYS OF SETTING RATES.

THERE'S ONE CALLED THE EMBEDDED APPROACH OR HISTORICAL APPROACH WE'RE USED ACTUAL COSTS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE DO HERE AT AUSTIN ENERGY.

IN FACT, THAT'S WHAT IS PERMITTED IN MOST STATES, THERE'S ANOTHER APPROACH CALLED MARGINAL COST WHERE YOU'RE, UM, UH, COMING UP WITH THE COST OF THE NEXT ELEMENT NEXT KWH, WHAT DOES IT COST TO PROVIDE THE NEXT KWH? UM, AND THAT'S CALLED A MARGINAL COST APPROACH THAT IS DISALLOWED IN MOST STATES.

I ONLY KNOW OF ONE OR TWO STATES THAT ALLOW IT.

AND I KNOW IN TEXAS, THEY DON'T KNOW HOW MARGINAL COSTS, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE REALLY DOING IS YOU'RE BASING OUR COSTS ON THE ACTUAL COST.

BUT WHAT YOU THINK THAT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE, UM, WHERE IN THE, UH, EMBEDDED HISTORICAL COSTS, YOU HAVE ACTUAL RECEIPTS AND KWH THAT YOU BASE IT ON.

AND SO IT'S, UH, YOU CAN, YOU CAN PROVE IT.

AND TO THE EXTENT YOU CAN MAKE ADJUSTMENTS KNOWN AND MEASURABLE.

SO ONCE YOUR EAR CLOSES, YOU MAKE A NOTE, A MEASURABLE CHANGE TO THAT.

UH, BUT BEYOND THAT, WE DON'T, UH, WE DON'T SET RATES FOR WHAT WE THINK MAY HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.

UM, IF WE FIND OUT THAT OUR RATES ARE, UH, ARE OVER RECOVERY OR UNDER RECOVERY, WE'LL COME BACK AND HAVE ANOTHER RATE CASE TO RESET THOSE RATES BASED UPON A NEW TEST YEAR.

IS IT NOT TRUE THOUGH, THAT IN THE WORLD OF

[01:05:01]

TRANSPORTATION OR WATER AND WASTEWATER, WE PUT IMPACT FEES ON DEVELOPERS ALL THE TIME THAT'S TO TRY TO PAY FOR THE GROWTH THAT'S COMING, BECAUSE WE KNOW FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THE, THE WATER TREATMENT AND THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT THAT SERVES PRESENT DAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE NEEDS AS NEW DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS.

SO, YEAH, AND WE DO THINGS LIKE THAT AND TRANSPORTATION TOO, RIGHT, WHERE WE PUT IMPACT FEES FOR FUTURE TRANSPORTATION COSTS ON OUR DEVELOPMENT.

I WOULD THINK, YOU KNOW, I, I'M SORT OF SPECULATING NOW HERE, LIKE COFFEE TALK, AN IMPACT FEE IS KIND OF LIKE A CONTRIBUTION TO ANY CONSTRUCTION WHERE WHEN A CUSTOMER COMES AND SAYS, I'M GOING TO BUILD THIS BUILDING, WE ASKED THEM TO GIVE US OUR LOAD PROJECTIONS.

AND WE, WE ENGINEER THAT, THAT CONNECTION SO THAT IT SERVES OUT OF MOUSE ENERGY TO THAT CUSTOMER, EVEN IF THEY DON'T USE IT.

SO THEY PAY THE CONTRIBUTION, ANY CONSTRUCTION THAT MATCHES THEIR LOAD FORECAST.

I THINK AS LIKE AN IMPACT FEE, WHEN A DEVELOPER SAYS, I'M GOING TO BUILD THIS NEW HOUSING AREA AND YOU SORT OF ESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF CARS AND THEY SAY, WELL, THEN YOU HAVE TO IMPROVE THIS INTERSECTION TO HANDLE THE CARS AND STUFF, EVEN IF THEY DON'T SHOW UP.

SO I THINK THAT'S HOW IT EQUATED, NOT SO MUCH THE UNKNOWN COSTS IN THE FUTURE, BUT WHAT'S THE CUSTOMER'S USAGE.

SO IN THAT EXTENT, I WOULD SAY WE DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT IN THAT CONTRIBUTION NET CONSTRUCTION.

SO I THINK I'M, I'M HEARING A COUPLE THINGS.

IT, IT SEEMS THE CONCEPT IS SUPER INTERESTING.

UM, AND, UH, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE A W W ONE THERE'S WE HAVE THE HISTORICAL TEST HERE AND, AND WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE FUTURE TEST YEARS IN TEXAS.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, SO, SO WE, WE ARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT ACTUAL EXPENSES FOR OUR TEST, YOUR PLUS AS MRS. DOMBROWSKI MENTIONED A KNOWN AND MEASURABLE CHANGES.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE CAN BE SOME ESTIMATES MADE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE, IF THEY REACH THAT STANDARD.

UM, AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT WHERE WE'RE CONSTRAINED IN, IN, UH, SEEKING THE DOLLARS NECESSARY TO RUN THE UTILITY FROM EXISTING CUSTOMERS AND, AND BASED ON A HISTORICAL TEST YEAR, AND, YOU KNOW, AS NEW FOLKS MOVE IN, THEY WILL FALL INTO THE EXISTING RATE CLASSES.

UM, UNTIL SUCH TIME WE HAVE ANOTHER RATE REVIEW IF WE HAVE, IF WE'VE GOTTEN TO THE POINT WHERE GROWTH HAS BEEN.

SO, UH, YOU KNOW, LARGE THAT NOW WE ARE UNDER RECOVERING.

AND SO WE NEED TO COME BACK IN AND SEEK ADDITIONAL, UM, RATE INCREASE, OR AS, AS MR. JOHN BOSSY MENTIONED, UH, UH, AN OVER RECOVERY, IT COULD BE REFUNDED.

UM, BUT I THINK, UH, CONSIDERING, AND THEN IT'S, IT'S ALMOST LIKE AT THE, AT THAT NEXT RATE REVIEW, IF WE WANTED TO CONTEMPLATE A DIFFERENT COST ALLOCATION METHOD, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CERTAINLY COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE CONCEPT IS REALLY INTERESTING.

UM, BUT I THINK THAT IT COULD GET REALLY COMPLICATED REALLY QUICKLY.

AND, AND THAT WOULD, WE, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD NEED SOME TYPE OF ECONOMICS UTILITY, UH, CONSULTANT TO DEVELOP A, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THE COST ALLOCATION WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THAT, UM, SORT OF CONSIDERING THESE PARAMETERS OR GUIDELINES.

UM, BUT SO I, I'M ALL OF THAT TO SAY, I DO THINK WE HAVE THE KAYAK, WHICH IS THE CONSTRUCTION AND AID OF, UM, NO CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CON CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS, I THINK JUST A POLICY.

AND, AND SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, A STANDALONE POLICY THAT WE COULD, UH, TAKE AND REVIEW GET, YOU KNOW, GET A PRESENTATION ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT IS THIS, HOW ARE YOU COLLECTING IT? HOW IS IT BEING ASSESSED? AND THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE THINK THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE TO PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, EXPAND OR INCREASE THOSE, AND WHO, WHO DOES IT APPLY TO? I MEAN, MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, DOES IT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS, KAYAK CONTRIBUTION, YEAH.

AND ANY NEW CUSTOMER.

TO WHOEVER BUYS THOSE HOMES.

SO, UM, IF SOMEONE WERE SAY WHERE TO BUILD THEIR OWN HOME, LIKE ON THE LOT, AND THEY'RE THE, UH, THE CONTRACTOR, YES.

THEY WOULD PAY THAT.

USUALLY AS, UH, AS COMMISSIONER CHATMAN POINTED OUT, IT'S USUALLY A DEVELOPER, THAT'S BUILDING A NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY WILL PUT ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THEY'LL PAY THE CONNECT TO, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY SYSTEM.

AND THEN THEY RECOVER THAT COST IN THE PROPERTY SALES

[01:10:01]

SO, SO MARK, UM, CAN YOU GIVE US SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, UM, IS THIS A FAIRLY MATURE SET OF CONVERSATIONS AS FAR AS FAR AS COST ALLOCATION, BASED UPON HISTORICAL DATA? I MEAN, HAS NEIGHBORHOOD HAD GUIDELINES ON THAT FOR YEARS? AND, AND, UH, IS THAT WHAT THE BASIS IS FOR WHAT AUSTIN ENERGY USES AS A GENERAL RULE? UM, AND THEN WHERE HAVE YOU SEEN DEVIATIONS OR WHERE IS AUSTIN ENERGY SAW OTHER WAYS BESIDES THE MAYBE BASELINE WAY THAT NEIGHBOR AS RECOMMENDED AS FAR AS COST CAUSATION AND ALLOCATION? YEAH.

SO THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE ON SELLING RATES COMES FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT AREAS, INCLUDING NEHRU AND PUC, UH, THROUGH THEIR APPLICATION OF, OF THESE RULES.

UM, AND CERTAINLY THE EMBEDDED OR HISTORICAL COST APPROACHES THE MOST PREVALENT BECAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE DISAGREEMENT ABOUT A FACT.

SO, UM, THERE IS, UH, SEVERAL STATES THAT DO ALLOW MARGINAL COST.

UM, IN FACT, I WAS FORMER DIRECTOR OF SALES, CITY LIGHT, UM, AND, UM, WE USE MARGINAL COSTS THERE.

SO I'M, I'M FAMILIAR WITH BOTH APPROACHES.

UM, BUT LIKE I SAID, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S MUCH MORE CONTROVERSIAL IN A MARGINAL ABOUT WHAT YOU INCLUDE BECAUSE YOU'RE INCLUDING COSTS THAT YOU HAVE NOT YET INCURRED.

UM, AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS A DISAGREEMENT THERE.

AND SO PUC AND OTHER BODIES THAT LOOK AT RATES TEND TO FAVOR THE, UM, THE EMBEDDED APPROACH, UH, TO SETTING RATES.

AND I IT'S GOING TO BE GOING ON IT'S MUCH LONGER THAN I'VE BEEN ALIVE.

I MEAN, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WHOLE HISTORY OF A RATE MAKING IT TO PUC.

SO I CAN'T TELL YOU THE ORIGINS OF IT, BUT, UH, IT GOES BACK TO, I GUESS, THE RAILROADS, WHEN THE SORT OF REGULATING RAILROADS, I'M GOING TO ARGUE AGAINST MY OWN SELF, BUT I'M LOOKING AT CHAPTER 3 95 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IS AUTHORIZED BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE.

UM, YOU CAN IMPOSE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND IMPACT FEES, BUT NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR ELECTRIC IT'S FOR, YOU KNOW, WATER WASTEWATER, ET CETERA.

SO, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S ACTUALLY, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO IT SPECIFICALLY FOR, UH, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT YOU CAN DO THINGS LIKE THE POLICY, YOU MENTIONED THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.

SO MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD JUST LOOK AT IS WHAT IS THE PO, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WITHIN THE EOC IS JURISDICTION THAT I THINK IT'S A POLICY OF, OF AUSTIN ENERGY THAT WE COULD, WE CAN REVIEW.

RIGHT? SO THE POLICY WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2013 EFFECTIVE IN 14, AND THEN, UH, IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN, SO IT TOOK SEVERAL YEARS FOR IT, UH, START COLLECTING ALL THOSE CONTRIBUTIONS AND NATIVE CONSTRUCTION AND IT, UM, AND THE DESIGN CRITERIA MALECON DICTATES, WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THAT, BUT BASICALLY IT'S TO CONNECT A CUSTOMER TO THE SYSTEM.

SO, UM, IT VARIES DEPENDING ON, UM, EACH CUSTOMER'S, UM, DESIGN WORK I'D LIKE TO WEIGH IN JUST FOR A MOMENT.

UM, IF I COULD, UM, THE, UH, CONTRIBUTIONS NATIVE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND IN THE PUBLIC TEXAS PUBLIC UTILITY ARENA SINCE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR ALMOST FOUR YEARS.

SO I THINK IT'S A KNOWN CONCEPT, CERTAINLY NOT PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, BUT, AND, AND, AND THE, THIS IS MY THOUGHT ON DOING SOMETHING, UH, LIKE THAT, UH, EXTENDING IT, UM, UH, TO NEW CUSTOMERS WON.

I ASSUME THAT THE NUMBERS WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF NEW CUSTOMERS SINCE THE LAST RIGHT CASE INDICATES NEW METERS.

AND AM I CORRECT ON THAT? UM, I THINK THAT, AND IF IT'S NOT NEW CO IF IT'S NOT NEW METERS BEING INSTALLED AND IT'S JUST SOMEBODY NEW MOVING INTO AN EXISTING HOUSE, YOU'RE NOT THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO CAPTURE THIS GROWTH.

NO, I THINK IT'S NEW.

WE USE THE TERM PREMISE.

SO IT'S A NEW PREMISE.

SO IT'S A NEW MAINER, I BELIEVE SO.

UH, UM, THE IMPACT OF ALL THESE NEW CUSTOMERS AWAY FROM EVERYBODY ELSE, ESPECIALLY THE LOWEST CONSUMERS, UM, WHO ARE TAKING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THIS RATE INCREASE.

AND, AND SO, UM, AS YOU JUST ALLUDED TO, IT'S USUALLY THE, UH, DEVELOPER WHO DOES, UH, WHO, WHO PAYS THAT CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN IT GETS PASSED THROUGH TO THE PURCHASER OF THE PREMISE.

AND SO I LIKED THIS IDEA OF TRYING TO SHIFT AWAY SOME OF THIS,

[01:15:01]

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS IN MY VIEW, THAT COST IS GOING TO GET PASSED RIGHT BACK THROUGH TO THE RIGHT PAYER IN ANY EVENT.

SO IT'S SORT OF A, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHAT WE WISH FOR JUST A THOUGHT.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL, ANYBODY ELSE ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

IF I COULD, UM, MARTY, I, I CANNOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO SEND THE, UH, MY THOUGHTS ON NUMBER ONE IN A CHAT.

SO I EMAILED THEM TO MOST OF YOU IN THE ROOM, INCLUDING TAMMY.

SO MAYBE THERE CAN BE AT WHEN YOU COME BACK AROUND TO NUMBER ONE, IT CAN BE, UM, MY THOUGHTS ON HOW TO REWRITE RECOMMENDATION NUMBER ONE CAN BE PUT UP.

GREAT.

UM, SO ON NUMBER TWO, COMMISSIONER CHATMAN, DID YOU HAVE ANY SORT OF CLOSING THOUGHTS OR IDEAS GIVEN THE DISCUSSION? UH, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS CONSIDER THE UNDERLYING RATIONALE OR NOT SAYING, AND THE CONTRIBUTION AND I, I SUPPORT YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE A REVIEW OF THE, UH, CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CONSTRUCTION.

AND WHETHER THAT IS TODAY FULLY RECOVERING ALL THE ASSOCIATED, UH, COST, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S NOT, UH, THAT IT WOULD BE ALLOCATED TO THE EXTENT THAT WE ARE UNDER, UNDER COLLECTING IN THAT AREA, INCLUDING THE GENERAL OVERHEAD ASSOCIATED WITH SERVING THAT NEW GROWTH, NO PROBLEMS. AND IT HOPEFULLY WOULD DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT IS NECESSARY IN THE RIGHT CASE.

SO AGAIN, I FOCUS ON THE WORDING THAT HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY MODIFIED TO BASICALLY SAY THAT IT BE CONSIDERED AND CONSISTENT WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION CHAIR HOPKINS, UH, THAT WE LOOK AT THE CONTRA, UH, AT THE NEXT MEETING, THE CONTRIBUTION AND NATIVE CONSTRUCTION AS BEING HOW IT IS SET NOW, HOW IT CAN BE SET TO OFFSET OTHER COSTS THAT ARE NOW PROPOSED TO BE SHIFTED TO EXISTING CUSTOMERS, CLOSING THOUGHT.

PIECE I'M MISSING IS THAT YOU WANT TO ENSURE THAT THE HEARING TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THESE THINGS.

UM, IS THERE, I GUESS, A PROPOSED A CHANGE TO THE LANGUAGE ON NUMBER TWO, OR, OR SHOULD WE, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE US TO VOTE ON THE ITEM AS, AS WRITTEN? I WELCOME ANY OF THEM AND I WELCOME ANY AMENDMENTS, AS LONG AS THEY'RE FRIENDLY.

UM, I'M, YOU KNOW, I'M, I, I GUESS IT, IT SOUNDED LIKE COMMISSIONER BOWMAN AND YOU, YOU WERE SAYING THAT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST SENTENCE HAS BEEN, IT, IT HAS BEEN AN, IS BEING ADDRESSED THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN ENERGY DID THE, DID SUCH A REVIEW IN THEIR COST ALLOCATION, I MEAN, IN THEIR, UM, COST OF SERVICE STUDY.

AND, AND, UH, SO THEN I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THE, THE, YOU KNOW, IF WE STRUCK THE FIRST SENTENCE, WHAT, WHAT DOES THE SECOND SENTENCE NEED TO SAY FOR IT TO BE STILL FOR IT TO STILL MAKE SENSE? UM, AS FAR AS A RECOMMENDATION? WELL, I GUESS, LET ME FIRST ASK THIS.

IF WE WERE TO REVIEW THE KAYAK POLICY INDEPENDENTLY, UM, AND YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE NEED A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO DO THAT.

I MEAN, I'M NOT HEARING FROM AUSTIN ENERGY THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, PRESENT THAT TO US, UM, AND ALLOW US A REVIEW OF THAT.

UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF, IF, IF AUSTIN ENERGY IS WILLING TO, TO BRING IT TO US AND, AND WE DO A REVIEW, THEN, THEN I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT AUSTIN ENERGY DO THAT.

IF THEY'RE WILLING TO DO IT, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GOING TO TOTALLY ADDRESS YOUR, UM, YOUR ITEM, RIGHT.

UM, IF, IF THE, IF THE

[01:20:01]

UM, THEN I, I DO THINK WE NEED SOME OTHER KIND OF ACTION, I GUESS.

UM, SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CLARIFIES ANYTHING HELPS MOVE, MOVE US ANY CLOSER TO, WELL, I, I BELIEVE THERE WAS PROPOSED A RECOMMENDATION TO SAY THE, TO STATE THAT THE REVIEW INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES.

AND I, AND THEN, UH, SUCH AS WITH, UM, SUCH AS LANGUAGE IN THE SUCH AS LANGUAGE WOULD BE THE CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION.

SO WITH THOSE WORDS INSERTED, THAT WOULD, THAT I HI WOULD SUBMIT, SUBMIT THAT CHANGE.

SO DELETING THE FIRST SENTENCE, AND THEN ESSENTIALLY THE SECOND SENTENCE WOULD READ SOMETHING LIKE THE RATE REVIEW SHOULD INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH AND PROPER ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE EXPENSES, SUCH AS CON CONTRIBUTION IN AN AGE OF CONSTRUCTION.

THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO ME IF IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO OTHERS.

I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE LANGUAGE.

AND I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD MAYBE INCORPORATE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO ITEM FOUR TO JUST HAVE TIMELY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THAT POLICY, OR WE CAN JUST LEAVE IT WITH THE SUCH AS LANGUAGE, RANDY, WOULD YOU ACCEPT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO SAY, UH, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO CIAC YOU GOT A COMMISSIONER.

I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE OBVIOUSLY FILED WHAT WE FILED IN, IN OUR RATE FILING PACKAGE, UH, WHICH AGAIN HAS, UH, THE EXAMINATION OF, OF, OR, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE UNDERLYING RATIONALE FOR, UH, THE REVENUE DEFICIT, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, UNLESS ONE OF THE PARTIES BRINGS IT UP, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I'M NOT SURE THAT EXACTLY YOUR ISSUE IS TEED UP FOR THE IHG AT THIS POINT.

NORMALLY THE, WITH THE HEARING EXAMINER ZONE, AS WHETHER WE APPLIED OUR CONTRIBUTION TO NATIVE CONSTRUCTION CORRECTLY AND GAVE IT CREDIT TO THE RIGHT CLASSES, THE CUSTOMER, WE ALLOCATED THAT, AND WE WERE ACCOUNTING FOR CORRECTLY, THE ELEMENTS OF THE CONTRIBUTION AND CONSTRUCTION, WHAT COSTS RECOVER WOULD NOT BE THE PURVIEW OF THE HEARING EXAMINER.

THAT'S SET BY POLICY.

WE HAVE THAT IN OUR CITY COUNCIL POLICY, OUR DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL.

SO THAT WOULD NOT BE A RATE REVIEW ISSUE THAT WOULD BE SORT OF LIKE SAY AN INTERNAL POLICY TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ABOUT WHAT ELEMENTS ARE COLLECTED IN CONTRIBUTION AND CONSTRUCTION.

UH, AND THAT'S SORT OF WHAT I WAS GETTING AT LIKE THAT WE, WE CAN, AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, SHOULD I THINK REVIEW THAT POLICY.

UM, BUT I'M NOT, I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO FIT IT INTO, UH, THE, THE PENDING RATE REVIEW TO THE EXTENT THAT IT RAISES THAT A CHANGE IN POLICY AND ALL OF WHICH IS IF WE CAN MOVE TIMELY, IF WE DON'T ACT NOW, UH, NOW MEANING TONIGHT TO SAY THAT THIS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, WE'RE NOT SAYING IMPLEMENTED, WE'RE NOT DEFINING THE DETAILS OF THE POLICY OR THE AMOUNTS.

SO WHAT WERE THE RECOMMENDATION IS, IS TO THE EXTENT YOU CAN DO BOTH THINGS SIMULTANEOUSLY.

AND WHEN COUNSEL FINALLY RECEIVES A RECOMMENDATION FROM EUC, FROM THE INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER, UH, AND FROM THE VARIOUS PARTIES THAT, THAT THE CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION BE INCREASED, THAT WOULD HAVE AN OFFSETTING EFFECT.

ART COULD HAVE AN OFFSETTING EFFECT FOR PURPOSES OF RIGHTS, THE ADDITIONAL MONEY BEING SOUGHT FROM CUSTOMERS.

THERE ARE VARIATIONS IN THE TEST

[01:25:01]

YEAR.

YOU DO NOT, THERE ARE WEATHER CHA LOOKING AT WEATHER, WEATHER, NORMALIZATION OF WEATHER EVENTS.

SO ALL OF WHICH IS TO THE EXTENT IN THE F WE ARE LOOKING AT NEW MONEY TO FULLY RECOVER COSTS, UH, THAT CERTAINLY, UH, AS FALL APPROACHES, UH, THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AS AN OFFSET.

SO YES, WE CAN DO BOTH THINGS SIMULTANEOUSLY IN MY OPINION, AND IT WOULDN'T BE AN OFFSET BECAUSE AT THE TEST YEAR, SO THE RIGHT DESIGN IS DESIGNED TO COLLECT THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE NEEDED FOR THE TEST YEAR.

SO ANY CHANGE IN CONTRIBUTION TO CONSTRUCTION WILL BE A FUTURE YEAR, AND YOU'D ALSO GRANDFATHERED IN.

SO IF SOMEONE'S ALREADY HAD A PLANS APPROVED AND PAID HER, YOU WOULDN'T GO BACK AND SAY, NOW WE NEED MORE.

SO YOUR GRANDFATHER OVER TIME.

SO IT, IT COULD IMPACT FUTURE RATES IF YOU HAD MORE CONTRIBUTION, BUT IT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE R TRUST YOUR F F UH, 2021.

IT WOULD NOT IMPACT THOSE YEARS THAT, THAT REVENUE, CAN I ASK THAT DON'T YOU HAVE YOUR TEST HERE, AND THEN YOU ADJUST IT FOR NON UNMEASURABLE CHANGES.

WE DID.

AND SO WHEN WE PUBLISHED OUR RIGHT REPORT, THAT WAS OUR KNOWN MEASURABLE.

WE DON'T DO A ROLLING NOTRE MEASURABLE.

UM, SO WHEN WE DEVELOPED OUR COST OF SERVICE AND SUBMITTED IT TO ALL THE PARTIES, THAT WAS THE END OF OUR KNOWN AND MEASURABLE PERIOD.

BUT I'M CERTAIN, SOME OF THE OTHER PARTIES MIGHT BE SUGGEST, MIGHT SUGGEST THAT DIDN'T DO THAT ACCURATELY, OR THAT THERE SHOULD BE ADDITIONAL MODIFICATIONS THAT THE HEARING EXAMINER COULD CONSIDER.

YES, NO ONE IMAGINED THERE'S ALWAYS A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE IN OUR INNER RIGHT CASE.

AND IT'S NOT WHETHER YOU SHOULD, IT SHOULD BE ROLLING IT'S ABOUT WHETHER YOU APPLY THE ZONE AND MEASUREMENTS CORRECTLY, OR YOU SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE THAT, BUT THAT'S CORRECT.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

SO I THINK, UH, WHAT, WHAT WAS CURRENTLY ON THE TABLE IS, UH, THE, UH, THE RATE REVIEW SHOULD INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH AND PROPER ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE EXPENSES SUCH AS, OR INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSTRUCT CONTRIBUTION AND NATIVE CONSTRUCTION.

UM, AND THIS IS A JUST KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE MAKING TO CITY COUNCIL.

UM, AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT INFORMATION.

UM, THEY, THEY WILL, UH, YOU KNOW, IN POTENTIALLY, UH, CONSIDERED THAT WHEN THE RATE, UM, WHEN THE HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION GETS IN FRONT OF THEM IN NOVEMBER, UM, AFTER WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW, UH, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, AND, UM, IN, AND I GUESS ALSO THE, UH, INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER IS ASSUMING THAT THEY ARE, UH, FOLLOWING THAT YOU SEE, UH, MIGHT BE AWARE OF, OF OUR RECOMMENDATION.

AND SO THEN COULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

THEN I WILL, UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO, UH, RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THE RATE REVIEW INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH AND A PROPER ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE EXPENSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION CYRUS, WHERE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE? OH, SORRY.

I MEAN, MY ONLY THOUGHT WAS, DO WE HAVE TO TIE THIS TO THE RATE REVIEW? COULDN'T WE JUST ASK CITY COUNCIL? I MEAN, WE COULD REFER TO THE, THAT THERE'S A RATE CASE GOING ON, BUT INDEPENDENTLY OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE RATE CASE CITY COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER CHANGES TO THIS POLICY THAT COULD LOWER THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT.

MAYBE I'M NOT CORRECT.

I DON'T KNOW.

I'M JUST, I MEAN, SO I WONDER IF WE JUST SAID REVIEW CITY COUNCIL, WE THINK YOU SHOULD REVIEW THIS POLICY AS A POTENTIAL, UM, ADDITIONAL REVENUE TOOL, AND ALSO ASK THAT AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENT THAT POLICY TO US AND NOT TRY TO TIE IT DIRECTLY TO THE RATE CASE ITSELF.

I THINK I, THAT, I THINK THAT HELPS ME, I'M STRUGGLING WITH HOW TO TIE IT TO THE RATE CASE, JUST BECAUSE, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE RATE CASE HAS BEEN PRESENTED AND THE COST ALLOCATION IS WHAT IT IS.

AND THEN OF COURSE WE HAVE STAKEHOLDERS INTERVENORS WHO CAN PROPOSE OTHER COST ALLOCATIONS, BUT WE ARE NOT AN INTERVENER, UM, IN

[01:30:01]

THE CASE.

AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE READY TO PROPOSE A DIFFERENT ALLOCATION, UM, YOU KNOW, TODAY.

SO I, I THINK I LIKE THAT IDEA, JUST AN INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL THAT THEY REVIEWED THE KAYAK POLICY, UM, AS A MEANS TO, UH, REDUCE THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT, TO REDUCE THE RENT AS A MEANS TO REDUCE THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT, REVIEW, CALL IT THE POLICIES ASSOCIATED WITH, YOU KNOW, CAPTURING REVENUES FROM GROWTH, SUCH AS NEW DEVELOPMENTS, SUCH AS THIS THING.

UM, AND WE CAN SEPARATELY HAVE AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENT TO US WHAT THAT POLICY IS.

SO WE HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT AS WELL.

AND THEN WE COULD SUPPLEMENT SUBSEQUENTLY MAKE OUR OWN FURTHER RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO KAYAK.

EXACTLY.

IT JUST SEEMS I, ALL OF THE QUICHES WHILE WE ARE WORDSMITHING, UH, THE CLOCK IS RUNNING AND, AND, UH, WE HAVE THE WORDING AS, EXCUSE ME.

UH, WE HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION, THE WORDING IN FRONT OF US, AND, UH, WITH, WITH AMENDMENTS, AS RECOMMENDATION, AS RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONER TROSTLE, UH, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED, WE HAVE A REC, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, INDEPENDENTLY THAT WE REVIEW, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION AT THE AID AND CONSTRUCTION POLICY AS IT STANDS NOW, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, FIS KNEE, I THINK, UNLESS WE HAVE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE NOW, WE SHOULDN'T JUST POSTPONE PUSH BACK.

WE W I THINK THE INTENT IS, AS I HEAR IT IS ALMOST UNANIMOUS.

UH, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND, CONTINUE TO SAY, W AS AMENDED AS AMENDED, LET'S DO THE, DO A VOTE TONIGHT AND ALL OF WHICH IS, AND, AND WHEN WE GET TO THE LAST ITEM, WE WILL INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION AT THE POLICY AND ASK AUSTIN ENERGY TO, TO REVIEW PROPOSED CHANGES CONSISTENT WITH THIS DISCUSSION.

UH, WOULD YOU JUST, YOU KNOW, TO, TO PUT A FINAL POINT ON, UH, COMMISSIONER READS PROPOSAL, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER IN LIEU OF WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED? UH, IF FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO, IF, IF THE, UH, RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL WAS THAT CITY COUNCIL REVIEW THE, UM, CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CONSTRUCTION, UH, POLICY AS A MEANS OF REDUCING, UM, THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CURRENT, UH, RATE REVIEW.

THIS WOULD CONTEMPLATE, THEN, THEN PEOPLE WOULD SEE NO BENEFIT FROM A CHANGE IN THE, UH, CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION, A BROADER POLICY THAT WOULD COVER THE COST.

I'M JUST TELLING YOU, IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT.

YOU CAN KEEP SAYING IT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO DO THE CONTRIBUTION.

A CONSTRUCTION THAT WE HAVE IN OUR COST OF SERVICE IS BASED UPON ACTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, DATA CONSTRUCTION.

WE DID NOT BASE IT UPON WHAT WE THINK IT MAY BE IN THE NEXT YEAR.

YOU CAN CERTAINLY CHANGE THAT POLICY AND LOOK AT IT AND WOULD CHANGE REVENUE REQUIREMENTS IN THE FUTURE, RIGHT.

WHEN THOSE ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

SO EVEN IF YOU CHANGE THAT CONTRIBUTION, LET'S SAY FROM A HUNDRED DOLLARS TO $200, I CAN'T MAKE A NOTE OF MEASURABLE.

CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO MAKE THE $200 PAYMENT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CUSTOMERS READY TO CONNECT.

I HAVE NO WAY TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT.

HOWEVER, IF WE MAKE THAT CHANGE, LET'S SAY WE MADE IT EFFECTIVE WHEN WE ADOPT THE BUDGET FOR AND WE START GRANDFATHERING, HE GOES IN THE NEXT TIME WE DO A RATE REVIEW, WE'LL HAVE THAT HIGHER CONTRIBUTION TO NATIVE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WOULD OFFSET A FUTURE REVENUE REQUIREMENT, BUT IT WILL NOT OFFSET THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT FOR OUR TEST.

YOUR THEN THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE NOT TO ADOPT A, UH, RIGHT REVIEW A SHORT-TERM RATE REVIEW, UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO SADDLE PEOPLE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, WHICH IS, AS I UNDERSTOOD, UH, YOU KNOW, THE EXPERIENCES FIVE YEARS.

SO ALL OF WHICH IS THE COST OF SERVING A BUILDING.

IT WOULD NOT, PEOPLE WOULD NOT SEE ANY REDUCTION IN THAT $25 CUSTOMER SERVICE FEE, BECAUSE YOU WOULD HA WITHOUT AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE TEXT YEAR, UNLESS YOU DO AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE TEST YEAR, WHICH, WHICH

[01:35:01]

AS W AS CYRUS HAS MENTIONED, YOU BUILD WATER PLANTS FOR THE FUTURE YOU BUILD FOR THE FUTURE.

YOU DON'T BUILD FOR THE PAST, THAT'S THE CONCEPT.

AND YES, IT IS USED IN, IN OTHER PLACE IN OTHER PLACES, AS YOU HAVE MENTIONED, UH, LOOKING FORWARD FORWARD-LOOKING AND THAT'S THE POLICY CHANGE, ALL OF WHICH HAS, YES, IT WOULD HAVE, COULD HAVE AN IMMEDIATE REVENUE.

UH, IT COULD HAPPEN IMMEDIATE EFFECT IN 2023 ON RATES.

OR WE COULD RECOMMEND THAT THE RATE REVIEW BE PUSHED BACK BY A YEAR OR SO THAT WEEK WOULD HAVE MORE DETAILED INFORMATION AND MAKE THAT CHANGE.

I'M NOT RECOMMENDING THAT, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS THAT WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE THAT WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THEN LOOK AT, TO THEN LOOK AT THIS, BUT SADDLING PEOPLE WITH, UH, WITH COSTS FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I COULD SUPPORT.

UH, I'LL JUST SHARE KIND OF WHAT, WHERE I AM.

I'M NOT COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS.

IF IT'S TIED TO THE CURRENT RATE REVIEW FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM AUSTIN ENERGY.

SO I'D BE OPEN TO, UH, WELL, WHAT CYRUS PROPOSED, UH, A REVIEW RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL THAT THEY REVIEW KAYAK, SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF CITY COUNCIL SHOULD REVIEW CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CONSTRUCTION POLICY.

AND ALSO ANDREW PRESENT A PRESENTATION TO AUC REGARDING THE SAME FOR OUR CONSIDERATION.

I'D BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT I WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM AUSTIN ENERGY OF THE UTILITY OF SUCH A REVIEW AT THIS POINT OF TYING IT TO THE CURRENT RATE REVIEW.

THAT'S JUST WHERE I AM.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE I AM TOO.

I THINK THAT I JUST CAN'T GET MY MIND AROUND HOW, UH, WE COULD ACCOMPLISH IT, LIKE, LIKE HOW IT CAN ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED IN THIS CASE.

I JUST, I DON'T, UM, I CAN'T GET MY HEAD AROUND HOW, HOW IT COULD WORK IN THE PENDING CASE.

UM, SO I'M, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S, UM, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS AND I THINK CARRIE VIRTUAL COMMISSIONER VIRTUAL, DID YOU WANT TO CONTRIBUTE? YEAH, I JUST, I, I I'LL CONCUR WITH MARTY.

UH, I DON'T THINK PROCEDURALLY IT'S GOING TO BE POSSIBLE TO GET THIS INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT RATE FOR VIEW NUMBER ONE, BUT NUMBER TWO, AND I'M BEING REALLY UNFAIR TO MR. DOMBROSKI BY EVEN BRINGING THIS UP, BUT MAYBE, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG ABOUT THIS, BUT I DON'T THINK ANY FEASIBLE A, UH, UH, IN SUPPORT OF CONSTRUCTION AMOUNT IS GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THAT $25 FEE.

I MEAN, I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT IT, BUT I MEAN, HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU THINK YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO BRING IN? WAS HE ONE TIME PAYMENTS, UH, WHEN THE IMPACT OF THE MOVING THE CUSTOMER SERVICE FEE FROM $10 TO $25 IS HUMONGOUS.

AND, AND I, I SUSPECTED THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A NEARLY IMMATERIAL IMPACT ON THAT EVEN UNDER THE ROSIEST OF SCENARIOS, BUT MARK, IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO THAT FINE.

I KNOW IT'S VERY UNFAIR TO BRING IT UP OFF THE CUFF LIKE THAT, BUT IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO ME LIKE THIS IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, HAVING MUCH OF AN IMPACT.

YEAH, I'LL, I'LL QUALIFY MY ANSWER TO THAT.

I MAY HAVE TO GET BACK TO CONFIRM THIS, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THAT $25, UM, IS IMPACTED BY A CONTRIBUTION NATIVE CONSTRUCTION.

UM, THAT'S THE COST OF THE, UM, THE METER, THE METER READING THE BILLING, UH, UH, CALL CENTER, THOSE TYPES OF CHARGES.

UM, BUT LET ME QUALIFY THAT, THAT I WILL GET BACK WITH YOU.

I'M, I'M PRETTY SURE ON THAT IN A WAY CONTRIBUTION ADDED CONSTRUCTION WORKS, LET'S SAY A CUSTOMER, UM, SPENDS, UM, UM, I'M GOING TO MAKE THE NUMBER NICE, BIG AND ROUND, UH, $300 FOR CONTRIBUTION DATA CONSTRUCTION.

[01:40:01]

AND WE THEN AMORTIZE THAT OVER 30 YEARS.

SO EACH YEAR WE RECOGNIZE $10 OF REVENUE OVER THE 30 YEARS.

SO THE CHANGE IN CONTRIBUTION NATIVE CONSTRUCTION, WHILE IT DOES CHANGE THE CASH REQUIREMENTS FOR US, FOR OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS, UM, IT TAKES A WHILE FOR THAT TO IMPACT THE REVENUES.

IT'S I THINK OUR BASE RATE REVENUES ARE APPROXIMATELY 650 MILLION.

UH, THE REVENUE FROM CONTRIBUTION DATA CONSTRUCTION IS PROBABLY AROUND TWO OR $3 MILLION.

I'M GUESSING, UH, BECAUSE WE, WE AMORTIZE THAT OVER THE LIFE OF THE ASSET, RIGHT? SO EACH YEAR I THINK WE, UM, I, ALL THESE NUMBERS ARE CAVEAT, UM, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, LET'S SAY, WE'RE, WE'RE BRINGING IN ABOUT TO $45 MILLION A YEAR IN CONTRIBUTION TO THE NATIVE CONSTRUCTION.

SO THAT'S WHAT A CUSTOMER GIVES US CONNECT THEM.

THE ALTERNATIVE WAS, WOULD BE IF THEY DIDN'T DO THAT, THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY THAT.

AND SOME UTILITIES DO THAT.

AND SO WE WOULD EITHER USE CASH OR DEBT, AND THEN WE WOULD THEN AMORTIZE THAT OVER THE LIFE OF THAT ASSET.

AND SO WE DO IT THE SAME WAY AS AN OFFSET TO CASH.

SO THAT FULL $42 MILLION, YOU OFTEN HEAR US TALKING ABOUT KAYAK.

THAT'S NOT THE REVENUE NUMBER.

WE JUST THERE'S.

THE AMORTIZED PORTION IS THE REVENUE.

UM, IS THAT HELP PUT IT IN SCALE? I'M GUESSING, SIR, CERTAINLY, BUT WE'RE NOT LIMITED TO TALKING ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION OR TA ALONE.

UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE COST TO THE SYSTEM, ADDING MORE 3, 1, 1 P MORE PEOPLE TO THE 3, 1, 1 WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, ADDITIONAL, UH, PUTTING IN ADDITIONAL FEEDERS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, COSTS COSTS GOING FORWARD.

YES, THIS IS A DIFFERENT APPROACH, UH, THAN TRADITIONALLY USED.

THESE ARE NOT TRADITIONAL TIMES IN AUSTIN, THAT WE ARE, UH, PEOPLE ARE BEING PUSHED OUT AND TO SAY, THERE SHOULD BE NO ADJUSTMENTS.

YES, IT'S NOT AN OFTEN NECESSARILY AN DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR OFFSET.

IT IS NOT, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS W WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS ADDRESSING, UH, A REVENUE SHORTFALL THAT IS NEEDED, THAT IS NEEDED TO, IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A MORE BALANCED BUDGET.

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WOULD FLOW THROUGH EITHER TO THE CUSTOMER SERVICE CHARGE OR THE TIER EXAMINATION OR WHATEVER, IT WOULD HAVE SOME IMPACT ON LOWERING THE NEED TO RAISE RATES AT THIS TIME.

AND FIVE YEARS OUT IS JUST TOO LONG.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN IN, IN, UH, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION OF TIME, W WE'RE ONLY ON ITEM NUMBER TWO AND, AND IT'S ALMOST EIGHT O'CLOCK.

SO, UM, LET, LET'S GO AHEAD.

AND, UH, I THINK I'VE GOT A, UM, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, UH, OR, UH, ENTERTAINED I'VE ENTERTAINED EMOTION, UM, TO, UH, RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT THE RATE REVIEW SHOULD INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH AND THE PROPER ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE EXPENSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSTRUCTION, UM, CONTRIBUTION IN NATIVE CONSTRUCTION.

UM, AND SO I'VE, I'VE ENTERTAINED A MOTION FOR THAT.

UH, IF, UH, COMMISSIONER CHATMAN, YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION, THEN WE CAN TAKE A BOAT AND THEN, UM, I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN, UH, EMOTION.

UM, IF, IF, IF THAT MOTION DOESN'T PASS, I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN.

WELL, NO, I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

AND AFTER THAT, UH, TO, UH, THAT FOLLOWS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S, UH, LANGUAGE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THOSE CAN BE TWO SEPARATE THINGS.

SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE THE, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION OF A WORK GROUP.

UM, IS THERE A SECOND, I'M GOING TO TAKE THAT AS A MOTION.

I WILL SECOND.

SO WOULD IT BE AN ORDER TO, FOR ME TO MOVE TO AMEND THAT RECOMMENDATION, OR WOULD YOU RATHER DO IT AS A SEPARATE MOTION? I THINK THERE ARE, I THINK THEY CAN BE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS.

I THINK THAT WE CAN DO BOTH.

UM, AND BECAUSE I THINK THE AMENDMENT, UM, OKAY, SURE.

LET'S DO THAT.

SECONDED TO, UM, I RECOMMENDATION FROM THE UC THAT CITY COUNCIL REVIEW THE CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION POLICY AND THAT AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENT A PRESENTATION TO THE EUC REGARDING THE SAME REGARDING THE CONTRIBUTION NATIVE CONSTRUCTION FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSIONS CONSIDERATION.

SO I MOVE TO AMEND THE, THE RECOMMENDATION.

THAT'S JUST BEEN MOVED AND

[01:45:01]

SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW MY ROBERT QUESTION.

CAN WE, CAN WE VOTE ON BOTH? UH, IN OTHER WORDS, CAN WE TAKE THAT UP AS A SEPARATE I, AS A SEPARATE BULLET POINT? CAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT.

I THINK LET'S, LET'S DO IT THE FIRST WAY AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

UM, IF YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT, THEN I WOULD VOTE NO ON THE AMENDMENT AND THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A STANDALONE MOTION AGAIN.

AND SO IF, BASICALLY WE DON'T HAVE SUPPORT TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDATION AS PROPOSED I'LL, I'LL ENTERTAIN IT AS AN INDEPENDENT ITEM.

SO, WELL, BEFORE WE VOTE ON THAT, CAN, CAN WE GET CARRIE'S QUESTION ANSWERED ABOUT, UM, HOW VIABLE IT IS ACTUALLY TO TRY TO CHANGE OR SAYS MIDSTREAM HERE FOR THE EXISTING RATE CASE OR THIS ALLOCATION, UM, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO BE WASTING EVERYBODY'S TIME ON VOTING FOR SOMETHING THAT ISN'T REALLY EVEN DO RIGHT NOW? AND THAT'S WHY, WHAT COMMISSIONER BOWEN, BOWMAN WAS TALKING ABOUT IT FOR THE FUTURE? YOU KNOW, IF IT'S NOT REALLY VIABLE FOR THIS RATE CASE, THEN IT MAKES SENSE TO LOOK AT IT STILL.

I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A CONSENSUS THAT IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT AS FAR AS ALLOCATION, BUT CAN YOU EVEN DO IT RIGHT NOW, AUSTIN ENERGY? DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL, AND I, I WOULD CERTAINLY LOOK TO THE KIND OF KEEPING THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS.

WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, PARTIES, POSITION STATEMENTS ARE DUE NEXT WEEK.

UM, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY NOTICE ISSUES.

THERE'S A VARIETY OF THINGS I THINK THAT COULD LIMIT, UH, THE ABILITY.

AND, AND THEN JUST EVEN THAT, I THINK AS MR. DOMBROWSKI INDICATED, IT REALLY, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF KEEPING THE INTEGRITY OF, OF RATE MAKING PRINCIPLES, UM, THAT WE ARE STILL POTENTIALLY SUBJECT TO, UM, BY THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, IF THERE WOULD BE AN APPEAL BY OUTSIDE CITY CUSTOMERS, YOU KNOW, THAT THIS WOULD REALLY COULD ONLY BE APPLIED GOING FORWARD.

UH, YOU KNOW, ONCE CHANGES ARE MADE TO THE KAYAK POLICY, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, IT WOULD IMPACT, YOU KNOW, FUTURE, BUT NOT OUR HISTORICAL TEST YEAR.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS WE HAVE ABOUT TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, INTERJECT A NEW ISSUE, UM, THAT, THAT IS ALSO POTENTIALLY CONTRARY TO TRADITIONAL RAINMAKING PRINCIPLES WITH LOOKING JUST AT A HISTORICAL TEST YEAR, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF KNOWN IMMEASURABLES.

SO THERE'S AN AMENDMENT PENDING, UM, THAT WOULD, UH, FULLY SUBSTITUTE, UM, RECOMMENDATION NUMBER TWO, UM, ON THE LANGUAGE THAT COMMISSIONER BOWMAN PROPOSED, UH, DO I NEED A SECOND? MY ROBERT'S RULES PERSON.

DO I NEED A SECOND FOR AN AMENDMENT? OKAY.

IS THERE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S AMENDMENT BOING, BOING.

OH, SO SORRY.

I'VE BEEN CALLING YOU BOWMAN THE WHOLE TIME.

MISHA BOWEN, EXCUSE ME.

SO SORRY.

THAT'S OKAY.

HAPPENED MY WHOLE LIFE.

UH, SO THERE'S A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT.

HI.

HI CARRIE.

WE CAN STILL COME BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, RIGHT? IF, IF WE WANT TO.

NO.

SO I THINK WHAT MY PROPOSAL IS, THIS AMENDMENT IS SUBSTITUTING THE ORIGINAL.

SO IF YOU WANT THE ORIGINAL DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS AMENDMENT AND I WILL ENTERTAIN, I WILL ENTERTAIN THE SECOND.

UM, I WILL ENTERTAIN THE AMENDMENT AS AN INDEPENDENT, UH, IF, IF IT DOES NOT PASS, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I GUESS SO, SO THAT I KNOW I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS, BUT, UH, IF THAT IS A SEPARATE, UH, BULLET POINT, IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING I WOULD CONSIDER.

EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE DONE? THE TACOS, SO JUST STRIKE THOSE MOTIONS.

HOW ABOUT THIS? I THINK I'VE GOT US ALL TOO CONFUSED FOR THIS TO BE EFFECTIVE.

I'M GOING TO START OVER.

CAN WE JUST SCRATCH

[01:50:01]

WE'RE GOING TO START OVER.

I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO, UH, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL ALONG COMMISSIONER BOWEN'S LINES.

IF YOU'D READ THAT ONE MORE TIME FOR THE GROUP, JUST AS JUST COMMISSIONER BOWEN'S CITY COUNCIL SHOULD REVIEW THE CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CONSTRUCTION POLICY AND AUSTIN ENERGY SHOULD PRESENT A PRESENTATION TO THE EUC REGARDING THE CONTRIBUTION AND AID OF CONSTRUCTION POLICY FOR EACH, FOR THE EUC IS CONSIDERATION.

ARE WE VOTING TO AS THAT AS SUBSTITUTE LANGUAGE STAND ALONE, AND ARE WE GOING TO PUT A DIET? WOULD YOU ACCEPT PUTTING A DATE ON IT? SO IT DOESN'T, WE'RE NOT TALKING A YEAR LONG PROCESS.

CAN WE PUT PICTURE AND TIMING ON HERE HAS NOT PUT A DATE ON IT.

I DON'T HAVE A DATE AND, AND THE MOTION I THINK IS IT'S TO A VOTE.

SO IT'S TO IT'S TO VOTE.

I W ALL OF WHICH IT, I KNOW WHAT I'M ABOUT, BUT I THINK IT'S PRETTY STANDARD.

UH, WE NEED, EXCUSE ME, ALL OF WHICH IS I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE SAY, UH, THAT THE PRESENTATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS BE PRESENTED TO THE EUC BY SEPTEMBER ONE AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL BY NOVEMBER ONE.

WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE? I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY FOR, AND THEN THAT TO THE MOTION HAS PASSED.

UM, AND SO I'D LIKE TO, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT VOTES FROM EVERYBODY.

I DON'T THINK I HEARD, UH, MS. COMMISSIONER VIRTUAL OR COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

SORRY.

THIS IS KERRY FEIN VOTING FOR MR. DOLAN'S PROPOSAL.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN CHAPMAN, ACTUALLY CHECK.

NOW I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND, UH, THAT THE RATE REVIEW SHOULD INCLUDE AN EXAMINATION OF EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH SYSTEM GROWTH AND THE PROPER ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE EXPENSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO A CONTRIBUTION IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION.

I I'VE LOST TRACK OF WHERE WE WERE, BUT I DON'T THINK I VOTED ON THE LAST ONE, SO I WILL ALSO BE LISTED AS ABSTAINING.

UM, WE GOT A LITTLE FINICKY THERE.

AND COMMISSIONER REED, DID YOU VOTE ON? I VOTED FOR ONE, BUT I'M ALSO GOING TO SECOND, THIS ONE I'M FOR BOTH.

SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, THAT I JUST ENTERTAINED? THAT IS THE MOTION OF THE WORK GROUP.

AND IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY, SO NOW ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE.

SO I'VE GOT COMMISSIONER YONKER, COMMISSIONER REED, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, UH, COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL, AND, UH, COMMISSIONER VIRTUAL AND COMMISSIONER TUTTLE.

I, I CAN'T SEE YOU.

SO WHERE DID, WHERE DID YOU, DID YOU SAY ANYTHING? I DON'T SUPPORT IT.

I DON'T SUPPORT IT EITHER.

SO THAT'S FOR, UM, ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NAY.

UM, CARRIE.

SO FOUR TO FOUR, I THINK THE, UH, THAT'S A PUSH.

SO THE MOTION DOESN'T PASS.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, AND I'M GOING TO TRY TO LIMIT, UM, THE CONVERSATION.

UH, NO, EXCUSE ME.

LET'S GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER ONE.

COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL HAD SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE.

I I'VE NOT SEEN THAT COME THROUGH, BUT PERHAPS YOU COULD READ IT OUT.

FORMS RECEIVED BY A, THE EUC RECOMMENDS THAT AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENT TO THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER AS PART OF THE FORMAL HEARING PROCESS, ALL FEEDBACK FORMS RECEIVED.

IT'S.

I SENT IT TO YOUR, UM, EACH OF YOURS, UH, CITY, UM, EMAIL ACCOUNTS, BUT THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS.

AND, UH, UH, MS. COOPER HAS IT THAT I WAS HOPING SHE COULD PERHAPS FIGURE OUT A WAY TO PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN, BUT HERE IT IS TO ENSURE THAT THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER AND THE CITY COUNCIL ARE ABLE TO CONSIDER THE BROAD CROSS SECTION OF INPUT FROM RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS REFLECTED IN THE FEEDBACK

[01:55:01]

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL.

IT'S UM, IS THAT A MOTION? IT IS.

IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

ALRIGHT, DAVE, YOU SAID I, AND YEAH, THIS IS CARRIE I, OKAY, GREAT.

I THINK THAT, AND COMMISSIONER BOWEN, WERE YOU IN FAVOR? OKAY, GREAT.

THAT THE CO ITEM NUMBER ONE AS AMENDED, UH, PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, AND AGAIN, UM, CONSIDERING THE TIME I'D LIKE TO LEND IT DISCUSSION IF POSSIBLE.

SO, UH, COMMISSIONER CHATMAN, IF YOU'D LIKE TO, UH, TELL US A LITTLE BIT, INTRODUCE ITEM NUMBER THREE, UH, THAT WILL BE PRESENTED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER RAID.

YES, THIS IS VERY, THIS IS VERY MUCH AN IDEA THAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, WHICH IS, UM, WELL, SOME OF THESE TARIFFS MAY WELL BE RAISED AS PART OF THE RATE REVIEW PROCESS, UH, BECAUSE THE RATE REVIEW PROCESS IS REALLY JUST LOOKING AT BASE RATES, UH, THESE MORE SPECIALIZED TARIFFS, WHAT I'LL CALL ANNUAL TARIFFS, LIKE THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY SERVICE FEE, UM, LIKE THE COMMUNITY SOLAR ASSESSMENT TARIFF, LIKE THE GREEN CHOICE TARIFF ARE REALLY OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW, UM, OF THE, OF THE RATE REVIEW.

UM, BUT THEY ARE VERY MUCH PART OF OUR PURVIEW.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM AUSTIN ENERGY ON THESE ANNUAL TARIFFS, AND THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM AT A PINE ON THEM BECAUSE THOSE TARIFFS ACTUALLY, UH, IN MANY CASES SET THE BUDGETS FOR THOSE PROGRAMS. SO IT'S REALLY SORT OF, AS PART OF THE BUDGET REVIEW, HAVE E HAVE AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENT THOSE TARIFFS, AND WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, YOU KNOW, SUGGEST RECOMMEND CHANGES OR ADOPTION TO, UM, TO CITY COUNCIL JUST FOR MY EDIFICATION IS THE IDEA THAT THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, OR JUST A RECOMMENDATION TO AUSTIN ENERGY RIGHT NOW, I GUESS, WHERE DOES AUSTIN ENERGY STAND ON? I LIKE THIS IDEA.

I THINK THAT WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD LOOK AT THOSE INDIVIDUAL, UM, YOU KNOW, TARIFFS AND PROGRAMS. UH, BUT DO WE, I GUESS, DO WE NEED TO, DO WE NEED FOR IT TO BE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AT THIS POINT? I GUESS NOT.

I MEAN, WE'LL, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE FUTURE RIGHT ON IT.

IF WE FIND THERE NEEDS TO BE CHANGES IN THESE, I GUESS WE DON'T NEED, I GUESS THIS IS MORE OF A PRESENTATION, JUST A REQUEST, A REQUEST WILL PRESENTED THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION ON IT.

AND, UM, TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, IT WOULD BE GETTING A PRESENTATION ON THE FISCAL YEAR, 23 ANNUAL TARIFFS.

SO, RIGHT.

SO THAT IS PLANNED IN AUGUST.

UM, SO USUALLY AFTER THE CITY MANAGER DELIVERS THEIR BUDGET, WE DO A PRESENTATION FOR YOU AT A PRETTY DETAILED LEVEL.

AND I KNOW FOR ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS THAT ARE, SO CUSTOMER-FOCUSED CES, YOU'LL HEAR FROM THE DIRECTORS AND THE VP ON THOSE EXACT ISSUES.

AND IF WE DON'T HAVE IT INCLUDED, I WILL INCLUDE A, UM, AN ESTIMATED RATE CHANGE BASED UPON OUR BUDGET.

SO I I'D ARGUE THAT SORT OF THE TARIFF DOES INSIDE THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET DECIDES TO TARIFF.

UM, SO WHEN YOU ADOPT THESE PROGRAMS, WE FIGURED OUT WHAT IT COSTS.

AND WE KNOW AT WHAT THE BILLING DETERMINE IS IT'S USUALLY A KWH AND IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE MATH CALCULATION.

WHAT W WHAT IS THE RATE? BUT WE CAN PRESENT THAT TO YOU.

WE ARE PLANNING ON THAT IN AUGUST.

YOU CAN PRESENT BOTH THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND THE PROPOSED RATES.

AND IF WE, AS A BODY SAY, YOU KNOW, W WE THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE ADDITIONAL MONEY PUT IN THIS, THEREFORE WE RECOMMEND A HIGHER TARIFF.

WE CERTAINLY CAN DO THAT.

WHETHER IT'S WHETHER OR NOT CITY COUNCIL AGREES, THAT'S THEIR DECISION.

SO I GUESS I COULD, AS LONG AS WE HAVE A COMMITMENT THAT THEY WOULD DO THIS IN AUGUST, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS BECAUSE WE CAN ANY ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS WE CAN ARRIVE AT IN AUGUST OR IT'S SEPTEMBER MIGHT BE TOO LATE.

[02:00:01]

WELL THEN I WOULD WITHDRAW.

I WOULD WITH THE, WITH THE COMMITMENT AND WE CAN WORK ON THE LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT BEFORE YOU WITHDRAW, BEFORE YOU DECIDE ON THAT, MAY I ASK A QUESTION, JUST A PROCESS QUESTION.

IF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WE'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTED AS PART OF THE BUDGET REVIEW, WHICH IT'S R WILL ALREADY HAVE BEEN DECIDED RIGHT.

FOR THE COMING YEAR, IS YOUR THOUGHTS, CYRUS, THAT WE, YOU WANTED US TO HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT INPUT INTO THESE, UH, THE TARIFFS ON THESE PROGRAMS, FAIT ACCOMPLI.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, WELL, THIS IS, THIS IS ACTUALLY IN, I'M TRYING TO SEPARATE MY ESE AND SIERRA CLUB THAT I HAD, BUT THIS IS, HAS ALWAYS BEEN ONE OF THE ISSUES, RIGHT? BY THE TIME YOU SEE THE BUDGETS AND THE TARIFFS, THERE'S REALLY VERY LITTLE TIME TO INFLUENCE IT.

SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN CHANGE THAT FOR 2023 BECAUSE OF THE TIMING, BUT WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE THERE'S A, MAYBE THERE'S A NEW PROCESS IN THE FUTURE WHERE WE COULD, UM, AT LEAST SEE SOME DRAFT PROPOSALS EARLIER THAN AFTER THE CITY MANAGER BLESSES THAT, BECAUSE IT PUTS US IN A REAL BIND, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN CHANGE THAT FOR 2023.

SO THIS IS JUST SCARY, SCARY.

THIS IS CARRIE.

I, I JUST WANTED TO SECOND WHAT MARK SAID.

I'D ACTUALLY GO ONE STEP FURTHER AND SAY THAT THE BUDGET, WELL, THE TARIFF AND THE BUDGET ARE DETERMINED BY THE POLICY, AND WE CAN CHANGE THE POLICY ANYTIME WE WANT TO CHANGE IT, BECAUSE IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO AGREE TO THAT, UH, SO FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

NOW, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD TAKE UP IF WE WANT TO CONSIDER CHANGING OUR POLICY ON THESE ISSUES, WE CAN, WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ANY TIME AND AS A, UM, YOU KNOW, POINT IN TIME, PERHAPS THAT BUDGET PRESENTATION IS A JUMPING OFF POINT.

UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IN, IN WE GET A PRESENTATION ON THE GREEN CHOICE TARIFF, UM, IN MORE DETAIL, UH, IN THE BUDGET AND WHAT IT IS, AND WE THINK THAT ONE IS UNDERFUNDED, OR THIS ONE IS OVERFUNDED.

WE, YOU KNOW, PRIORITIZE THE, UH, THE, THE PROGRAMS AND TARIFFS THAT WE WANT TO TAKE UP, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, OUR ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN THE AUGUST MEETING.

AND THEN WE HAVE A POLICY DISCUSSION AND PERHAPS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL ABOUT A CHANGE TO THAT POLICY.

SO IT'S, IT'S ITEM NUMBER THREE, THEN, UH, WITHDRAWN OR WITH, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A DETAILED PRESENTATION IN AUGUST, UM, ON THESE ITEMS. AND WE'LL TAKE UP POLICY DISCUSSIONS, UM, PERHAPS ONE AT A TIME.

UM, BUT NOT NECESSARILY.

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UM, AND, UH, WHO FROM THE WORK GROUP WILL BE INTRODUCING THIS ONE, WE'LL INTRODUCE THIS ONE, WHICH IT'S FAIRLY SIMILAR TO THE LAST ONE, BECAUSE THEY DO BOTH, UM, IT'S COME FROM THOSE TARIFFS.

AND I GUESS IF WE ARE GOING TO RECEIVE A LATER PRESENTATION, WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS.

BUT, UM, ESSENTIALLY WITH THE RATE REVIEW AND THE LARGE INCREASES TO COSTS FOR CUSTOMERS AND IN PARTICULAR, LOW AND MODERATE INCOME, WE JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CONTINUED FUNDING AND EVEN POTENTIALLY EXPANDED FUNDING FOR THESE PROGRAMS, UM, IN PARTICULAR WEATHERIZATION, AFTERS, STALLING, DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT THE, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS HAS ALREADY DONE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE THE UNSPENT FUNDS TO BE ROLLED OVER FOR WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE DURING THE 2020 TO 2023 BUDGET.

SO I THINK THAT WE CAN COVER THAT WITH A LATER PRESENTATION, UNLESS THERE'S OTHER THOUGHTS, IT WOULD BE THAT THAT IS ONE OF THE OTHER TARIFFS, RIGHT? THE CVC, THE EES AS PART OF THE, BUT THE CBC FUNDS SPECIFICALLY LOW-INCOME WEATHERIZATION AND THE, UM, PAYMENT ASSISTANCE.

SO I THINK IT COULD ALL BE PART OF THE SAME THING, HONESTLY.

ARE SET DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE.

AND S FROM AUSTIN ENERGY'S PERSPECTIVE, CAN WE GET A COMMITMENT THAT, THAT BE DISCUSSED AT THE AUGUST MEETING AS WELL? YES, THAT WILL ALSO BE PART OF OUR DISCUSSION, UM, ON THOSE, THOSE PATHS CHARGES THAT

[02:05:01]

AND YOU'RE CORRECT THAT THOSE, UM, UNSPENT FUNDS, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE A RATE THAT SAY COLLECTION MILLION DOLLARS, AND WE ONLY SPENT 800,000 ON A PROGRAM THAT REMAINED, OR 200,000 STAYS IN THAT FUND UNTIL YOU EITHER SPEND IT ON A PROGRAM, OR UNTIL WE DECIDE WE'RE GOING TO RETURN IT TO THE CUSTOMERS.

SO THOSE, THOSE MONIES DON'T, DON'T GO, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.

ONCE WE'VE COLLECTED THAT CASH.

IF I UNDERSTAND THOUGH THE RECOMMENDATION IS BUDGET AND BUDGETED AND SPENT, BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN EXAMPLES OF WHERE MONEY IS COLLECTED, AND THEN FOR WHATEVER REASONS YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM OR THE COVID COMES ALONG, AND NOBODY WANTS SOMEONE IN THEIR HOUSE OR WHATEVER.

UH, THE KEY, KEY, UH, ITEM IS THAT THE DOLLARS IN THE COMING YEAR BE ACTUALLY SPENT.

AND THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION DURING THAT BUDGET MEETING, YOU KNOW, WHAT WERE THE BASIS FOR SETTING THEIR BUDGET AS THEY DID? IS THERE CONSTRAINTS ON RESOURCES OR NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS WANTING TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION TO ASK.

WHY IS YOUR BUDGET SET AT IS, AND WHETHER THERE CAN BE AN INCREASE TO USE THOSE FUNDS EFFECTIVELY.

CONSUMER ADVOCATE TO PRESENT FOR LONGER THAN THREE MINUTES OR ARE WE LIMITING IT TO THREE MINUTES? UM, AND I, SO I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, JUST, UH, IT'S LIKE A, UM, I'M CONCERNED THAT, UH, UNLESS EACH OF US ARE INDIVIDUALLY REALLY DELVING INTO THE RATE REVIEW, UM, THAT IF WE'RE ONLY PRESENTED WITH ONE PARTY'S VIEW, UH, THAT IT W WE'LL JUST HAVE A LIMITED SCOPE, UNLESS, UNLESS WE'RE DOING OUR OWN, YOU KNOW, THOUGHTFUL, THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE, THE RATE REVIEW, UM, PROCEEDING, WHICH IS, THERE'S A LOT OF DOCUMENTS TO LOOK AT.

UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, WHO FROM THE WORK GROUP WILL INTRODUCE THIS ITEM? UH, I CAN INTRODUCE THIS ONE AS WELL.

WE, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE SOME REGULAR UPDATES FROM THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE, AND I THINK THAT, UM, IT'S ESPECIALLY DESIRED AFTER WE'VE NOW MOTION WANTED TO HAVE THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE REVIEW THOSE, UM, THE FEEDBACK FROM CUSTOMERS.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A BENEFICIAL UPDATE TO RECEIVE.

AND AS A REGULAR STANDING AGENDA ITEM, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC ON WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON? UH, I KNOW RANDY, YOU HAD DROPPED IT THIS LANGUAGE IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING, BUT I, I THINK THAT IN PARTICULAR, WE WOULD JUST LIKE UPDATES AS TO ANY ONGOING CHANGES TO THE PRO, LIKE SUCH AS THE TIERS.

I AM INTERESTED IN SEEING IF THERE'S GOING TO BE WHAT THE THOUGHTS ARE IN REGARDS TO CHANGING FROM THE FIVE-YEAR TO THE THREE TIER SYSTEM.

AND, UM, HOW I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR HOW THE FEEDBACK FORMS WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THAT INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE.

A COUPLE OF THINGS I MIGHT NOTE, I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, THE, I DON'T THINK THAT THE, THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT SPECIFICALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, ENVISIONED, UH, AN IN-PERSON, UH, MONTHLY APPEARANCE BY THE, UH, INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK TO CONSIDER, I WOULD SAY YOUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED THE WEEK THE HEARING STARTS, AND THERE, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE SOME PERCEPTION ISSUES OF YOU JUST INVITING ONE PARTY, UM, TO, TO COME AND SPEAK WHEN THERE ARE, UH, YOU KNOW, I HAD THE, I HAD A LIST OF OTHER PARTIES AS WELL.

UM, AND I THINK BASED ON, BASED ON WHAT I SAW, YOU KNOW, THE, UM, IN TERMS OF THE FEEDBACK, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOW DIRECTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE IHG, UM, YOU KNOW, IS AWARE OF THE FEEDBACK AS PART OF THE PROCESS.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN COMMIT THAT WE WILL BE DOING THAT.

SO, UM, JUST A FEW THOUGHTS THAT I HAVE ON, ON THAT SUGGESTION, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER READ.

I WONDER IF IT'D BE JUST POSSIBLE TO INVITE THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE TO COME AND MAKE A PRESENTATION TO US AT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, WHICH IS BEFORE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO TAKE ACTION IN OCTOBER, BUT IT WOULD AT LEAST GIVE US THEIR PERSPECTIVE ON, YOU KNOW, HOW THE HEARING WENT AND, YOU KNOW WHAT THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT THE, THE IHG RECOMMENDATION.

WELL, THAT COMES OUT SEPTEMBER 15TH.

WELL, HOW THE PROCESSES, THE RECOMMENDATION COMES OUT ON AUGUST 31ST AND THEN, AND I ACTUALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN AND I DISCUSSED THIS A LITTLE BIT UN AND I THINK, UM, THOUGH WE ARE, YOU KNOW, NOT THE DECISION MAKERS HERE.

UM, I FEEL SOME KIND OF, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS EXACTLY, BUT, BUT SOME KIND OF AN EASINESS ABOUT, UM, INVITING ONLY ONE PARTY TO COME AND PRESENT TO US.

ALTHOUGH OF COURSE WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION.

I, I JUST, I HAVE SOME KIND OF UNEASINESS ABOUT, UM, INVITING A PARTICULAR INTERVENER, UH, TO, TO COME AND PRESENT TO US.

UM, AND PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

UM, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THE INDEPENDENT

[02:10:01]

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M GUILTY OF THIS.

UH, IT'S, IT'S OFTEN MUCH EASIER FOR ME TO DIGEST WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO ME RATHER THAN ME GOING AND HAVING TO DIG IT UP AND FIND IT AND READ IT.

UM, AND SO I HAVE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF DISCOMFORT ABOUT THAT.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, I WAS THINKING ABOUT THAT, THAT WE, WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT WAS WHAT IF AFTER THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINERS, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS ISSUED, WE INVITE ALL STAKEHOLDERS, UM, NOT STAKEHOLDERS, EXCUSE ME, INTERVENERS, TO COME AND PRESENT TO US.

AND, UM, AND, AND THEN ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO CAN SHOW UP, UH, AND IF THEY DON'T, THEN I ASSUME THAT THEY'RE, THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN US HEARING.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S, THAT'S AN IDEA, THE CONSENT, THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE, IT, UH, ALL OF WHICH IS THIS IS INVITING THEM AND MAYBE WILL SAY, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET.

UH, BUT ALL WE'RE DOING HERE AS I READ IT AS, AS PUTTING IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM, UH, AND CERTAINLY EXTENDING THE INVITATION, BUT THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE, UH, THAT CITY COUNCIL HIRED IS NOT JUST ANY INTERVENER PARTY.

UH, RATHER THIS IS A INDIVIDUAL.

AND IF I READ IT RIGHT, IT NOT JUST AN ONE INDIVIDUAL, BUT THEIR CONSENT SUBCONTRACTS, UH, AND ALL OF WHICH IS TO SAY, HERE'S YOUR THREE MINUTES TO SOMEBODY WHO HAS BEEN SELECTED BY CITY COUNCIL TO REPRESENT ALL THE RESIDENTIAL AND S AND SMALL BUSINESS CUSTOMERS, UH, TO ME, WOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE.

AND THAT'S SO SIMPLY ADDING THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM, INVITING THEM.

AND IF HE SAYS NO, OR MAYBE IF HE SAYS NO, OR I NEED TO AMEND MY CONTRACT THAT'S BETWEEN HIM AND AUSTIN ENERGY OR COUNCIL.

UH, SO ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. I SEARCHED HER HOPKINS CONCERN THOUGH.

THERE IS A PENDING RATE REVIEW, AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE INTERVENERS AND NOT WITHSTANDING THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATES STATUS.

THEY, THAT PERSON STILL IS ONE OF SEVERAL INTERVENERS IN THIS FORMAL PROCEEDING.

AND IT JUST FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE TO HAVE TO SINGLE OUT A SPECIFIC INTERVENER, UM, AND INVITE JUST THAT PERSON, I THINK.

AND I DON'T, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU SUGGESTING WE WERE, WE WOULD LIMIT THAT TO THREE MINUTES.

NO, I WAS JUST, I WAS SUGGESTING THAT WE INVITE ALL INTERVENERS TO COME AND SPEAK TO US AT, FOR INSTANCE, THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.

UM, AND, AND NOT, NOT THAT IT'D BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES, BUT I WAS, WE COULD COME UP WITH SOME, SOME LIMITATIONS SO THAT WE'RE NOT HERE ALL NIGHT, BUT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT.

I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE INVITING ONE OF THE MULTIPLE INTERVENERS, GIVEN OUR, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE A FORMAL ROLE IN THE RATE REVIEW PROCESS.

THIS IS NOT ANYBODY WHO SIGNED UP AND INTERVENE MOTION TO INTERVENE.

THIS IS THE COUNCIL SELECTED REPRESENTATIVE.

THIS IS TWO PURSUANT TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY.

AND IT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THE SAME.

I DISAGREE.

WHERE THEY EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT THEY THINK OF WHAT'S GOING ON AND, UH, HOW THEY WOULD PROPOSE TO ADJUST AUSTIN ENERGY'S PROPOSAL AND ALL.

I JUST THINK THEY HAVE THE SAME STATUS TECHNICALLY AS AN INTERVENER IN THE PROCESS AS THESE OTHER INTERVENERS.

SO THIS IS CARRIE, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS APROPOS OF ANYTHING, BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT IT'S NOT HARD TO FIND OUT WHAT THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE THINKS BECAUSE THEY'RE FILING PLEADINGS IN THIS PROCESS, WRITTEN PLEADINGS,

[02:15:01]

SO FOR THOSE OF USE WHO ARE INTERESTED TO FIND OUT WHAT A CONSUMER ADVOCATE HAS TO SAY OR WHAT THEY THINK YOU CAN GET, THAT YOU CAN, IT'S GOING TO BE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.

I, THIS IS KATE RUSSELL.

I, UM, I'M NOT, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE, I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT ANY KIND OF ANYTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE AN EX PARTE COMMUNICATION BY HAVING ONLY ONE BY HAVING THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE COME.

BUT, UM, I THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE, I DON'T THINK THEY'D BE WILLING TO COME BEFORE THEY FILED THEIR, BEFORE THE HEARING OR BEFORE, BEFORE THEY FILED THEIR CLOSING ARGUMENT.

AND, UM, I I'M, I'M GONNA AGREE WITH CARRIE HERE.

I THINK THAT THE ANSWER IS THAT RATHER THAN JUST WAITING TILL WE GET THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION AT THE END OF AUGUST, AND THEN, UH, UH, WE CAN CONSIDER IT, I GUESS IN SEPTEMBER OR SEPTEMBER 12TH MEETING AND OUR OCTOBER 10TH MEETING IN ADVANCE OF THE WORK SESSIONS, THAT, THAT THE ANSWER MAY BE ASSUMING THEY'RE IN THE SETTLEMENT OF THE CASE, BUT, AND I HAVE NO IDEA THE LIKELIHOOD VET OR NOT, BUT IS TO READ THEIR STATEMENTS OF POSITION, UH, READ WHAT THEIR CLOSING BRIEF SAY SO THAT WE, AND THEN READ THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION.

I JUST, UH, UH, THINK, I THINK ACTUALLY TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS ABOUT ALL THE PARTICIPANTS, THAT IF WE WANT TO BE FULLY INFORMED OF HOW WE RESPOND TO THE INDEPENDENT HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING, WE'LL BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION OF OUR OWN COUNSEL ON THAT.

WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO BE LOOKING AT IF NOT WATCHING THE HEARING ITSELF, RE AT LEAST READING ALL THE CLOSING ARGUMENTS THAT ARE PRESENTED.

I'M NOT SAYING I'M GOING TO DO THAT THOUGH, HONESTLY.

UM, I'M, UH, WITH OUR CHAIR ON, IT'S SO MUCH EASIER TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN AND MAKE A PRESENTATION TO US, BUT, UH, THINK THAT THAT MAY BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO HAVE A FIRM BASIS FOR WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION WE MAY.

I THINK THOSE ARE VERY FAIR POINTS AND I THINK THAT'S RIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER TRUSSELL.

I THINK THAT TO MAKE AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION ON THE HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION, WE ARE ALL GOING TO NEED TO AT LEAST, UM, AT VERY LEAST READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE HEARING EXAMINER.

AND THEN I WOULD SAY, UM, THE PARTIES, EXCEPTIONS, UH, WHICH ARE, OR THEIR RESPONSE TO THAT, WHICH IS ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, WILL PROBABLY BE VERY INFORMATIVE TO ON, ON WHETHER, YOU KNOW, ANY PARTICULAR PARTY IS, UH, SATISFIED WITH THE HEARING EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATION OR IF THEY HAVE A PARTICULAR CONCERN ABOUT, UM, ANY, ANY ASPECT.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT'LL SHOW UP AND WOULD BE PARTICULARLY INFORMATIVE.

AND I DO THINK IT'S JUST, IT'S GONNA TAKE SOME READING ON ALL OF OUR PARTS, MR. REED.

UM, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT, RIGHT? I MISS, BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE IN JUNE, UM, WE COULD DISCUSS THIS MORE IN JULY.

WHAT, WHETHER A FUTURE UC MEETING WOULD HAVE PRESENTATIONS FROM STAKEHOLDERS, UM, ARE YOU SUGGESTING A SPECIAL MEETING THEN? I'M NOT SUGGESTING A SPECIAL MEETING.

I'M SUGGESTING THAT IN JULY, WE COULD TAKE UP THIS ISSUE AGAIN ABOUT HOW DO WE WANT TO DELIBERATE ON AUSTIN RATE CASE.

AND DO WE NEED PRESENTATIONS FROM DIFFERENT FROM THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE AND OR OTHER FOLKS SAYING WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION TONIGHT? THAT'S GOOD WITH ME, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN POSTED IT ON THE AGENDA.

DIDN'T KNOW MY LIGHT WAS STILL ON HERE.

UH, UH, YEAH, YEAH, WE CAN PLAN ON THAT.

WE CAN PLAN ON THIS.

UH, BUT, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS I DO NOT EQUATE THE CITY SELECTED

[02:20:01]

LIMITING IT TO THREE TO FIVE MINUTES FOR THE CONSENT CITY, CONSUMER ADVOCATE.

UH, HOWEVER, TO PUT THAT PERSON IN THE SAME BASIS AS ALL THE OTHERS AND SAY, HERE'S YOUR FIVE MINUTES OR 10 MINUTES, UH, I THINK THE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHATEVER THEY ARE, I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO THAT INDIVIDUAL.

SO, BUT I, I DO WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR AT, TO HEAR AND BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THAT INDIVIDUAL.

SO IF, IF THE WORKING GROUP IS COMFORTABLE, UM, POSTING ITEM NUMBER FIVE FOR DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION FOR THE JULY MEETING, AND WE CAN TAKE IT UP THEN.

OTHER BUSINESS OF THIS IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT REPORT, UM, REGARDING THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON ITEMS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED BY THE EUC.

UM, THEN WE WILL TABLE ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, UNTIL THE JULY MEETING.

UM, THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR THAT.

UM, REALLY I THINK RIGOROUS AND INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION, UM, AND FOR STICKING WITH US LATE INTO THE EVENING, UH, OKAY.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO

[8. Report regarding City Council action on items previously reviewed by the EUC.]

UM, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THIS DOCUMENT HEARING? NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN A WAIT, DO I APPROVE THIS? I JUST TOTALLY BLANKED.

IT'S JUST A, IT'S JUST A REPORT, RIGHT? I DON'T HAVE TO.

OKAY, THANKS.

I JUST COMPLETELY BLANKED, SORRY GUYS.

EXACTLY.

UH, OKAY.

ITEMS. UH, SO WE HAVE THE ANNUAL REPORT, UM, IS, IS THIS IS THE EUC ANNUAL REPORT AND IT'S DUE IN JULY.

UM, AND THEN FINALLY, FUTURE AGENDA

[9. Future agenda items]

UH, OKAY.

UM, SO I'M GOING TO REQUEST THAT THE, UM, JULY MEETING INCLUDE AN AGENDA ITEM OF, OF REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL REPORT.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, I WILL, UH, WORK WITH, UH, ROBIN OR NATASHA ON, ON GETTING A DRAFT CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSION FOR REVIEW, UM, ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, UH, THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS.

HEY CARRIE, WASN'T THERE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT SEEING THE RFQ? I THOUGHT THEY WERE RFPS OR RFQ IS OUT FOR STORAGE PROJECTS AND JUST SOME KIND OF REVIEW OF WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED WITH THEM AND WHETHER IT BE PPA PA'S OR THE STORAGE CONTRACTS.

WHAT DO YOU REMEMBER FROM SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS ON THAT, OR WHEN IS LOGICAL TO GET A REVIEW ON THAT? AND SECONDLY, WE HAD A CONVERSATION A FEW MONTHS AGO ABOUT THE EAV, UM, INTELLIGENT CHARGING PLAN INSTEAD OF EXTENDING THE TOU PLAN, THERE WAS AN IDEA OF DOING SOMETHING BETTER AND SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE OUGHTA SEE WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS AND WHAT IT IS.

NOTED THE RFP STORAGE, UH, UPDATE IS, IS ON THE LIST OF ITEMS. I DON'T KNOW IF NATASHA, DO YOU KNOW WHEN IT'S SCHEDULED TO BE? I KNOW IT'S ON THE, UM, IT'S SLATED FOR IN THE COMING MONTHS.

I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC DATE, UM, OR AGENDA.

UM, PERHAPS ROBIN CAN HELP US ON THAT.

UM, WHEN SHE, WHEN SHE GETS BACK.

TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE CONFERENCE.

ANYBODY, ANYBODY ELSE CAN I SHOW TROSTLE I IT'S REALLY NOT AN AGENDA ITEM.

I HAVE SOME MEMORY THAT WE HAD, I, YOU AND I HAVE DISCUSSED AT LAST MONTH'S MEETING SOME REASON THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO PUSH SEE IF WE COULD POSSIBLY RESCHEDULE THE JULY MEETING TO THE THIRD MONDAY OF THE MONTH.

AND THAT MAY BE IMPOSSIBLE BASED ON THE CITY'S, UH, WE'RE CHAIN MEETINGS.

I WOULD NOT, I THINK IT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH WHEN THE BUDGET PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE MADE AND WE THOUGHT IF WE COULD MEET THEM, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHY, BUT I DO KNOW THAT IF WE MEET ON JULY 11TH IS I THINK WE'RE CURRENTLY SCHEDULED TO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST DAY THAT WOULD BE THE SETTLEMENT ON THIS RIGHT CASE, SUDDENLY THE SETTLEMENT DISCUSSION DAY AND THEN

[02:25:01]

SO I WOULD PROBABLY THE HEARING THE CONFERENCE DURING THE REST OF THAT WEEK, BUT, UH, HELPED ME OUT WITH THE, UH, WHEN THE BUDGET PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE MADE TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT.

JULY 15TH IS THE BUDGET PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL.

UM, SO, UH, YES.

THANK YOU FOR THAT REMINDER.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, I WOULD LET ME LOOK AT MY CALENDAR HERE.

SO WE'RE SCHEDULED FOR OUR, OUR, UM, JULY MEETING IS ON THE 11TH THAT'S RIGHT.

JULY 11TH.

AND SO WE WERE DISCUSSING, UH, POTENTIALLY MOVING IT TO JULY 18TH, IF, IF THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY.

SO THE THINGS THAT I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT ONE, UM, THAT'S GOING TO BE DOABLE FOR AUSTIN ENERGY AND TWO, THAT WE'D BE ABLE TO HAVE A QUORUM BECAUSE THAT IS, YOU KNOW, SHIFTING THE DATES AROUND ON FOLKS.

UM, SO, UH, I GUESS I'M GOING TO JUST GO AROUND THE ROOM.

CYRUS, COULD YOU, HOW DOES THE 18TH LOOK OKAY, RANDY? UH, YES.

AND I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM KNOWING ANY SUBTLE, THE RESULTS IN, AND OF ANY SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS IN FIRMS AND ALSO POTENTIALLY GIVE US TWO MEETINGS TO TALK ABOUT BUDGET JULY AND AUGUST.

RIGHT? EXACTLY.

IT'S UM, OKAY, TAMMY, I THINK, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY WORKABLE.

WE NEED TO CHECK ON ROOM AVAILABILITY AND ATX AND AVAILABILITY.

UM, KOSHER BERLIN.

I HAVE SOME TRAVEL IN JULY TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED, SO I, UM, TBD, BUT I COULD LIKELY JOIN REMOTE WHEREVER I AM.

WELL, THAT'LL BE FUN ON YOUR VACATION, DEPENDING ON HOW FUN MY VACATION LOOKS.

THAT'LL DETERMINE MINE, BUT I'LL, I'LL TRY MY BEST TO BE HERE.

COMMISSIONER YONKER, I'LL BE THERE.

AND CARRIE, UH, DAVE, I ASSUME I'LL BE THERE.

WELL, IT'LL BE THE SECOND VACATION ON THIS SUMMER ON WHICH I HAVE JOINED, UH, REMOTELY.

WELL, THAT'S AWESOME THAT YOU'RE GETTING SOMEBODY VACATIONS.

THERE'S NO REASON TO FEEL SORRY FOR WHAT AND MARTY, I WOULD SAY I CAN, I WOULD NOT BE HERE ON THE JOB LIE 11TH.

I'M GOING TO BE NOT ONLY OUT OF POCKET, I'M GOING TO BE WITH FAMILY.

UM, ANYWAY, SO I WOULD NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO JOIN YOUR MONTHLY ON THE 11TH, BUT I WILL ON 18TH.

OH, GREAT.

WELL, LET'S SEE.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S ALL VERY WORKABLE AND IT'S GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL FOR BOTH THE BUDGET AND THE RATE CASE.

UM, OKAY, GREAT.

SO REAL QUICK, I THINK WE HAD ALSO REQUESTED AN UPDATE ON ELECTRIFYING SCHOOL BUS FLEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

W WE HAD, UM, YEAH, MR. BEULAH HAD RAISED SOME ISSUES AND WE HAD SAID, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR A PRESENTATION OR JUST INFORMATION.

I'M NOT SURE.

I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY THE, I DON'T EITHER, BUT YEAH, I REMEMBER WE, WE, WE GO BACK AND WATCH THE TAPE.

I DON'T REMEMBER.

GOT IT.

UM, NATASHA, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT I NEED TO DO FORMALLY TO, TO CHANGE THE MEETING DATE OTHER THAN JUST AUSTIN ENERGY IS GOING TO CONFIRM ABOUT ROOM AVAILABILITY ON A, YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO CANCEL YOUR ORIGINAL MEETING AND THEN SCHEDULE A SPECIAL CALL.

AND CAN I DO THAT NOW ON LIKE ON, ON THE, DURING THIS MEETING OR HOW TO, HOW DO I ACCOMPLISH THAT? W WE CAN DO IT.

WE CAN WORK ON IT BEHIND THE SCENES.

SO WE'LL JUST LEAVE IT AS IS I'LL HAVE ROBIN WORK WITH YOU BEHIND THE SCENES.

THAT'S AMY'S NEW JOB.

SHE HAS TO FIGURE IT OUT.

OH, YES.

I'M SO SORRY.

AND WELCOME, AMY.

I MEANT TO SAY WELCOME.

UM, THEN WE GOT DISTRACTED.

UM, BUT WELCOME.

GLAD TO HAVE YOU, UM, LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU.

ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY.

UH, ANY MORE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY.

ANY, ANY OTHER BUSINESS HEARING? NONE WITHOUT OBJECTION.

I ADJOURN THE MEETING.