Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


ROBIN, ARE

[00:00:01]

WE READY? STAFF? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

AND I CALL

[CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

THIS MEETING AT THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION TO ORDER.

IT'S OCTOBER 17TH, 2022 AT 6:00 PM NO, EXCUSE ME, 6:04 PM WE'RE HERE AT THE AUSTIN ENERGY HEADQUARTERS, AND VIRTUALLY FOR THE RECORD, WE HAVE AN ATTENDANCE COMMISSIONERS, TU YANKER, KERRY VIRTUAL, I JUST BLANKED ON YOUR LAST NAME.

COMMISSIONER BOWEN.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, COMMISSIONER REED.

AND VIRTUALLY WE HAVE COMMISSIONER TROL.

UH, FIRST WE

[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]

WILL HEAR, UH, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE FIRST SPEAKER WE HAVE ISK, YOU SIT DOWN HERE OR THINK YOU'D GO TO THE PODIUM UP THERE.

HI, MY NAME IS BILL OKIE, AND FOR THOSE OF Y'ALL WHO DON'T KNOW ME, I'VE BEEN IN THE AFFORDABILITY ADVOCATE IN AUSTIN SINCE 1983 WHEN I WON MY FIRST ELECTRIC RATE CASE WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL CUT A RATE INCREASE IN HALF ON APRIL 12TH, 1984.

I, I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THESE RATE CASES VERY CAREFULLY EVER SINCE.

UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? UH, I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THESE RAPE CASES VERY CAREFULLY SINCE 1984.

AND, UH, THE RESEARCH THAT I'VE DONE ON THE CURRENT RAPE CASE IS ABSOLUTELY FASCINATING AND SHOCKING.

AT THE SAME TIME, I WILL TELL YOU THAT THIS RAPE PROPOSAL IS BUILT UPON A FALSE FOUNDATION FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

IN APRIL, WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVED THE PRESENTATION FROM AUSTIN ENERGY, UH, THEY SAID THAT WE ARE NOT SELLING ENOUGH ELECTRICITY.

WE'RE LOSING REVENUE.

WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GENERATE MORE REVENUE THAT IS NOT RELATED TO ENERGY SALES.

SO WE'RE GONNA MULTIPLY THE CUSTOMER CHARGE BY TWO AND A HALF TIMES.

WELL, GUESS WHAT? IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR OWN CHARTS IN THAT VERY FIRST PRESENTATION, YOU WILL SEE THAT REVENUES EXCEEDED EXPENDITURE IN 20 17, 20 18, AND 2019.

IT WASN'T UNTIL 20, NOT 2020 AND 2021, UH, THAT YOU STARTED TO SEE EXPENDITURES EXCEED REVENUES.

AND THERE'S THREE REASONS FOR THAT.

NUMBER ONE, THE PANDEMIC WHEN ALL THE BUSINESSES WERE CLOSES AND PEOPLE STAYED HOME.

NUMBER TWO, THE WINTER STORM, WHICH EVERYBODY KNOWS HOW THAT SLOWED DOWN ENERGY SALES.

AND THEN THE THIRD THING, WHICH ISN'T TALKED ABOUT VERY MUCH, MUCH, IS THAT, UH, THE SUMMER OF 2021 LAST SUMMER WAS A MILDER THAN THAN NORMAL SUMMER.

SO ALL THREE OF THOSE FACTORS DROVE DOWN, UH, ENERGY SALES.

AND WHEN I TALKED TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE RATE CASE, I TALKED TO MANY OF THOSE MEMBERS OVER MANY HOURS AND DAYS.

AND WHAT I LEARNED IS THAT, UH, THEY HAVE PLENTY OF REVENUE OPTIONS, PLENTY OF, UH, COST SAVING MEASURES THAT COMPL COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THIS RATE INCREASE.

AND THE PROBLEM WITH THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION IN THE, IN THE CHARTS AND EVERYTHING IS THAT, UH, THERE'S, WHEN YOU USE A PRIOR TEST YEAR APPROACH TO SETTING, TO RATE SETTING, UH, IF YOU USE A YEAR THAT HAS AN ANOMALOUS SET OF CONDITIONS LIKE WE HAD IN, IN, IN THE WINTER STORM, IN THE PANDEMIC, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO NORMALIZE THOSE NUMBERS.

AND THE RATE CASE PARTICIPANTS TOLD ME THAT AUSTIN ENERGY DID NOT PROP MAKE ENOUGH ADJUSTMENTS TO NORMALIZE IT PROPERLY.

SO THE RATE INCREASE IS BUILT ON A FLAWED FOUNDATION TO BEGIN WITH.

AND THEN AFTER THAT, UH, THERE ARE JUST SO MANY THINGS THAT THERE ISN'T TIME TO GO THROUGH THEM TONIGHT.

BUT WHAT I'M GONNA ASK YOU TO DO IS RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY MEET WITH THE RIGHT CASE PARTICIPANTS, ASK QUESTIONS, STUDY THEIR BRIEFS, INCLUDE AUSTIN ENERGY IN THE DISCUSSIONS, AND UTILIZE THE, THE HARD WORK AND THE EXPERTISE OF THESE WONDERFUL PEOPLE, MANY OF WHOM I'M KNOWN, KNOWN FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS, UH, USE THEIR EXPERTISE TO GET RID OF THIS RATE INCREASE.

AND BECAUSE OF THE DOUBLE RATE SHOCK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAD TO, HAD TO APPROVE LAST WEEK, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE GONNA PHASE IT IN OVER THREE YEARS, MS. BE YOUR TIME AS FIRE.

UH, PLEASE, PLEASE GO BOLD AND RECOMMEND WIPING OUT THE RATE INCREASE BY USING THE EXPERTISE OF THESE EXPERTS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK

[00:05:01]

YOU, SIR.

NEXT COOPER.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M LYNETTE COOPER AND I REPRESENT, UH, TWO W R IN THE CURRENT BASE RATE PENDING BA.

IS THERE SOMETHING I'M SUPPOSED TO TOUCH HERE? OKAY.

DOES THAT HELP? ALL RIGHT.

I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

AND I HAD SENT YOU ALL THROUGH MISS OTTO, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR FORWARDING THOSE, UH, A COPY OF MY EXCEPTIONS, WHICH IS HOW YOU DISAGREE WITH THE EXAMINER WHO ISSUED THE CASE ALONG WITH THE TWO ATTACHMENTS I HAD MADE WITH THE EXCEPTION, ALONG WITH ACTUAL PAGES FROM AUSTIN ENERGY'S RATE CASE, UH, TO THAT I CITED IN THOSE EXCEPTIONS.

AND SO WHAT I'VE DONE ALSO TONIGHT, AND I'VE PASSED TO YOU AND YOU SHOULD ALSO GET IT ELECTRONICALLY, BUT I WAS LATE GETTING IT TO HIM.

YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS LATE TO THE PARTY, UH, WHICH IS AN OUTLINE, AND I REALLY DON'T WANNA SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN THE OUTLINE.

I THINK IT'S SELF EXPLANATORY.

EVERY POINT I'VE MADE IN HERE IS SUPPORTED BY THE RECORD EVIDENCE.

IF, UH, YOU WANT, UH, SOURCES OF A RECORD EVIDENCE, I CAN CERTAINLY GIVE THEM TO YOU.

UH, NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEADS.

I CAN TELL YOU KIND OF WHETHER THEY'RE IN THE RATE FILING PACKAGE OR THAT, BUT I WANTED TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME OF, UH, WHAT IS THE RATE DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND WHERE DO WE GET THEM.

UH, RATE DESIGN PRINCIPLES ARE BASICALLY SET UP UNDER THE PUBLIC UTILITY REGULATORY ACT.

UH, AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT BECAUSE WHEN, UH, WE HAD A RAPE CASE APPEAL SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THAT WAS THE BIG ISSUE.

WHAT KIND OF REGULATORY PRINCIPLES SHOULD APPLY TO A MUNICIPALITY ON APPEAL? AND THE COURT SAID IT SHOULD BE THE STATE, STATE, UH, REGULATORY PRINCIPLES.

AND SO WHAT I HAVE GOTTEN FROM THESE STATUTES, AND IT WOULD BE 36.003, THAT SETS OUT THE VERY BROAD PARAMETERS OF WHAT YOU SHOULD LOOK AT AND THINK ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE DESIGNING RATES.

AND THAT'S ARE THAT RATES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE JUST IN REASONABLE AND THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE EQUITABLE.

THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE UNREASONABLY PREFERENTIAL.

AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT YOU CAN HAVE SOME PREFERENCE, YOU JUST CAN'T BE UNREASONABLE ABOUT IT.

AND THAT ALSO FIGURES INTO THE CONCEPT OF EQUITY.

AND OF COURSE, RATES SHOULD HAVE SOME SEMBLANCE TO COST AND, UH, THEY MUST BE SUFFICIENT.

THAT MEANS COST AND THEY SHOULD BE CONSISTENT.

IN OTHER WORDS, PEOPLE SHOULD ALL BE PAYING THE SAME THING.

AND IN OUR INVERTED BLOCK RATE, REG RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING THE SAME THING.

EVERYBODY PAYS THE SAME CUSTOMER CHARGE.

WELL, EXCEPT FOR THE LOW INCOME FOLKS IN THE CAT PROGRAM, EVERYBODY PAYS THE SAME RATE FOR THE FIRST 500 AND ON UP.

UH, ANOTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE MAKING THE DECISION ON, ON THE RATES, AND I'M MOST INTERESTED IN RATE DESIGN, CUZ I THINK IT IS A ALMOST A SIN TO, UH, BRING IN A CUSTOMER CHARGE THAT'S ALMOST DOUBLE WELL IS DOUBLE AND SOMETIMES EVEN TROUBLE OF WHAT THE SIMILAR SIZE UTILITIES ARE IN TEXAS.

UH, IT DOESN'T, THEY DON'T HAVE REALLY A VALID REASON FOR THAT.

UH, EVERYTHING THEY'VE GOT IS NOT REALLY JUSTIFIED.

AND THAT IS SHOWED UP IN MY POINTS, BUT UNDER STATE LAW THAT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO RAISE ANY CUSTOMER CLASS MORE THAN 150% IS THE TIME UP.

OKAY.

I CAN BARELY HEAR IT.

WELL, THAT'S ALL I DID NOT WANNA SPEND A LOT OF TIME LIKE I DID LAST TIME.

UH, I KNOW Y'ALL'S TIME IS BUSY, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

WELL, LYNNETTE A VERY QUICK QUESTION.

DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR WHAT A REASONABLE CUSTOMER CHARGE WOULD BE IN THIS CASE PERSONALLY GIVEN, UH, THE TESTIMONY FROM, UH, MR. JOHNSON WHO ACTUALLY LOOKED AT THE DIRECT COST? AND THAT'S WHAT A CUSTOMER CHARGE IS SUPPOSED TO COVER.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO CO UH, COVER THE COST OF, OF WHAT A CUSTOMER, THE VARYING COST.

IF YOU ADD A CUSTOMER TO THE SYSTEM OR TAKE THE CUSTOMER OUT, WHAT COST DOES THE, UH, DOES THE UTILITY INCUR OR LOSE? AND THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE INSTANCE.

AND IN HIS CASE, IT WAS HE FOUND THAT THE, UH, ACTUAL COST, THE DIRECT COST WAS EVEN LESS THAN THE CURRENT CUSTOMER CHARGE.

I WOULD BE COMPLETELY HAPPY WITH THE CURRENT CUSTOMER CHARGE, BUT WE WOULD NOT, UH, MY CUSTOMER, MY CLIENTS WOULD NOT OBJECT TO SOMETHING THAT, UH, MIRRORS THE, UH, CLASS INCREASE.

AND IN NO MATTER WE SHOULD EXCEED THE $13 THAT ICA THROUGH IN.

BUT I REALLY PERSONALLY THINK IT SHOULD NO BE NO HIGHER THAN THE SYSTEM AVERAGE

[00:10:01]

INCREASE.

AND AND WHAT WAS THE SYSTEM AVERAGE INCREASE? DO YOU REMEMBER? 5%.

OKAY.

AND SO I THINK, I MEAN, YOU MIGHT NEED TO GET SOMEBODY WHO'S HERE, BUT I THINK IT'S 5%.

AND SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE CUSTOMER CHARGE NOT BE INCREASED MORE THAN 5%.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

THAT EVERY, EVERY, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIER SHOULD INCREASE CONSISTENTLY THE SAME.

OKAY.

THANK YOU MS. COOPER.

AND, AND, UH, CAN, UH, YOU MENTIONED PRINCIPLE TWO QUESTIONS.

YOU, UH, IN TERMS OF AVOIDING RIGHT SH SO-CALLED RIGHT SHOCK EQUITY, UH, SPEAK TO PLEASE SPEAK TO HOW THAT WOULD BE, UH, PHASED IN.

ANY CHANGES BETWEEN THE CLASS SHOULD BE PHASED IN.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? WELL, UH, AND I DERIVE THIS FROM THE PRINCIPLES I GOT FROM THE STATE, STATE, AND THESE ALSO KIND OF, I USED TO WORK WITH THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC UTILITY COUNCIL, SO I WAS IN A LOT OF STATE REGULATORY CASES, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE LOOKED AT.

AND ONE OF THE ISSUES IS NO CUSTOMER CLASH SHOULD HAVE AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 150%.

UH, AND THAT'S JUST WAS JUST A GENERAL PRINCIPLE.

AND THEN YOU CAN FIND THIS OTHER ONE IN, UH, THE REVIEW OF RATE, RATE, UH, THE, THE MUNICIPAL RATES.

UH, THERE'S A LITTLE HISTORY, LITTLE POLITICAL HISTORY HERE OF, UH, UH, WHEN A, OUR RATES WERE APPEALED.

THEY SEE THE PUC GETS TO DECIDE USING THEIR OWN CONCEPT OF WHAT SHOULD BE USED, WHAT FORMULAS AND ALL THAT.

AND IF IT IS SO OUT OF RANGE WITH WHAT THE PUC, I MEAN WITH THE CITY HAD COME UP WITH, THEN WE'RE PUT ON A 10 YEAR PAROLE .

AND THERE'S CERTAIN STATUTORY, UH, STANDARDS IN THAT 10 YEAR PAROLE, AND ONE OF 'EM IS, UH, IN A RATE CASE.

UH, NO CUSTOMER CLASS SHOULD INCREASE MORE THAN 150%.

AND, UH, THAT'S JUST, I THINK IT REALLY REFLECTS WHAT HAD BEEN BASICALLY, I HATE TO SAY COMMON LAW.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING IS.

OKAY.

UH, MY, MY SECOND QUESTION, UH, MY SECOND QUESTION IS, YOU PARTICIPATED IN THE, UH, ADVISORY, THE CITY'S TASK FORCE THAT ESTABLISHED THE CAP PROGRAM.

UH, AND, AND THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

BUT MY QUESTION IS, UH, READING THE HEAR, UH, HEARING ALL EXAMINERS RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THOSE ARE THE PARTIES, UH, THERE'S BEEN A LOT DISCUSSION, UH, REGARDING THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT PARTI UNDER PARTICIPATION UTILIZATION AND PEOPLE WHO ARE IN POVERTY BUT DON'T QUALIFY BASED UPON ONE OF THOSE, UH, PROGRAMS WHERE THEY DO THE MATCH.

HOW WOULD YOU CHANGE THAT? WELL, ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS WITH THE CAT PROGRAM IS IT'S, UH, INCOME ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS IS DIFFERENT THAN THE INCOME STANDARDS RELIED ON BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS.

UH, LIKE THE ONE THAT HELPS FOR HOUSING REPAIR.

THEY USE THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME CRITERIA.

I'M NOT SAYING IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE HISTORICALLY WEATHERIZATION PROGRAMS COUNTRYWIDE HAVE ALWAYS USED THE FEDERAL POVERTY GUIDELINE.

BUT ONE THING THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT IS ACCESS TO WEATHERIZATION PROGRAMS THAT MAYBE WE SH I, I REALLY THINK WE SHOULD EXTEND THE INCOME QUALIFICATION FOR WEATHERIZATION PROGRAMS FOR THE CAP CUSTOMERS.

I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT REPLACING AIR CONDITIONERS, PARTICULARLY UNIT AIR CONDITIONERS, UH, BECAUSE THAT'S, UH, SOMETHING THAT REALLY WILL USE UP A LOT OF ELECTRICITY UNDER THE OLDER AIR CONDITIONING.

SO THEY DON'T WORK VERY WELL.

THE NEWER ONES WILL BE MORE EFFICIENT.

UH, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT MAYBE INCREASING THE, THE INCOME GUIDELINE EVEN FOR THE CAP PROGRAM ITSELF.

UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT SHOULD HAVE THE SAME, UH, PROGRAM BENEFITS, BUT MAYBE SIMILAR.

I I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU MR. TOPHER.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR, FOR HAVING US.

NEXT SPEAKER IS DALE VULA.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS DALE BULE.

I WANT TO SHARE SOME OF MY THOUGHTS ON ELECTRIC SCHOOL BUSES.

[00:15:02]

UM, THE MESSAGE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING IS TALKING ABOUT V TO G OR VEHICLE TO GRID TECHNOLOGY AND ELECTRIC SCHOOL BUSES, UH, HAVE SENT, UH, YOU SEVERAL ARTICLES SHOWING WHAT OTHER STATES ARE DOING WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY.

AND I THINK AUSTIN ENERGY SHOULD SUPPORT THIS CONCEPT AND PROMOTE THIS TECHNOLOGY ALONG WITH A I S D AND THE OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE IN OUR SERVICE AREA WITH HUNDREDS OF BUSES SITTING IN BUS BARNS ALL SUMMER.

IT SEEMS TO BE A NO BRAINER.

THOSE SAME BUSES COULD BE PUT TO GOOD USE, UH, BY GENERATING REVENUE TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS WHILE REVIVING OR RELIEVING SOME OF THE STRESS ON OUR GRID DURING THESE HIGH PEAK LOADS.

THESE BUSES COULD ALSO BE USED AS EMERGENCY POWER STATIONS DURING POWER OUTAGES OR OTHER KINDS OF EMERGENCIES.

I HEAR THAT AUSTIN ENERGY IS PLANNING FOR BATTERY STORAGE, BUT I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW THAT IS PROGRESSING AND WHAT AT, AT WHAT COST.

UH, BY PARTNERING WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS, IT COULD LOWER THE OUTLAY OF SCHOOL BUS PURCHASES WHILE PROVIDING, UH, PERHAPS A LOWER COST TO THE UTILITY AS IT SEEMS TO BE WORKING IN NEW YORK AND MASSACHUSETTS, UH, ILLINOIS, AS WELL AS CALIFORNIA BY FILLING UP BATTERIES AT NIGHT WHEN SOME WIND TURBINES ARE EVEN TURNED OFF BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO PLACE TO SEND THE ENERGY.

THIS SEEMS LIKE A WIN-WIN FOR ALL THAT ARE CONCERNED, AS WELL AS THE HEALTH OF THE CHILDREN THAT RIDE THESE BUSES.

AND OF COURSE, THE PLANET WILL HAVE FEWER EMISSIONS AS WELL.

THIS COULD PERHAPS SAVE MONEY FOR AUSTIN ENERGY BY NEEDING FEWER BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME HELPING SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH A REVENUE STREAM.

UH, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO PLAN NOW FOR LOTS OF CHARGING STATIONS AT SCHOOL DISTRICTS WHILE MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE EQUIPPED WITH V TO G BUSES AS WELL AS V TO G CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE.

UH, I KNOW THERE WAS A PRESS CONFERENCE THIS EVENING AT A I S D ANNOUNCING, UH, SOME OF THESE EFFORTS.

THEY HAVE THREE BUSES ON ORDER, AND I THINK THAT MIGHT MAKE A GREAT PILOT PROGRAM TO SEE WHAT VT G COULD DO TO HELP THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND TO HELP AUSTIN ENERGY.

AND THANKS FOR LISTENING TO MY IDEAS.

THANK YOU, MR. BULA.

MS. OTTO, DO WE HAVE ANY MORE? YES.

NEXT SPEAKER IS ASHLEY FISHER.

HI, MY NAME'S ASHLEY FISHER.

I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE SOLAR AND STORAGE COALITION.

UM, WE SPOKE TO YOU LAST MONTH IN MORE DETAIL ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS OUR COALITION HAS BEEN ASKING FOR IN THE RATE CASE.

I HAVE A HANDOUT THAT I THINK I GAVE TO MOST PEOPLE, BUT I THINK I MISSED A COUPLE, SO I'LL HAND IT BACK OUT.

BUT JUST TO SUMMARIZE, SORT OF AN OFFICIAL INTERVENER IN THE RATE CASE AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN BEEN, UH, AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN ASKING FOR THROUGHOUT THE RIGHT CASE IS TO EXPAND THE VALUE OF SOLAR TARIFF TO INCLUDE STORAGE.

UM, AUSTIN ENERGY HAS STATED THAT THEY THINK OUR ISSUES ARE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE RIGHT CASE.

UM, BUT IN THEIR CLOSING BRIEF, UM, THEY DID NOTE THAT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME THAT E COMMITS TO INCLUDING SSC AS STAKEHOLDERS AND THE DEVELOPMENTS OF PROGRAMS RAISED IN THIS BRIEF.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS PART OF THIS PROCESS.

IT'S CONCURRENT WITH THE RATE CASE FOR SOME DIRECTION TO AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, TO LAUNCH A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS TO CONSIDER DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR PLUS STORAGE TARIFF.

AND I INCLUDE SOME DRAFT LANGUAGE HERE, UM, TO SORT OF HELP WITH THAT, BUT TO LOOK AT A RATE, UM, THAT COULD INCLUDE REBATES FOR STORAGE, TIME OF USE, ALLOWING MICROGRID, UH, TO SHARE PAYMENTS ACROSS CUSTOMER INVOICES AND A FEW OTHER THINGS.

SO I HAVE SOME LANGUAGE HERE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER IN THIS PROCESS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. FISHER.

SURE.

AND THE FINAL SPEAKER IS JEAN CHERRY.

MY NAME IS JEAN CHERRY.

I'M A CUSTOMER OF AUSTIN ENERGY, AND I HAVE A PV SYSTEM INSTALLED.

SO WHAT IS MY VALUE AS SOLAR? WHEN I BOUGHT THE SYSTEM SEVEN TO 10 YEAR OR SEVEN YEARS AGO, IT WAS SAID THAT SEVEN TO 10 YEARS WOULD BE THE PAYOFF OF THE SYSTEM.

I'D GET LOWER IN ENERGY BILLS, I'D HEADS AGAINST INFLATION.

SO FAR, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF THIS.

SEVEN YEARS AGO WHEN I INSTALLED IT FOR 30 K, I'VE GENERATED 5.6 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY.

AND IF YOU FIGURE THAT AT 10 CENTS, WHICH IS A LITTLE HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE GETTING PAID RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ONLY $5,600 AGAINST A THREE $30,000 SYSTEM.

HOW DO I PAY IT BACK? WELL, AUSTIN ENERGY BUYS

[00:20:01]

ALL OF MY PV ELECTRICITY AND THEN SELLS IT ALL BACK TO ME.

SO I PAY A, UH, HIGHER RATE STRUCTURE IN THE TIER STRUCTURE BECAUSE I HAVE TO BUY IT BACK.

EVEN THOUGH MY HOUSE USES WHAT I GENERATE, I PAY REGULATORY CHARGES ON THE, ON THE ELECTRICITY THAT I GENERATE BECAUSE I BUY IT BACK AND YOU PAY, I PAY THE SAME AS THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR.

MY FUEL ADJUSTMENT COSTS ARE THERE.

WHAT DO YOU DO? SEND A SHUTTLE TO THE SUN EVERY DAY TO FUEL IT SO I GET MORE ENERGY FROM IT.

I DON'T THINK SO.

SO WHY AM I PAYING FUEL ADJUSTMENT COSTS ON THE ENERGY THAT I GENERATE? AND LASTLY, BENEFITS, COMMUNITY BENEFITS? WELL, I, I HAVE A PV SET.

I'M GENERATING ELECTRICITY FOR THE COMMUNITY.

I'M HELPING OUT BY USING LESS ENERGY OFF THE GRID, BUT I'M TURNED AROUND AND PAYING A COMMUNITY BENEFIT THEN ON THAT SAME ELECTRICITY.

WHY? WHY? WHY DO I DO THAT? SINCE WE'RE NEGOTIATING FOR A DIFFERENT PRICE RATE.

HOW ABOUT RAISING MY RATE UP SO I GET MORE OUT OF IT SO I CAN PAY MY SYSTEM OFF, SAY 60 CENTS A KILOWATT HOUR INSTEAD OF 10 CENTS? THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. CHERRY.

THERE NO MORE SPEAKERS.

THANK YOU.

MOVING ON TO

[1. Approve the minutes of the Electric Utility Commission Regular meeting on September 12, 2022.]

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

UH, WE HAVE THE SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2022 MINUTES FOR CIRCULATED WITH YOUR MEETING MATERIALS.

ANY COMMENTS OR CHANGES MOVE TO APPROVE.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER REED.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

AND COMMISSIONER TREL? I CAN'T HEAR YOU, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU VOTED, IF SHE'S NOT ON THAT'S OKAY.

SHE'S ON.

I UNMUTED.

I'M OKAY.

I, YES, YOU, YOU MUTED ME.

OKAY.

I'M, I VOTED I OH, GREAT.

OKAY.

THANKS.

UH, ALL THOSE OPPOSED, OR NONE OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, MOVING ON

[Items 2 - 10]

TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RECOMMENDATIONS.

THIS IS ITEMS NUMBER TWO THROUGH 10.

ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO TAKE UP FOR DISCUSSION? OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBERS 10, EXCUSE ME, TWO THROUGH 10.

SO MOVED.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

AND COMMISSIONER TREL.

AYE.

GREAT.

I, UH, NONE OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES.

OKAY.

MOVING

[11. Discussion and possible action on the proposed Base Rate changes.]

ON TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 11, THIS IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE PROPOSED BASE RATE CHANGES.

AND HERE AT THE TOP, I'D LIKE TO, UH, TALK ABOUT A COUPLE LOGISTIC THINGS.

SO, UM, AS I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITY ONGOING.

UH, WITH REGARD TO THE BASE RATE CHANGES WE HAVE.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE, UH, STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE PARTICIPATED IN THE RATE REVIEW PROCESS ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN, UH, ONGOING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS.

UH, LIKEWISE, THERE IS, UH, THE PSA, UM, ADJUSTMENT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL LAST WEEK.

UM, I THINK MOST FOLKS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT.

AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S GOING TO BE A, UM, YOU KNOW, A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO, UH, CUSTOMERS' BILLS.

AND FINALLY, UM, DURING THAT CONVERSATION, UM, THAT COUNSEL HAD, THEY, THEY DISCUSSED PUSHING BACK THE BASE RATE CHANGE DECISION AT COUNSEL TO EARLY DECEMBER.

AND I THINK, UM, WE MAY NOT HAVE CONFIRMATION YET ON WHEN THOSE MEETINGS WILL BE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, DECEMBER 1ST, AND COMMISSIONER REID, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THAT, THAT'S DECEMBER 1ST, IS THE DATE THAT, UH, COUNSEL IS LIKELY TO TAKE UP THE BASE RATE REVIEW, UH, FOR A DECISION.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, I BELIEVE THEY ARE ASKING, OR THAT THEY INTEND TO HOLD ADDITIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS, PERHAPS

[00:25:01]

A PUBLIC HEARING WHERE THEY ARE INVITING, UH, RATE CASE PARTICIPANTS TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL.

AGAIN, ON THESE ARE ON THESE ISSUES.

MAYBE NOT.

AGAIN, COMMISSIONER REED, DID I GETTING, I THINK YOU GOT IT RIGHT.

I'M, I WAS WONDERING IF SOMEBODY FROM AUSTIN ENERGY COULD BE THERE JUST TO CONFIRM THOSE DATES.

SO WE KNEW, UM, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THESE DATES ARE SET IN STONE OR THEY'RE JUST PART OF A DISCUSSION, BUT IF SOMEBODY FROM AUSTIN ENERGY, I JUST HAVE A, HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TIMING.

OKAY.

SO, HI AMY.

HI.

SO, UM, IS, IS WHAT CHAIRMAN HOPKINS SAID GENERALLY CORRECT THAT CITY COUNCILS INDICATED THEY, THEY WOULD MAKE A DECISION EITHER ON DECEMBER 1ST OR DECEMBER 8TH.

YES.

CURRENTLY THERE, THE PLAN IS FOR DECEMBER 1ST, AND THEY ADDED A NUMBER OF WORK SESSIONS THAT ARE ON THE COUNCIL MESSAGE BOARD RIGHT NOW WHO MAY HAVE POSTED THAT EARLIER TODAY.

SO YOU CAN GO AND CHECK OUT ALL THOSE DATES.

OKAY.

AND MAYBE WE CAN GET, UM, MAYBE WE CAN DISTRIBUTE THAT TO THE UC COMMISSIONERS.

SO WE'RE YEAH, I CAN, I CAN SEND YOU JUST THE AUSTIN ENERGY PART THIS DATE.

OKAY.

UM, AND THEN ONE OF THOSE WORK SESSIONS WOULD INVOLVE PARTIES AND THE IE AND AUSTIN ENERGY PRESENTING TO CITY COUNCIL.

YES.

SO CURRENTLY THAT IS PROPOSED AS NOVEMBER 9TH.

UM, AND THAT THIS WAS ALL JUST DECIDED TODAY, BUT THAT'S WHY NOBODY'S BEEN INFORMED OFFICIALLY.

BUT YES, NOVEMBER 9TH IS THE DATE THAT THE IE, THE ICA ALL PARTICIPANTS AND AUSTIN ENERGY WOULD, WOULD PRESENT.

OKAY.

AND WHEN ARE WE SCHEDULED TO MEET AGAIN? NOVEMBER 14TH.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO WITH, WITH ALL ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER REED? I, I GUESS ONE QUESTION WOULD BE, UM, IS NOVEMBER 14TH, IS WAITING TILL NOVEMBER 14TH WAITING TOO LONG, GIVEN THAT THEY WILL HAVE STARTED THOSE WORKSHOPS? OR IS THERE THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE A, A SPECIAL MEETING BEFORE SAY THAT NOVEMBER NINE? YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES SOONER? UH, I THINK, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WISDOM IS.

MY, MY NEXT THOUGHT, SO I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SAID WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY, WHICH IS THAT I, I AM GIVEN WHERE WE ARE.

AND, UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADD THAT IN ADDITION TO, UH, THESE COMMENTS, UM, THAT, THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, THE, UH, BUDGET AND AUDIT WORK GROUP HAVE CIRCULATED, UH, JUST PRIOR TO THE MEETING, UM, TWO, I BELIEVE PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS.

UH, AND, AND THEY'RE RATHER DETAILED AND, AND I APPRECIATE THE WORKING GROUP'S EFFORTS ON THIS.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I HAVE SPENT A LITTLE BIT OF TIME WITH THEM AND, UH, BUT, BUT IN AN IDEAL WORLD, I WOULD SPEND SOME MORE TIME, I WOULD GET TO SPEND SOME MORE TIME.

AND SO WHAT I AM GOING TO RECOMMEND IS THAT WE, UH, DELAY THE ACTUAL VOTE ON THE BASE RATE CHANGES OR OUR ACTION ON THE BASE RATE CHANGES UNTIL THE NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING.

UM, I WILL, I'M GOING TO, UH, TAKE A POLL AS TO WHETHER, YOU KNOW, HOW FOLKS FEEL ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, MAJORITY SUPPORT FOR THAT, I, I WON'T MOVE IT.

WE CAN VOTE ON IT TODAY.

UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, GIVEN WHERE WE ARE, I, YOU KNOW, I I THINK THAT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO GIVE FOLKS SOME MORE TIME TO THINK ABOUT THESE THINGS.

TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER REED, THERE IS ALSO THE OPTION TO CALL A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING THAT WOULD BE SOMETIME EARLIER THAN NOVEMBER 14TH.

UM, BUT PRIOR TO POTENTIALLY THE NOVEMBER 9TH MEETING, IF THAT'S WHAT, WHAT, WHEN COUNCIL'S HEARING FROM STAKEHOLDERS.

UM, BUT I, I THINK WE COULD, WE COULD MAKE A DECISION ON THE 14TH AND THAT WOULD STILL PROVIDE A, YOU KNOW, GUIDANCE TO COUNSEL PRIOR TO THEIR ULTIMATE, UH, DECISION ON THE FIRST, UH, SO I'M INTERESTED IN FOLKS' THOUGHTS IF I, GO AHEAD.

GO AHEAD.

YEAH, I JUST, I WANNA SECOND THE IDEA THAT WE GIVE THE PARTIES A CHANCE TO COME UP WITH A RESOLUTION OF THEIR OWN, UH, BEFORE WE, UH, PROPOSE A RESOLUTION, UH, OUT OF THIS GROUP.

UH, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS, YOU KNOW, TWO OR THREE TIMES IN THE PAST, AND I CAN TELL YOU, YOU WILL NOT GET A BETTER RESOLUTION TO THIS THAN THE PARTIES CAN COME UP WITH ON THEIR OWN.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

YES, I WAS GONNA SAY, WE'VE HEARD FROM ALL THE PARTIES, WE, UH, THE BRIEFINGS, THE EXAMINER'S REPORT, EVERYTHING IS OUT, HAS BEEN NOW, UH,

[00:30:01]

AND WE'VE DONE OUR HOMEWORK.

THE, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PARTIES ARE, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE ON THE BRINK OF SETTLEMENT.

THERE'S BEEN NO MULTIPLE MEETINGS AND VERY LITTLE PROGRESS FROM WHAT I HEARD, FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, UH, ALL OF WHICH IS, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WAITING UNTIL THE 14TH, UH, JUST IT IS, IT IS GETTING BEHIND THE HORSE INSTEAD OF A HEAD, THE HORSE.

WE, WE OUGHT TO GIVE COUNSEL, WE OUGHTA WE TO SPEAK AS A VOICE AND PROVIDE A VOICE.

SO, UH, THE SPECIAL MEETING, UH, AS LONG AS WE DO THAT SOMETIME THIS MONTH, UM, TO GET, ALLOW YOURSELF AND OTHERS A LITTLE MORE TI A LITTLE MORE TIME, UH, WOULD BE ACCEPTA CERTAINLY ACCEPTABLE.

BUT I'M, I'M READY TO VOTE TONIGHT.

UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE RESOLUTION.

SO EITHER, EITHER, EITHER, EITHER OPTION, EITHER OPTION, BUT, BUT LET'S NOT WAIT UNTIL ALL THE OTHER PARTIES HAVE WEIGHED IN.

I AGREE WITH YOUR APPROACH, CHAIR HOPKINS TO WAIT UNTIL THE NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING FOR THE REASONS YOU EXPRESSED.

I ALSO, I'M NOT SURE WE'RE HAMSTRING OURSELVES BY WAITING UNTIL THE NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING, IF THAT'S STILL WEEKS BEFORE COUNSEL TAKES IT UP.

I, IF WE CAN HEAR, IF WE, IF WE CAN GLEAN ANYTHING FROM THE PRESENTATIONS AT THE NOVEMBER 14TH, I, I'M SORRY, THE NOVEMBER 9TH MEETING, THAT WOULD GIVE US PLENTY OF TIME TO, I THINK, ACCOUNT FOR THOSE IN OUR RECOMMENDATION.

SO THAT'S MY POSITION.

AND, UH, HOW ABOUT COMMISSIONER TU AND YANKER? I AGREE WITH TRYING FIND, UM, UNDERSTAND BETTER WITH THE NEGOTIATION WHERE IT'S AT.

YOU'RE MIKE.

THANKS.

I AGREE WITH UNDERSTANDING WHERE THE NEGOTIATIONS ARE AT AND SEEING WHAT THEY'RE COMING UP WITH.

THERE'S, WE MAY HAVE READ A LOT OF THIS, BUT I HAVE A FEELING THERE'S STILL SOME ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS THAT THOSE PARTIES HAVE WHEN THEY ACTUALLY CRANK THE NUMBERS.

SO I'M A LITTLE BIT MORE HESITANT.

I, I DO HAVE SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE THAT OKAY, VOTE ON THE 14TH, BUT I FEEL OBLIGATED TO TRY TO GET BETTER INFORMATION BEFORE THE COUNCIL VOTES TO GIVE SOME ADVICE, SOME ADVICE TO MY COUNCIL MEMBER, THOUGH.

AND SO IF THERE COULD BE SOME, BESIDES US SPENDING A LOT OF HOURS TRYING TO FOLLOW EXACTLY WHAT THE COUNCIL'S DOING IN REAL TIME, IF THERE COULD BE SOME KIND OF HEADS UP BEFORE THOSE MEETINGS SO THAT WE GET AN IDEA, I WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER YOKER, I, I THINK I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF A ESPECIALLY CALLED SESSION.

I'M ALSO FINE AND READY TO VOTE TONIGHT, BUT I RESPECT OTHERS' HESITATIONS.

SO, UH, BUT I THINK THAT A KIND OF SPLITTING THE DIFFERENCE AND DOING A ESPECIALLY CALLED MIGHT BE THE BEST.

AND COMMISSIONER TREL, ANY THOUGHTS? I MEAN, UM, COMMISSIONER TR OH, THANK YOU.

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, YES, I, I, UM, I UNDERSTAND THE SETTLEMENT PROCESS PRETTY WELL AND I JUST THINK THAT, UH, THE WORKING GROUP HAS SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON, UM, LOOKING AT THE ARGUMENTS AND, UH, THE EVIDENCE.

AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE SETTLEMENT FOR THEM TO HAVE SOME IDEA OF WHERE WE ARE GOING, UM, AND WHAT THE, THE EUC THINKS ABOUT THE PENDING CASE.

SO I, I COULD SUPPORT A, UM, UH, A, A SPECIAL CALLS MEETING SOMETIME, HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THE MONTH, BUT CERTAINLY BEFORE THE, UM, NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING.

UM, PRIMARILY CUZ I THINK, AND PERHAPS JUST TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION, WE WILL, UH, IF WE HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION, UM, UH, ON THE ISSUES, IT WILL, UH, ENCOURAGE SOME MOVEMENT AMONG THE PARTIES TO THE, UM, THAT ARE PART PARTICIPATING IN THE SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS.

SO MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE, I'M READY TO VOTE TONIGHT, BUT MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE, I GUESS, A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE EEC.

OKAY.

UM, THANK YOU.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT AN EVEN SPLIT.

UH, I AM, I, I AM NOT READY TO VOTE TONIGHT, BUT I, I DO PREFER A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, CUZ I THINK WAITING FOR THE 14TH IS MAYBE TOO

[00:35:01]

LONG.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM, SO, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE GENERALLY WE'VE GOT FOUR FOR WAITING TO 11, 14 AND FOUR FOR A SPECIALLY CALLED MEETING, I THINK.

UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO NOW IS, OH, GO AHEAD.

YEAH, I, I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUESTION.

CYRUS SIERRA CLUB IS A PARTY TO THIS.

SO I'M, I'M DIRECTING THIS TO YOU EVEN THOUGH I KNOW YOU'RE NOT HERE AS THEIR REPRESENTATIVE.

BUT, UM, UH, GIVEN, GIVEN THAT THE PROCESS HAS WORKED ITSELF OUT, WHERE YET AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE NINTH, ARE DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE COMING TO ANY CONCLUSIONS BEFORE THAT HAPPENS? ? UH, I, I, I DON'T KNOW.

OKAY.

YEAH, I JUST DON'T KNOW.

YEAH, YOU DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN, I, I HAVE THE SAME, UH, I HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS MYSELF, AND, AND I GUESS I'M A LITTLE BIT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, WHICH IS PEOPLE DON'T USUALLY SETTLE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE.

AND, AND SO I'M NOT SURE THAT, THAT WE'RE GONNA BE IN ANY BETTER SHAPE IN 10 DAYS THAN WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

UH, AND WE MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE TO HAVE THE PARTIES ACTUALLY REACH THEIR OWN RESOLUTION IF WE JUST LET THE PROCESS PLAY OUT A LITTLE LONGER.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY PREFERENCE.

GO AHEAD.

CAN WE RE WE COULD , UM, ONE, THE NOVEMBER 14TH IS SET AS A MEETING, WE COULD SCHEDULE A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.

IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION, RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S SORT OF A WASTE OF EVERYONE'S TIME, I GUESS, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IN ADDITION TO THE NOVEMBER 14TH.

EXACTLY.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

UM, I THINK, UH, GIVEN SORT OF WHERE, WHERE, WHERE WE ARE, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE THERE'S AN EVEN SPLIT, LIKE I'M SAYING, UH, AS FAR AS CALLING A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING EITHER IN LIEU OF, OR IN ADDITION TO, OR JUST MAKING THE DECISION ON THE 14TH.

SO I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS PUT A PIN IN THAT, HAVE THE DISCUSSION, UM, THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT, UH, THE, UH, WHERE WE ARE ON THE BASE RATE REVIEW.

WHAT I'D, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS HEAR FROM ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE INTERESTED IN, IN PRESENTING THEIR VIEWS AND WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, WHAT THEY'RE THINKING, AND IN PARTICULAR THE, UH, UH, WORKING GROUP RESOLUTION THAT THEY'VE PROPOSED.

I'D LIKE TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON THESE, AND PART OF THE REASON THAT I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE MOVE, UH, THE DECISION IS BECAUSE I WILL, I WILL SAY THAT IF WE TAKE IT UP AND DOWN VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I'M GONNA HAVE TO BE A NOTE.

BUT THERE ARE MANY, MANY PIECES OF THIS RESOLUTION THAT I WOULD SUPPORT.

AND SO I THINK IF WE HAD SOME ADDITIONAL TIME, UM, YOU KNOW, WE COULD PULL OUT THE THINGS THAT THERE WILL BE UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT ON OR MAJORITY AGREEMENT ON, AND WE COULD PASS THAT ON TO THE COMMISSION, UH, SORRY, THE, THE COUNCIL WITH UNANIMOUS SUPPORT.

UM, AND IT, YOU KNOW, IN AN IDEAL WORLD THAT THAT'S WHAT SOMETHING WOULD LOOK LIKE GOING TO, UH, THE, UH, THE COUNCIL.

I DO THINK THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, TACKLE THAT.

WE CAN TAKE AN UP AND DOWN VOTE ON THE HEARING EXAMINER'S, UH, PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION.

UM, AS COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN PROPOSED, WE CAN TAKE AN UP AND DOWN VOTE ON THE WORKING GROUPS PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION.

UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT.

UH, BUT AGAIN, I THINK IF WE DO THAT TODAY, FOR ME PERSONALLY, I'M GONNA HAVE TO BE A NO ON THE WORKING GROUPS PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION, THOUGH I THINK THERE ARE MANY PIECES OF THIS THAT I WOULD SUPPORT.

AND SO GIVEN SOME TIME, I THINK WE COULD CARVE OUT, UM, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NOW SO THAT THERE IS SOME DIRECTION, AND MAYBE TO COMMISSIONER CHARLES'S POINT, THAT WILL INFORM, UH, SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS.

WHO KNOWS IF ANYBODY WILL, UH, ACTUALLY CARE WHAT WE, UH, SAY, BUT POTENTIALLY, I MEAN PARTIES, UM, BUT POTENTIALLY, I MEAN, IT COULD INFORM, UH, WHERE, WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE'RE THINKING AND, AND, AND PERHAPS THAT WOULD BE USEFUL TO, TO THE PARTIES.

SO, UH, THAT, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT, THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO.

UH, AND SO I'LL GIVE THE, MAY I ASK, GO AHEAD.

MAY, IF I MAY ASK ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, WE, WE CERTAINLY CAN VOTE ON DO AN UP AND DOWN ON THE HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT TONIGHT.

UH, BUT WITH RESPECT TO, UH, AND A ROBUST DISCUSSION TONIGHT, I WOULD THINK WOULD ENABLE,

[00:40:01]

ENABLE US IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO TO BE ABLE TO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE TIME PEOPLE NEED, BUT I, I, I SUSPECT FOR THE REASONS, UH, DISCUSS THAT HAVING OUR OPINIONS WOULD, MIGHT MOVE ALONG THE SETTLEMENT TALKS.

AND THE, THEREFORE, IF WE, IF WE'VE FINISHED THE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING, UH, THEN WE COULD HA IN THAT SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OR SIMPLY MOVE UP THE NOVEMBER DATE TO NOVEMBER, SAY NOVEMBER 1ST, UH, THAT THEN WE COULD HAVE A QUICK UP AND DOWN VOTE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE WORK GROUP, USING THAT AS A, AS AN OUTLINE AND THE THEREFORE BE ABLE TO SAY, YES, YES, YES OR NO.

NO, NO.

UH, HOW WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO, TO MAKE THAT REVIEW AND HAVE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? I, I THINK THAT WOULD, UM, FOR ME IT'S, IT'S MORE OF A QUESTION I THINK OF WHETHER FOLKS CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT KIND OF SCHEDULE.

SO OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE CLEAR THEIR CALENDARS FOR THE 14TH, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE TO WRANGLE HERE, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GET EVERYBODY TOGETHER INCLUDING, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE ROOM AVAILABILITY AND EVERYTHING FOR, UH, LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, OCTOBER 31ST, OR, UH, NOVEMBER 7TH .

THERE YOU GO.

OH, I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S HALLOWEEN.

IS HALLOWEEN, OKAY.

YEAH.

UM, OKAY, SO NOT THE 31ST.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'D EITHER NEED TO PICK ANOTHER EVENING AND KEEPING IN MIND AS WELL, THAT EV ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, INCLUDING, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY, ARE ALSO PARTICIPATING IN ALL OF THE WORKSHOPS THAT THE COUNCIL IS HOLDING, AND THEY'RE PREPARING FOR THOSE AS WELL.

SO I THINK EVERYBODY'S GOT A REALLY PACKED SCHEDULE.

UM, SO I'M NOT, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO FINDING ANOTHER DATE, UM, BETWEEN NOW AND THE 14TH AND, AND HOLDING A SPECIALLY CALLED, UH, SESSION.

MY CONCERN IS THAT, IS, IS GETTING A DATE THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

LET'S ASK, LET'S ASK STAFF TO DO THAT THEN, AND, YOU KNOW, DO A POLL AND, AND WORKING WITH YOU.

SELECT THE DATE, OR THIS IS KATE, GO AHEAD.

MAY I COMMENT? UM, AND THEN I'M, I'M SORRY, BUT I'M HAPPY TO GET OFF THE CALL.

UM, BUT, UH, I, I FULLY SUPPORT, UM, THE IDEA OF GOING THROUGH THE WORKING GROUP'S RESOLUTION AND SEEING IF THERE ARE POINTS ON WHICH THERE IS UNION UNANIMITY.

I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE A BIG STEP FORWARD FOR TONIGHT.

AND THEN AT THE END OF THE MEETING, IT CAN BE DECIDED, DO WE COME BACK ON THE 14TH OR DO WE COME BACK SOMETIME BEFORE THAT? BUT I THINK THAT IF WE COULD GO THROUGH A LOT OF THESE POINTS, I THINK THERE WILL BE UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT ON SOME OF THEM AND PERHAPS SOME CRITICAL ONES THAT WOULD HELP GUIDE THE SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS.

I AGREE.

COMMISSIONER TREL.

THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING.

I THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.

SEE IF THERE ARE SOME POINTS OF UNANIMITY, THEN COME BACK AND REVISIT THE MEETING, UH, SCHEDULE AT THE, AT THE END OF THIS DISCUSSION.

THANK YOU.

AND GOODBYE.

SORRY.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

OKAY.

BYE.

I ALSO, THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I THINK WE SHOULD DELAY THE DECISION IS BECAUSE COMMISSIONER TREL IS NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO VOTE, AND OBVIOUSLY SHE'S A VERY VALUABLE MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION AND WE APPRECIATE HER INPUT.

SO.

OKAY.

UH, SO I THINK I WILL TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONERS CHAPMAN, REED, UM, AND YANKER TO PRESENT THE RESOLUTION OF THE WORKING GROUP, UM, IF YOU'D LIKE.

AND WE CAN, UH, I'LL DEFER TO YOU ON HOW YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT.

UH, THERE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO RESOLUTIONS THAT I RECEIVED.

UH, AND ONE IS THE RESOURCE PLAN.

UH, AND I, UH, YEAH, THE RESOURCE PLAN I DID NOT PUT FORWARD FOR TONIGHT THAT SAYS SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

FINE.

UM, THE TWO THAT I PUT FORWARD WAS ONE SPECIFICALLY ON VALUE OF SOLAR, UM, WHICH I HONESTLY THINK WE CAN JUST AT THIS POINT PUNT ON BECAUSE IT'S REALLY A SEPARATE, SEPARATE ISSUE THAT'S STILL BEING DISCUSSED AMONG MULTIPLE PARTIES, INCLUDING SOME THAT CAME TONIGHT.

UM, AND IF WE COULD JUST CONCENTRATE ON THE MAIN BASE RATE ONE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UH, THAT WOULD BE THE, THE BEST USE OF OUR TIME.

OKAY.

WOULD, WOULD IT, ALL OF WHICH IS, UH, WE CAN JUST GO SEQUENTIALLY.

UH, AND WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT NUMBER ONE, IT WOULD A, WOULD A SHOWING A KIND OF A SHOWING OF

[00:45:01]

HANDS BE HELPFUL IN TERMS OF, UH, OR DISCUSSION, A SHOWING OF HANDS? OR DO YOU WANT A DISCUSSION ON EACH, EACH ITEM? THERE'S A LOT OF WHERE ASS TOO.

YEAH.

AND NOT EVERYONE MAY AGREE.

LET'S TO THE WHERE ASS, LET'S HELP EVERYBODY GET ON THE SAME PAGE.

I THINK COMMISSIONER PERLE'S LOOKING FOR THE RESOLUTION.

YES.

EX, OH, I CAN GET ON NOW.

GREAT.

UH, THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME FOR ME TO BRING UP THAT I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS.

SO IT JUST GOT SENT AT FIVE 17 AND 5 29, SO I WAS PACKING UP THE OFFICE AND TRYING TO GET ON MY WAY HERE.

SO I'M HAVING TO GO THROUGH RIGHT NOW, SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE LEAD TIME, A LITTLE BIT BETTER ON THIS NEXT TIME.

YEAH.

YEAH.

TO THAT END, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE COMMITTING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON ANY OF THE PROPOSED ITEMS IN THE BUDGET AND AUDIT COMMITTEES.

SO IN TERMS OF THE IDEA OF DOING A SHOW OF HANDS, I WOULD JUST ABSTAIN FROM ANY OF THAT, JUST CUZ I WANT MORE TIME WITH THIS.

SO I, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.

I DON'T KNOW HOW FRUITFUL IT WILL BE IN LIGHT OF THE TIME IN WHICH WE GOT THE, AND I'M NOT BLAMING YOU ALL, IT'S JUST THE FUNCTION OF THE SCHEDULE.

I'M, THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M AT IS I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH I HAVE TO OFFER.

SO, SO BACK TO MY POINT.

DOES SOMEBODY HAVE A COPY OF THIS THAT I COULD LOOK AT? WE'RE PUTTING UP ON THE SCREEN.

OH, BINOCULARS.

YOU WANT ME TO, CAN SOMEONE EMAIL IT IN YOUR EMAIL, KAREN? UM, OKAY.

I HAVEN'T YET.

SO I THINK, UM, FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES, I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL, UH, FOR THE WORKING GROUP TO UH, JUST PRESENT THE ITEMS, THE, THIS IS THE, I'M I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ACTUAL RESOLUTIONS, NOT THE WHERE ASS.

I THINK FOLKS CAN READ THOSE AND TAKE ISSUE WITH THEM IF, IF THEY DO, BUT I THINK THEY'RE JUST FACTUAL STATEMENTS ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN THE CASE.

UM, AND, AND SO, UM, ONCE PEOPLE HAVE AN INDEPENDENT OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THOSE CLOSELY, THEY CAN PROVIDE COMMENTS TO YOU IF THEY LIKE.

YEAH, I MEAN THE WHEREAS IS, UM, I'D SAY ARE FACTUAL, BUT THEY ARE AN INTERPRETATION OF FACTS, RIGHT? THEY'RE THEIR POSITION, THEY'RE THEIR, THEIR POSITION.

THEY'RE SAYING AUSTIN ENERGY HAD A BASE RATE CASE.

THEIR INITIAL ONE ASKED FOR EIGHT 48 MILLION.

IT WENT DOWN SUBSTANTIALLY DURING THE PROCEEDING.

UH, THE I E UM, HAD A SLIGHTLY LOWER RECOMMENDATION OF 31.3 MILLION.

AND IF THESE, IF THESE NUMBERS ARE WRONG, I'M HOPING THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WILL, WILL CORRECT THEM CUZ THESE ARE, ARE BASED ON THE RATE CASE.

UM, AND THE INDEPENDENT CONSUMER ADVOCATE HAD AN EVEN LOWER PROPOSAL OF 6.5 MILLION.

SO WE SORT OF HAVE THREE PARTIES WITH THREE DIFFERENT REVENUE REQUIREMENTS, UM, SUGGESTED REVENUE REQUIREMENTS AS PART OF THE RATE CASE.

UH, BUT IT DOES HAVE A, UM, I'LL SAY SOME SUBJECTIVITY BECAUSE, UM, IT SAYS MULTIPLE PARTIES HAVE RAISED CONCERNS THAT AUSTIN ENERGY'S PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RATE DESIGN, UM, IS A RADICAL CHANGE TO OUR RESIDENTIAL RATE DESIGN AND COULD REPRESENT A SHOCK TO AUSTIN ENERGY RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS.

SO THAT IS CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE, ALTHOUGH I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS THAT THEY DO FIND IT SHOCKING.

UM, UH, AND THEN, UM, IT POINTS OUT THAT THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL'S JUST APPROVED, UH, NEW TARIFFS FOR THE POWER SUPPLY ADJUSTMENT, WHICH WILL BE AN INCREASE FOR RESIDENTIAL, UH, RATE CONSUMERS.

SO ALL THAT IS SORT OF SETTING UP THE, THE RESOLVE SECTION, WHICH IS TO RECOMMEND, UM, DENIAL OF AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE IESS RECOMMENDATION.

AND THEN IT HAS A SERIES OF, UM, BOTH GENERAL POLICIES, A LOT OF WHICH CAME FROM RANDY AND THEN, AND THEN SOME SPECIFIC, UM, SUGGESTIONS TO, TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE FACTS, BUT THEY'RE WITH A CERTAIN SLANT, I'LL SAY.

YEAH.

UM, OKAY.

SO I THINK JUST, JUST TAKING NUMBER ONE HERE, UH, REJECT THE AUSTIN ENERGY PROPOSED BASE RATE REVENUE INCREASE 35.7 MILLION AND THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION OF 31.3 MILLION.

UH, SO THAT'S SORT OF THE BIG HEADLINE, YOU KNOW, BIG TICKET ITEM, OBVIOUSLY THE STORY.

UM, AND, AND SO, UH, LATER IN YOUR RESOLUTION, WE HAVE THE WORKING GROUPS RECOMMENDATION ON THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT, AND I THINK IT'S A RANGE OF SIX AND TO 15, SIX AND A HALF TO 18.

YEAH, 15, UM, 15, SORRY, EXCUSE ME.

LOOKING AT, WELL, I, I WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THIS.

UH, SO THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A VERSION THAT HAD 18.

I DON'T

[00:50:01]

KNOW THAT WE, WE, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I DON'T EVEN FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING ON THIS TONIGHT BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE STILL, WE'RE STILL ASSESSING ALL THOSE, UM, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT PARTIES HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD SUGGESTIONS OF HOW TO REDUCE THAT RATE INCREASE.

UM, SO AS AN EXAMPLE, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE IN THE, IN THE PROCEEDING, UM, THE INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS SUGGESTED THAT THERE SHOULD BE A, A BECAUSE OF THE VERY DIFFERENT YEAR WE HAD IN 2021, UH, THERE SHOULD BE A REDUCTION OF SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 23 TO 24 MILLION BECAUSE OF THAT.

UM, SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF REDUCTION THAT WE COULD SEE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE AS A GROUP CAME UP WITH A DEFINITIVE LIST AND SAID IT SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, 20 MILLION OR 15 MILLION OR 6 MILLION, WE JUST THOUGHT PRESENTING A RANGE.

UM, BUT THAT, THAT, THAT IS VERY SUBJECT TO PEOPLE'S INPUT.

SO, SO MY QUESTION IS, THE BOUNDS ON THE RANGE ARE HERE SIX AND A HALF TO 15, AND MAYBE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 17 OR 18, WHATEVER.

WHERE DOES THAT NUMBER COME FROM? SO IT, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY SAYING, UM, THE IE RECOMMENDED 31 MILLION, UM, 21 WAS AN UNUSUAL YEAR BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC AND THE LOWER SALES.

AND THEN HELP ME RANDALL WITH SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS WE DISCUSSED.

WELL, YOU HAVE, YOU, YOU HAVE THE REC, EXCUSE ME, YOU HAVE ALL THE RECOMMENDATION AND ALL THE BACKING FROM THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE.

UH, AND EXCUSE ME, YOU HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CONSUMER ADVOCATE.

YOU HAVE TESTIMONY, UH, FROM THE ICA ALSO ON THE ICA AND THE ANALYSIS BY CLARENCE JOHNSON.

UH, SO THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE THE BASE, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS THE, UH, 18, 18 MILLION, UH, WOULD BE HALFWAY.

THAT WOULD BE A CEILING.

SO I MEAN, ALL THIS DOES IS PROVIDE, PROVIDE A RANGE, AND THIS IS ON TOP OF THE FACT, THIS IS ON TOP OF THE FACT THAT COUNCIL TOOK ACTION THIS WEEK TO ALREADY INCREASE.

SO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE THROUGHOUT IS APPLYING PRINCIPLES OF GRADUALISM AND, AND, OKAY, SO I I STILL JUST, I'M, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.

I I, YOU'RE ANSWERING A LOT MORE THAN I, I'M ASKING, I'M JUST TRYING TO, I UNDERSTAND THE SIX AND A HALF WAS THE ICA RECOMMENDATION, SO I ASSUME THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

I HAVEN'T SEEN 15 OR 18 ANYWHERE FROM ANYBODY.

AND SO I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT CAME FROM AND I DON'T THINK THE AUSTIN, YOU WANT ME TO BE HONEST WHERE IT CAME FROM? UM, YES.

YEAH, SO THE, THE AUSTIN ENERGY RATE INCREASE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 15% ON RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS.

AND THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE A BIG SHOCK TO PEOPLE TO SUDDENLY HAVE AN INCREASE OF 15% TO THEIR RATES ON TOP OF THE PSA.

SO HALF OF 15 IS SEVEN AND A HALF.

SO THAT WAS THE, THAT WAS THE SORT OF THE MATH.

BUT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF, I MEAN, PAUL ROBBINS ACTUALLY SENT OUT ALL OF THE DIFFERENT REVENUE REDUCTIONS THAT DIFFERENT PARTIES CAME UP WITHIN THE RATE CASE.

HE ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH AND IDENTIFIED THEM AND THERE WERE A LOT OF THEM, I'M SURE.

YEAH.

SO, OKAY, THANKS.

IS THERE ANY, ANYBODY WANT TO WEIGH IN ON WHERE, WHERE THEY'RE THINKING AS FAR AS THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT NUMBER PRIOR TO OUR, LIKE, ACTUAL VOTE ON SOMETHING? KAREN? I'M SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN? WOULD YOU CARE TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT YOU'RE THINKING AS FAR AS REVENUE REQUIREMENT DIRECTIONALLY? WELL, I, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE, THE MATH THAT'S GOING ON HERE.

UH, EVEN THE 35 OR, UH, THAT'S NOT UP THERE, 35%, 35.7 IS NOT A SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE IN THE BASE RATE.

WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THERE ARE CERTAIN CUSTOMER CLASSES, THERE'S ALLOCATION AND RIGHT.

AND SO, SO THAT COULD BE DIFFERENT IF YOU'RE ALLOCATING THE BASE RATE, UH, AMONG CUSTOMER CLASSES IN A DIFFERENT FASHION.

UH, SO I'M, ALL I'M SAYING IS I, I, I CAN'T UNDERSTAND JUST FROM THIS WHERE ALL THE MATH IS COMING FROM.

ROBIN, DID YOU THE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS SENT TO THE WHOLE EUC, BUT WE HAD ASKED FOR, SO THIS IS GONNA HELP EXPLAIN

[00:55:01]

WHERE THIS NUMBER CAME FROM.

WE HAD ASKED FOR, UM, THE I E THE ICA AND THE AE FINAL PROPOSAL IN TERMS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE, ON THE RATE CLASSES.

AND THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO US, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO THE WHOLE EUC, IT WAS OKAY.

AND THAT, THAT IS WHERE THAT 15% ROUGHLY COMES FROM.

SO WE WERE LOOKING AT, WE WERE LOOKING AT THOSE, UM, ASSUMING A SIMILAR, YOU KNOW, DISTRIBUTION OF THE RATE INCREASE WOULD BE WHAT CITY COUNCIL DOES, WHICH IS AN ASSUMPTION, YOU KNOW, WE JUST SORT OF ASSUMED IF YOU'RE AT 31 MILLION AND IT'S A 15% INCREASE, IF YOU'RE DOWN AT 18 OR 15, IT'S GONNA BE A SEVEN AND A HALF.

THAT'S CYRUS MATH, NOT OFFICIAL RATE MAKING MATH.

BUT THE, IF WE HAVE A PRINCIPLE, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE SAY IN NUMBER TWO, IF WE HAVE A PRINCIPLE THAT ANYONE THAT SHOULD GET A RATE INCREASE IS GONNA GET, UM, IS GONNA BE TREATED EQUALLY AND APPLIED EQUALLY, AND ANYONE WHO'S DUE FOR A RATE DECREASE, IT'S GONNA BE APPLIED SORT OF EQUALLY AS WE DO THE NEW ALLOCATION.

UM, THEN IF YOU REDUCE THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT, IT SHOULD, THERE SHOULD BE A SIMILAR INCREASE FOR CUSTOMER CLASS ARE GETTING AN INCREASE AND A SIMILAR DECREASE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING A DECREASE UNDER THE ALLOCATION METHOD.

OKAY.

I'M NOT SURE I CAUGHT ALL THAT, BUT IF YOU CH, I MEAN, PART OF THIS ALSO SUGGESTS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO NOT ACCEPT WHAT AUSTIN AND ENERGY HAS PROPOSED IN TERMS OF REALLOCATING THE RIGHT CLASSES.

SO DON'T YOU HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT MATH TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY GETS AN INCREASE OF ANY PARTICULAR AMOUNT? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE, WE DISAGREED ABOUT, THERE'S GONNA BE AN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ALLOCATION OF, OF, OF THE NEW RATES.

WE JUST WANT IT TO BE GRADUAL AND EQUAL SO THAT IF, IF THE ALLOCATION SHOWS THAT THERE ARE CUSTOMER CLASSES WHO HAVE BEEN OVERPAYING, THEN THE REDUCTION SHOULD BE SIMILAR.

AND IF THERE'S, IF THE ALLOCATION SHOWS THAT SOME CLASSES HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ENOUGH, IT SHOULD BE SORT OF AN EQUAL, EQUAL HIT ON FOLKS.

OKAY.

THAT NO CUSTOMER CLASS SHOULD BE OVERBURDENED WITH AN INCREASE OR OVER PROMISED WITH A DECREASE GRADUALISM.

BUT I THINK IN, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX, WE HAVE ADOPT A REVENUE DISTRIBUTION THAT WOULD NOT INCREASE THE RATES.

SO ON ANY CUSTOMER CLASS, MORE THAN SEVEN AND HALF PERCENT.

SO IF, IF WE'RE PUTTING A CAP ON, UH, EACH CLASS, SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT, UH, ON THEN, THEN THERE'S OBVIOUSLY GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOME REALLOCATION.

UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THE COST ALLOCATION'S GONNA HAVE TO LOOK DIFFERENT TO ENSURE THAT THAT, ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO AUSTIN ENERGY'S PROPOSED, UH, RATE CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE IF YOU LIMIT IT TO SEVEN AND A HALF, THAT'S GOING TO DRAMATICALLY, UH, CHANGE THE, UH, CHANGE THE REVENUE AMONG CLASSES.

YEAH, I'M, I'M DESPERATELY LOOKING FOR THOSE, UM, EUC DOCUMENTS SO I CAN FIND THEM.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE GOT THEM AVAILABLE, ROBIN.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

OKAY.

I HAVE, UM, I HAVE FOUND THESE DOCUMENTS.

YEAH.

SO AS AN EXAMPLE IN AUSTIN ENERGY'S FILING, UM, WITH THE 35.7 ROUGHLY MILLION INCREASE THE CUSTOMER CLASS, NOT INCLUDING THE LIGHTING CATEGORY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, SORT OF MINOR.

BUT IN TERMS OF THE MAJOR, UH, CLASSES, THE, THE LARGEST CHANGE WOULD BE A 15.5% INCREASE ON THE RESIDENTIAL CLASS AND A FIVE POINT WHILE THERE'S SEVERAL OTHER, UH, SEVERAL OTHER INCREASES.

UM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE OVER 20 MEGAWATTS WOULD SEE A 9.3% INCREASE.

SO IT'S SORT OF SAYING, THIS IS KIND OF SAYING NOBODY SHOULD HAVE AN INCREASE MORE THAN SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT.

AND SO THE MATH WAS BASICALLY HAVING THE

[01:00:01]

REVENUE REQUIREMENT.

OKAY.

SO I, I'M, I'M GETTING WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, BUT I'LL JUST TELL YOU THE MATH DOESN'T WORK.

IF YOU, IF YOU LIMIT ALL INCREASES TO SEVEN AND A HALF, THEN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE NEGATIVE NUMBERS HAS TO GO POSITIVE.

OR I BELIEVE IF I LOOK AT THE, AT THE, UH, RANGE OF THE CURRENT AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S BEING RAISED IN EACH ONE OF THOSE RATE CLASSES, I HAS, HAS ANYBODY ACTUALLY DONE THE MATH TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU APPLY ALL THE CONSTRAINTS THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PROPOSAL? I HAVE NOT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

AND ONE THAT CERTAINLY WE CAN, BECAUSE I, I THINK WHAT YOU'LL FIND IS IF YOU ADD THE CONSTRAINTS THAT YOU HAVE IN THIS, THIS PROPOSAL PROPOSED RESOLUTION, YOU CAN'T MATHEMATICALLY ACCOMPLISH IT.

IF, IF YOU, IF YOU USE THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT AS, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ICA, EXCUSE ME.

IF YOU USE THE ICAS RECOMMENDATION AS A BASE, I DON'T SEE HOW YOU, HOW YOU WOULD, NOT THAT IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM, THE SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT USING THE SEVEN SEVEN TO CAP IT AT SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT WOULD PROVIDE AN INCREASE TO RESIDENTIAL.

IT WOULD PROVIDE AN INCREASE TO SMALL COMMERCIAL, BUT IT, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS, IT WOULD NOT PROVIDE A RATE CUT FOR SOME FOR YOUR LARGER COMMERCIAL.

SO, SO THE, THE ONE THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT BEFORE THAT SAID SIX AND A HALF TO 18 REALLY JUST BECOMES SIX AND A HALF.

UH, NO, I, I'M NOT SAYING YOU'RE NECESSARILY LOOKING AT THE SIX AND A HALF, UH, THE REVIEWING THE TESTIMONY, THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD REASONS THAT IT COULD BE SIX AND A HALF, BUT, BUT ALL OF WHICH IS WITHIN THAT RANGE, WITHIN THAT RANGE, UH, WITH THE SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT CAP, IT IS POSSIBLE, IT IS POSSIBLE TO KEEP IT AT THE SEVEN POINT A HALF, ALL OF WHICH IS WE'RE NOT GONNA, AS IF I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, WE'RE NOT GONNA VOTE.

RATHER WE'RE ASKING EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE FOR, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS ON EACH OF THESE ITEMS AND WE'RE KIND OF JUMPING AROUND.

OKAY.

SO, I MEAN, I DON'T WANNA BELABOR THIS ANY FURTHER OTHER THAN TO SAY, IN ORDER FOR ME TO VOTE FOR IT, I'VE GOTTA FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS HOW THE MATH WORKS BECAUSE MY, JUST OFF THE CUFF MATH, MATH, AND I'M PRETTY GOOD AT MATH, UH, SAYS THIS, THIS DOESN'T ADD UP, BUT I, I'M, I'M, I, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO BE PROVED INCORRECTLY.

I MAY BE THINKING ABOUT THIS TOO SIMPLISTICALLY, BUT AGAIN, ALL I WAS DOING WAS LOOKING AT IN THE, UM, I E RECOMMENDATION OF 31.3 MILLION, HIS TOP, UM, HIS TOP RATE IN TERMS OF AN INCREASE WOULD BE ON THE RESIDENTIAL CLASS AND IT WOULD BE A LITTLE OVER 14%.

SO AGAIN, TRYING TO MAKE SURE, AND, AND WE'RE, WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS, SO MAKING SURE THERE'S NOT A HUGE RATE SHOCK TO RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS GIVEN THAT THEY, THEY'RE ALREADY GONNA SEE A PSA INCREASE.

UM, AND AGAIN, HIS ALSO HAS A 9.8% ON SOME OF THE LARGER USERS, UH, AND A 5% ON THE SECONDARY VOLTAGE.

SO SMALL BUSINESS, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS, YOU KNOW, I WE'RE NOT, UM, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO CITY COUNCIL.

I DON'T KNOW IF CITY COUNCIL'S EXPECTING US TO COME UP WITH AN ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, PERCENTAGE ON EACH RATE CLASS OR ANYTHING, OR THAT DEGREE.

I THINK GIVING SOME GENERAL GUIDANCE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH AUSTIN ENERGY AND OTHERS ON WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE, I THINK THAT'S FAIR.

BUT RIGHT NOW THE RESOLUTION HAS, UH, SPECIFIC NUMBERS, UH, YOU KNOW, SO WE SAY A RANGE OF REVENUE REQUIREMENT AND THEN A AND THEN A GRADUALISM CAP TO THE CLASSES.

AND, AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER VIRTUAL THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA NEED TO SEE THE NUMBERS.

SO WE HAVE THE SIX AND A HALF PERCENT, I'M SORRY, THE SIX AND A HALF MILLION REVENUE REQUIREMENT, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM THE I, FROM THE ICA, UH, THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE NUMBER RUNS THAT AUSTIN ENERGY SENT US.

SO, SO THAT IS, YOU KNOW, ONE END OF THE RANGE.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT, AND, AND SO OBVIOUSLY THAT

[01:05:01]

IS APPLYING THE 7.5%, UM, REVENUE, UH, CAP, THE INCREASE, THE GRADUALISM INCREASE, UH, I THINK THAT ALREADY VIOLATES, AM I, AM I READING THAT WRONG? I MEAN, THE 1414 0.4% CHANGE IN RESIDENTIAL ISN'T THAT, ISN'T THAT ALREADY IN, THAT WAS FOR THE IE RECOMMENDATION.

THE ICA ONLY HAS I THINK A PERCENTAGE AND A HALF OR SOMETHING.

YEAH, THIS IS LIKE THEIR NUMBERS.

SEE, THOSE ARE THE NUMBERS.

THIS IS, THIS IS I E I E, ONE OF 'EM I E AND ONE OF THEM'S, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY, THIS IS, THIS IS AUSTIN ENERGY.

THERE'S AN AUSTIN ENERGY, THERE'S AN ICA.

OH, HERE'S ICA.

OKAY, I GOT IT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

YEAH, THE ICA HAD, I'LL SAY A PRETTY SIMPLE SOLUTION, WHICH WAS GIVE EVERYBODY A LITTLE OVER A PERCENTAGE, UH, RATE INCREASE OR A TINY DECREASE.

THEY REALLY 1.1 0.2%, ONE 2%.

YEAH.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S USING THEIR, THEIR BELIEF ON COST ALLOCATION, WHICH IS NOT SOMETHING THE JUDGE AGREED WITH, BUT IS, IS A, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT RATE MAKING, I GUESS ISN'T SCIENCE, IT'S ART.

UM, SO I GUESS I, I AGREE.

I MEAN, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE, YOU KNOW, SO WE HAVE THE SIX AND A HALF PERCENT, UH, WITH THE SEVEN, UM, SORRY, SIX AND A HALF MILLION WITH THE SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT CAP.

UH, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE TOP RANGE NUMBER, UM, WITH THE SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT CAP IMPLEMENTED.

UM, AND THEN, AND THEN I,