The regular meeting of the Board of Electric Commissioners was convened at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 at the Burlington Electric Department, 585 Pine Street, Burlington, Vermont.

Commissioners Jennifer Wallace-Brodeur, Scott Johnstone, and John Franco were present. Commissioners Christine Salembier and Jan Harris were absent. Staff members present included: Barbara Grimes, Tom Buckley, John Irving and Daryl Santerre. Other staff members present were Shawn Enterline. Patricia Crowley, Clerk, was present. Channel 17 failed to show up to tape this meeting.

Commissioner Wallace-Brodeur called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m.

Agenda:
Commissioner Johnstone asked to have an executive session item added, entitled ‘Possible Sale of Land to the Intervale Foundation’ to be new agenda item #6. Commissioner Franco asked to add new agenda item #4.01, entitled ‘Commissioners’ Corner.

Minutes of the January 11, 2006 meeting:
Commissioner Franco moved to accept the minutes for the January 11, 2006 meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnstone and approved by all Commissioners present.

Public Forum:
No one from the public was present for the meeting.

General Manager/Commission Information Items:
Ms. Grimes stated that January and February have been remarkable months regarding the weather. She informed the Commission that BED has been doing a lot of pumping of our underground due to the rain we have received.

Ms. Grimes stated that one of the cost cutting measures that will start rolling out this year and next is new meters. She informed the Commission that 800 new meters have been ordered and these new meters are radial read which will cut down on physically having to go to read these meters. Ms. Grimes stated that these will be residential meters.

4.1 Commissioners’ Corner
Commissioner Franco wanted to communicate what was mentioned to him in the Senate Finance Committee in Montpelier regarding BED and our presentation on energy conservation measures. Commissioner Franco stated that Tom Buckley’s name was mentioned and members of the Committee were favorably impressed with the presentation.

5. Outlook – Fiscal Year 2006
Mr. Santerre began the presentation by walking through the December YTD actual vs. budget analysis. This included discussions on revenues, expenses, capital spending and cash. December’s net income was $175,000. This was off the budget of $407,000 (a differential of $232,000). The bulk of the differential for the month was in power supply. It accounted for $249,000 of the deficit.

Year-to-date net income still remained healthy due to the one-time opportunity transactions and the new presentation of GASB customer contribution income, all of which would be removed from any revenue requirement filing. Operating cash was in line with budget ($3.0M budget vs. $2.9M actual).

Mr. Santerre then walked through a revised “Outlook” for the remainder of fiscal year ’06 (January-June). He explained the various assumptions that were used for the outlook, including changes expected since the adoption of the original budget. The outlook for year end indicated net income of $682,000, up from the January Outlook of $29,000. As for cash, a deficit was still projected, but was reduced by approximately $1M due to revised power supply numbers. The net impact, after factoring in all revisions, was to reduce the projected deficit from $1.5M in January to $500,000 with the February outlook.

Mr. Santerre then moved to a discussion of rates. He indicated that we were still waiting for a “Proposal for Decision” from the Public Service Board on our rate design filing. We had expected a mid-January timing. After this, there was an open discussion about our planned revenue requirement filing. The timing, based on the cash deficit and continued uncertainty in the power supply market, was going to stay with our plan of a mid-March (16th) filing, which after allowing for the mandatory 45-day period, would have May1st bills going out at the new rates for service consumed May 1st and after.

We then discussed the amount of work that goes into a revenue requirement filing, how much the number is impacted by power supply costs, and the challenge in having forward looking adjustments meet the “Known & Measurable” test. Although we were not in a position to indicate the precise amount (%) of the filing, we did state that the current range was in the 18-25% magnitude.

We then presented a timeline to meet the filing deadline of March 16th. The timeline and events included: scheduled meetings with the Commission’s Rates Liaison Committee, the Finance Board on February 21st (to discuss the range of the filing), a presentation and recommendation to the Commission at the March 8th meeting, and then followed by the Finance Board and City Council on March 13th. That would leave a few days to work with our attorney to get a filing package on March 16th.

***EXECUTIVE SESSION***
Possible Sale of Land to the Intervale Foundation
Commissioner Franco moved that the Board of Electric Commissioners enter into Executive Session at 7:15 p.m. to discuss agenda item #6.01, Possible Sale of Land to the Intervale Foundation; a contractual matter; the premature disclosure of which could place the Burlington Electric Department at a substantial disadvantage. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnstone and approved by all Commissioners present. The Commission returned to regular session at 7:21p.m. upon motions of Commissioners Franco and Johnstone.

There being no further business to discuss, Commissioners Franco and Johnstone moved to adjourn
at 7:23 p.m. which was approved by all Commissioners present.
 

Attest:

Patricia J. Crowley, Clerk