Board Members Present: Chair Merv Bennett, Vice Chair Andy Pico, Board Members Don Knight, Jan Martin, Helen Collins, Keith King, and Larry Bagley

Transcription

1 Minutes Colorado Springs Utilities Board Special Meeting Governance Structure & Governance Process Review January 28, 2015, 2:30 p.m. -5:30 p.m. Blue River Room 121 S. Tejon Street, 5 th Floor Board Members Present: Chair Merv Bennett, Vice Chair Andy Pico, Board Members Don Knight, Jan Martin, Helen Collins, Keith King, and Larry Bagley Board Members Excused: Jill Gaebler, Val Snider Staff Members Present: Jerry Forte, Sherri Newell Wilkinson, Bill Cherrier, Gary Bostrom, Eric Tharp, Christian Nelson, Rick Griffith City Attorney s Office-Colorado Springs Utilities Division, and Eileen Verosko Facilitator: Tim Blodgett, President and CEO of Hometown Connections, the utility services subsidiary of the American Public Power Association 1. Call to Order The meeting convened at 2:31 p.m. Chair Bennett opened the meeting giving a background on the how and why the Utilities Board has begun to look at the governance structure and governance process of the Utilities Board, and that this was the first in a series of public meetings that will be held monthly throughout the coming year. The Utilities Board will provide the leadership for this discussion, and will be bringing in outside facilitators. He stated that the Utilities Board wants this to be a community discussion, and to have the community fully engaged. 2. Objectives of the Governance Structure and Governance Process Review Ms. Sherri Newell Wilkinson, Chief Strategy and External Affairs Officer introduced the facilitator, Mr. Tim Blodgett, and discussed his credentials and background. She also gave a preview of the credentials and background of Dr. Jeff Tarbert, President and CEO of The Tarbert Group, and Executive Consultant for the American Public Power Association. He will be facilitating the March through June meetings. Mr. Blodgett discussed the objectives in line with how the process has been outlined so far. He stated the first exercise was to be done as a group. Chair Bennett requested that audience members be allowed to participate as well. As Mr. Blodgett fielded the questions, Mr. Christian Nelson, Senior Public Affairs Specialist recorded the input from the Utilities Board and audience on an easel. 1

2 Responses to Question One: What will the Utilities Board achieve by looking at governance? Division of labor o Carver model forward? o City vs. Utilities issues o Greater focus Community focus and agreement Greater accountability to customers Identify customers Better way Voice/representation for customers Effectiveness/efficiency Chair Bennett explained the purpose of the Utilities Policy Advisory Committee (UPAC) to Mr. Blodgett. Responses to Question Two: What are the fundamental drivers of the review? How would you describe the Utilities Board s responsibility to find a better way? What objectives are important to Colorado Springs Forward and other stakeholders? Utilities Board s responsibility for vision, strategy, best practices Continuous improvement Goals, costs Stewardship Prepare for future o Including technology Define end objective Advocacy and communication with public Stakeholder objectives: o Dedicated attention to Colorado Springs Utilities from the Utilities Board o Ensure success What are the objectives of Colorado Springs Forward and other stakeholders? Mr. John Cassiani, Executive Director of Colorado Springs Forward commented that five separate studies regarding this issue have been done over the last 20 years, and all recommended going to an independent board, but were never acted on. He stated that due to the complexity of the utilities business, it might be better to have a Utilities Board that can focus all its energy and time to just Utilities. Chair Bennett spoke on input he has received from other groups. They have asked how can we be assured we have the right talent on the Utilities Board from the elected officials. 2

3 Another concern was City Council members looking at Utilities Board as a secondary responsibility. Responses to Question Three: How is this study different from previous processes that looked at this issue? Defined objectives Public involvement Due diligence, process and policy Include internal and external perspectives Ratemaking responsibility and accountability will be considered Responses to Question Four: How does the Utilities Board define governance process and governance structure? Policy vs. operations o Seek balance Process- creating strategic direction; structure means of setting strategic direction Utilities Board expertise and background affects policy making process Structure how Utilities Board is established; process how Utilities Board conducts its business Mr. Blodgett stated that there is an education process for any governing body. Mr. Walter Lawson, customer, commented that rate increases tend to benefit the business and not the consumer. He mentioned a survey that was done in this area recently, and suggested that an invitation to the author of the survey to review the results be done as part of this review. Responses to Question Five: What is the scope of the review? o Financial stewardship o Discovery of options o Link to strategic planning Preparation for future o Best practices Responses to Question Six: What assumptions around the scope does the Utilities Board want to establish? Not broken Not defensive Not for sale municipal ownership Healthy Utilities is critical for a healthy community Inclusive process proactive outreach 3

4 No preconceived outcomes Responses to Question Seven: Describe the Utilities Board s role in the review; stakeholder s role; staff s roll. Utilities Board o Leadership, advancing process toward objectives Staff o Execution o Resources o Liaison to stakeholders Stakeholders o Participation o Communication with others o Be educated Ms. Newell Wilkinson stated all meeting recordings, Utilities Board and stakeholder comments, flip charts, etc. from the Governance Structure/Governance Process Review will be on the website. In the interest of time, the meeting moved forward on the agenda to stakeholder identification. The Utilities Board reviewed the stakeholder list provided. From the discussion, it was determined that the primary governance structure and governance process stakeholders are citizen owners and residential and business customers. Secondary stakeholders will be informed, but not be participants in the review. Mr. Cassiani questioned Mr. Blodgett on what he has seen as best practices from similar situations. Mr. Blodgett responded stating that it varies from community to community. Options for citizen engagement were discussed, including all citizen-owners and customers need to be aware of the public process. However, input is needed from a group of customers that are representative of the customer population and demographically diverse, informed, educated, and engaged throughout the process. Ideas for customer participation were discussed. Mr. Blodgett suggested that in selecting stakeholder participants, you also include some who are a thorn in your side, but are willing to participate. A good cross section is necessary. Mr. Lawson commented that some expertise in representing the residential rate payer also be included. Mr. Blodgett suggested the stakeholder selection issue be tabled, and be the start of the next meeting. 4

5 Chair Bennett and Vice Chair Pico will meet with Mr. Forte and Ms. Newell Wilkinson prior to the next meeting discuss stakeholder outreach and engagement. Chair Bennett thanked Mr. Blodgett for helping get the governance review started, and thanked those in the audience for their participation. 3. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:37 p.m. 5