HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 101-06TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
JANUARY 17, 2006
DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES
CMR:101:06
UTILITIES STRATEGIC PLAN PERFOI~MANCE REPORT, JULY 2004
THROUGH JUNE 2005
This is an informational report and no Council action is required.
BACKGROUND
On May 21, 2001, the City Council approved the Utilities Strategic Plan Implementation Plan
(CMR:223:01) and directed staff to make periodic progress reports on the performance of the
Utilities in meeting the objectives of the strategic plan. Staff committed to update the Utilities
Advisow Conm~ission (UAC) and City Council twice per year. This report is report #8.
Repo~
2
3
4
UAC Date
November 7, 2001
April t 0, 2002
October 2, 2002
March 5, _00~
Council Date ! CMR
February 4, 2002 129:02
May 13, 2002 235:02
November 12, 2002 432:02
April 21, 2003 214:03
Focus
Performance Measures
July 01 - Feb~aary 02 Performance
March 02 - June 02 Perfomaance and
Council-approved revisions
July 02 - December 02 Perfom~ance and
Balanced Scorecard
5 October !, 2003 December 1, 2003 526:03 January 03 - June 03 Performance and
Balanced Scorecard
6 March 3, 2004 May 10, 2004 246:04 July 03 - December 03 Performance and
Balanced Scorecard
7 October 13, 2004 April 25, 2005 192:05 January 04 - June 04 Performance and
Balanced Scorecard
The attached September 7, 2005 report, covering July 2004 through June 2005, provides key
accomplishments and activities as well as key performance measures for each of the strategic
objectives. The report also includes discussion of the development of an overall "balanced
CMR:101:06 Page 1 of 3
scorecard" approach to measuring and reporting the Utilities Department’s prowess in achieving
the Strategic Plan Objectives, and application of this measurement methodology to identify and
implement action plans to improve shortcomings.
As part of the current restructuring of the Utilities Department, the Strategic Plan will be
evaluated with respect to its relevance and applicabiliD, in its current form. Therefore, no further
updates to the Utilities Strategic Plan will provided until such evaluation is completed.
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOSIMENDATIO~ S
The Utilities Strategic Plan performance report was discussed at the September 7, 2005 UAC
meeting. Comments were generally positive and indicated that the Conm~ission felt that staff is
moving in the right direction. Key COlnmission que.stions and comments are summarized below
with staff responses.
Commissioners asked for clarification of "Accelerated CIP" measures. Accelerated CIP
measures track how close to the target the Utilities Department is in completing the CIP
pro~’ams. The CIP pro~ams were accelerated in the past in order to reduce maintenance
costs in future years. The goal statement for these measures is to complete more than 90% of
the work for the CIP projects in any given year. Accelerated CIP measures report the actual
money spent vs. budgeted amounts for these pro~ams.
The discussion focused on whether there can be a better way to present the percent of work
completed on these projects as actual money spent in a particular year may not necessarily
indicate percent of total work to be done. This is because CIP projects may span over a
number of years. Furthermore, the reported expenditures show actual spending that includes
encumbered amounts, and comparing that against the adopted budget, can also be misleading.
The commissioners discussed using other measures to better reflect the intended goal. Staff
will review this measure along with others as part of the overall review of the Utilities
Strategic Plan.
2.Under "Bill Comparisons", the Commissioners pointed out that Santa Clara’s bills are lower
than the City of Palo Alto’s. The Commissioners also recormnended that since Staff can not
know with certainty what PG&E’s rates will be in the future, then perhaps those forecast of
PG&E bills against the City ofPalo Alto’s bills should not be made.
Staff responded that this information was put together in response to earlier requests, but
going forward, it if it is not required, then it could be excluded from future reports.
One Commissioner pointed out that the measure "Transfers to General Fund" is one where
Staff has no control, and therefore, it should not be used as a performance measure for the
Utilities Department. Other Commissioners stated that there is some virtue in showing that
the Utilities Department is able to meet their obligation to the General Fund.
CMR:101:06 Page 2 of 3
RESOURCE IMPACT
This report has no direct resource impact.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This report supports the existing Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan (CMR 432:02) and
Utilities Strategic Implementation Plan (CMR:223:01).
ATTACHMENTS
A:September 7, 2005 UAC Report.
B:Minutes from UAC Meeting September 7, 2005
PREPARED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
Ipek CQnnolly, Resource Planner
. i
Direct,Tr of A/d(~}irdstrative Se~wices
Assistant CIW Manager
CMR:101:06 Page 3 of 3
CMR:101:06 Attachment A
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
4
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
UTILITIES STRATEGIC PLAN PERFORMANCE UPDATE REPORT
COVERING JULY 2004 THROUGH JU_-NE 2005
REQUEST
This report includes the City of Pa!o Alto Utilities (CPAU) Strategic Plan Performance Update
for the two six month periods beNnning in July 2004 and ending in June 2005, and is for the
Commission’s information only. No action is necessau.
SUMMARY
The CPAU overall "Balanced Scorecard" for the two six month periods beginning in July 2004
and ending in June 2005 is shown in Figure 1.
For this reporting period, CPAU has met or exceeded goals in most categories.
Utilities Balanced Scorecard by Objective, July 2004 - June 2005
CPAU performance results were mixed, as shown in the charts below.
A. Customer & Communi .~.
1.Customer Satisfaction +
2.Reliability M
3.Unique Municipal Value +
For more detail, refer to page Attachment t3.
C. Financial
1. Competitive Bills
2. Financial Strength
For more detail, refer to page Attachment B.
B. Environment
1. Resource efficiency
2. Renewables
TBD
M
For more detail, refer to page Attadmwnt t3.
1. S afeb~
2. Job Satisfaction
Uor more detail, refer to page Attachment B.
KEY: "+" = A4eet or Exceed Goal; "-" = Fail to Achieve Goal; M = ~(ixed; TBD = goals to be determined
Page 1 of 9
Within each Balanced Scorecard perspective of this report, CPAU applies objective measures to
determine whether CPAU has achieved its established goals. These measures are rated x~ith a
score of met, exceeded, or failure to meet the goals established. It should be noted that the
Perspectives are presented in no pa-ticular order, i.e. they are not arranged m order of importance
and no single item is weighted more heavily than another. A cross-reference relating each of the
foar perspectives to specific performance measures, and detailed performance results is provided
in Attachment B, Detailed Balanced Scorecard Measure Results.
For this reporting period 25 out of 29 performance measures have been updated. Four measures
are currently being developed. CPAU met 16 of the 25 measure goals, and fell short in the
remaining nine.
BACKGROU_~’D
On November 13~, 2000 the Palo Alto Ci~~" Council (Council) approved the Utilities Strategic
Plan [CMR 418:00] and directed the City Manager to return to Council with an implementation
plan at a future date.
On May 2t, 2001, Council approved the Utilities StrateNc Implementation Plan [CMR:223:01]
and directed staff to make periodic progress reports on the performance of CPAU in meeting the
objectives of the strategic plan.
The first strategic plan performance report was presented to the UAC in November 2001 and to
City Council in February 2002 [CMR:129:02]. The initial report focused on performance
measures. Council indicated a desire to be presented with a discussion of activities. The next
iteration of the report provided key accomplishments and activities as well as key performance
measures for each of the strateNc objectives. The report also included discussion of
recommended modifications to the Utilities Strategic Plan in order to adapt to the chamging
utility industry environment.
The next update xxas provided to the UAC in April 2002. In October 2002, the UAC was
presented with another Strategic Plan Performance Report. Proposed changes to the Strategic
Plan were unanimously recommended by the UAC. City Council approved the revisions in the
Strategic Plan Performance Report in November 2002 (CMR 432:02).
On March 5, 2003, the UAC approved the "balanced scorecard" approach presented by staff as
an effective method to set targets and to present the semi-annual strategic planning performance
measurement
On October 1, 2003, the UAC received the first Strategic Plan Performance update report, which
included the 51 performance measures chosen for the Balanced Score Card covering the 6-month
period from January 2003 through June 2003. The report also included Action Plans for two of
the performance measures, which had received a minus score for not achieving their objective
goals.
On December 1, 2003, the Ci~ Council received its first Strategic Plan Performance update
report (CM-R:526:03), which included the 51 performance measures chosen for the Balanced
Score Card for the period January 2003 through June 2003.
Page 2 of 9
On March 3, 2004, the UAC received the second StrateNc Plan Performance update report,
which included the 51 performance measures chosen for the Balanced Score Card covering the
6-month period from July 2003 through December 2003. The report also included Action Plans
for five of the performance measures, which had received a minus score for not achieving their
objective goals, and an update status on the two action plans presented in the October 2003
update report.
On May 10, 2004, the Cits, Council received its second Strategic Plan Performance update report
(CMR:246:04), which included the 51 performance measures chosen for the Balanced Score
Card for the period July 2003 through December 2003.
On October 13, 2004, the UAC received the third Strategic Plan Performance update report,
which included the 50 performance measures chosen for the Balanced Score Card covering the
6-month period from Januaiy 2004 tt~rough June 2004. The report also included Action Plans for
the performance measures which had received a minus score for not achieving their objective
goals, mad an update status on the previous Action Plans presented in the March 2004 update
report.
On October 13, the UAC also received an update to Utilities Strategic Plan. The UAC provided
some recommendations. Staff incorporated those recommendations into the Updated Utilities
Strategic Plan and on JanuaD, 12, 2005, the UAC recommended the Council to accept the
Updated Utilities StrateNc Plan. On March 7, 2005, the Ci~, Council adopted the revisions to the
Utilities StrateNc Plan recommended by the Utilities AdvisoD Commission (CMR: 148:05).
On April 25, 2005, the City Council received its third StrateNc Plan Performance update report
(CMR:192:05), which included the 50 performance measures chosen for the Balanced Score
Card for the period January 2004 tt~rough June 2004.
This report provides CPAU’s Performance Measures results for the Updated Strategic Plan
Measures and the and overall ’~Balanced Scorecard" coving the two six month periods beNnning
July 2004 through June 2005. The Updated Strategic Plan includes 29 pe~ormance measures and
most of the measures are updated annually. This report, therefore, covers the taro six month
periods during Fiscal Year 2004/05.
The UtiliU Strategic Plan is included in this report as Attachment A.
Utilities Semi-Annual Balanced Scorecard
The Balanced Scorecard tracking methodoloD" continues to assist in performance
measurement and to promote a better understanding of CPAU’s strateNc business
processes. Even though each perspective and category in the above Balanced Scorecard
was examined for alignment with the Strategic Plan, not all measures can be updated on a
semi-annual basis, either because updated data is not available at the time the report is
prepared or the data is updated on a calendar year basis only (or longer).
A.Customer and CommuniW Perspective
Three categories are measured in this perspective, namely Customer Satisfaction,
Reliabiliiw and Unique Municipal Value. CPAU has attained the majority (10/12) of
Page 3 of 9
goals set for all the performance measures updated for this reporting period. One
measure is still in development. Only one goal was not met.
To measure Customer Satisfaction in the Customer and Cornmm~iW perspective, two
indices serve as useful indicators of achieving strong customer satisfaction.
The first one is the Customer Satisfaction Index. Staff evaluated the option of
developing a survey instrument to gauge customer satisfaction, but in the end,
decided in favor of continuing ~dth the independent-consultant-run customer
satisfaction index that is traditionally coordinated by C_MUA. This index not only has
the advantage of being conducted by an independent outside party, but it also has the
advantage of being comparable against other municipal utilities in California, as well
as investor o~aed utilities. The Residential Sector Customer Satisfaction survey
conducted this year resulted in a value rating of 7.9 for CPAU. The previous value
was 7.4. CPAU not only exceeded its ow~ past performance, but also scored, on
average, higher than other Mtmi’s (7.0) in the State.
The other measure, "Customer Complaints Trends Analysis" a new one. Search for an
’off-the-shelf sofavare package suitable for Department-wide application is
continuing, including searching for non-utiliW packages. In the meantime, complaints
are being handled as in the past. Under the new system, customer complaints to all
utilities departments will be captured and reported in the same database. The system
will also provide tracking information, therefore, allowing to view and report trends.
Service ReliabiliU is measured in terms of service interruption minutes per customer
per year. CPAU’s reliabiliW measures for gas and water were on target for this
reporting period. Electric reliabiliW measure, SAIDI, on the other hand, was below
targets with average service interruptions exceeding the maximum threshold of 60
minutes per customer (at 63.68 minutes). Electric Operations will continue their
efforts in identifFiing potential hazards through their annual inspections of the Electric
infrastructure to bring this measure back in line with current goals. For gas and water,
the reliabiliW measures are set as frequency of service interrup;tions. CPAU exceeded
the goal of "fewer than taro interruptions per customer per year" as there were only
31 service interruptions involving 631 customers in gas, and 10 service interruptions
involving 193 customers in water. Staff reviewed data for the last three years in the
number of service interruptions and the customers affected and found performance
results to be on a positive trend. The table below shows this data for gas and electric
service interruptions. Staff plans on reporting the number of service interruptions and
the number of customers affected relative to these results in the furore performance
reports.
Service
Gas Interruptions
0~/03 I 45
03/04 [37
04/05 ]31
Customers
Affected
1001
850
639
Service
Water Interruptions
02/03 [18
03/04 I 16
04/05 I 10
Customers
Affected
242
303
193
Page 4 of 9
For wastewater reliabili~ measure, CPAU adopted the new US EPA’s Capacity,
Management, Operations, mad Maintenance regulations (CMOM) on July 1, 2004 as
the new perfomaance measure. CPAU met the goal of "less than or equal to t~o spills
per year" under this measure, as there were no reportable spills during Fiscal Year
2004 - 2005.
The value of local municipal ownership includes Accelerated Infrastructure
Replacement Programs to minimize maintenance costs in the future, Transfer to
General Funds mad response to Local Comprehensive Plan.
The accelerated infrastructure replacement progranzs are back on track following
delays in the Electric CIP funds discussed in the March 2004 update report. Electric
pro~ams completed well over the target of 90% budgeted CIP (at 108%). Gas and
water fund also reported high completion rates, 158% for gas and !03% for water.
The high rate of completion is a result of the fact that actual expenditures spent
includes both budgeted mad encumbered anounts for the CIP projects for FY 2004-
05.
~’Transfers to General Fund" met the objective of increase of 3 percent over pre~ious
?’ear (FY 2003-2004). The actual amounts transferred in FY 2004 -2005 were:
Electric Fund
Gas Fund
Water Fund
$8.234 million
$2.786 million
$2.370 million
With respect to "Response to Local Comprehensive Plan", CPAU met its goal of
implementing ~eater than or equal to five projects. Several projects have been
implemented, which include the following:
Advanced Metering - Implementation of the Meterlinks Program
Water Conservation Programs in conjtmction with the Santa Clara Valley
Water District including programs consisting of:
,Indoor and outdoor water studies (audits)
,Incentives for installation of water efficient technoloNes
¯Rebates for purchasing water conserving appliances
Implementation of CPA Landscape Ordinance to promote water consexwation
Providing educational ~ants of up to $50K for ener~, and water conservation
curriculum to PAUSD
Implementation of renewable ener~~ programs such as:
¯PaloAltoGreen
¯PV Partners
, Solar demonstration projects
Implementation of Residential and Commercial resource efficiency pro~ams
such as:
¯Smart Ener~;
¯Smart Appliance
. CAP
CARE
Page 5 of 9
Implementation of Financial Assistance programs such as:
Rate Assistance Program
, Project Pledge
B. Enviromnent Perspective
In the Environmental perspecti~ e Renewables and Resource Efficienc?’ are the main
categories of measures. CPAU met one of the five goals in this category. Tt~ree of the
goals are under development, and CPAU fell short of one of the goals in this categou.
CPAU was successful in meeting its Renewable Portfolio targets. In 2004 and 2005
Palo Alto executed long-term power purchase contracts for new renewable resources
totaling approximately 12 percent of its projected annual energy., load, or 6 percent per
?’ear on average. Approximately half of these new supplies are from the High Winds
project in Solano Count3.,,, and the other half are from three landfill gas-to-enerD-projects to be built in different locations in the Bay Area. Palo Alto’s Eligible
Renewable content based on SB1305 reporting requirements were 6% in 2003, 5% in
2004, and projected to be 9% in 2005, 11% in 2006, and 14% in 2007. Palo Alto is
currentIy working with other public po~ver ser¥ice providers and NCPA to fill the
remaining need.
The "Palo Alto Green" program has been ver?, successful in the past and had
continued setting aggressive targets for this year. Even though it increased its
participants by 35% since last year, the program fell slightly short of its targets for
June 2005. The targets for this year were set at 4,135 (3,975 for Residential and 160
for Business). The actual nmnber of participants in the program as of June 2005 were
3,494 (3,381 Residential and 113 Business). Going forward the progrmn revised its
targets to more realistically align with market feedback. The future pro~am targets for
the Palo Alto Green program are set as follows:
2005 year end: 4,000 Residential
2006 ?’ear end: 4,500 Residential
150 Business
200 Business
Demand Side Efficiency Program Goals and Objectives are currently being de~ eloped.
Staff hired a consultant, Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) to estimate the technical and
economic efficiency potential in Palo Alto. Following the completion of this stud?;,
specific targets will be set for electric, gas and water efficiency programs. During the
Fiscal Year 2004-2005, the Public Benefits and DSM programs results were as
follows:
Applications
FY 04_05 ICount
Residential 2170
Commerciall 29
TOTAL 2199
Annual
Electric
Rebates Savings
Paid !(kWh/Yr)
$321,151 764,778
$453,000 1,417,000
$774,151 2,181,778
Peak
Demand
Savings
kW/month)
Annual Gas
Savings
(Therms/Yr
48,37C
340 -~.~,.~0C
"340 301,670
Page 6 of 9
C.Financial Perspective
In the Financial perspective, Competitive Bills, and Financial Strength are the main
categories measured. CPAU fell short (met 4/11) of the goals set for the performance
measures updated for this reporting period.
Average.CPAU customers’ bills for electric, gas and water services is provided in
comparison with a similar customer in other jurisdictions in Attachment C. As can be
seen from this information, all CPAU customers enjoy lower electric bills compared to
other jurisdictions. The situation for gas and water bills on the other hand is not so
advantageous for CPAU customers. CPAU has been making significant strategic CIP
investments in our local gas and water distribution systems at a much greater rate than
our neighbors.
Recently, however, many Bay Area and "CPAU Benchmark" mm~icipalities or special
districts have publicly announced major initiatives to up~ade their existing water
distribution infrastructure. It is unclear as to what financing mechanisms these other
cities/agencies will use to fund their projects, and what the effects of those funding
decisions will be on their short-term ~xater~ rates. CPAU will be monitoring future cost
comparisons to determine if CPAU water rates and the rates of our Benchmark
Cities/Agencies will be converging in the near future or continuing to diverge.
For Naural Gas, the current Utilities reporting methodolo~; of combining CPAU Gas
Supply and Distribution costs into a single "bill" and comparing that "CPAU gas bill"
to a similar customer "bill" in PG&E’s service territo~, no longer appears applicable,
since PG&E now passes through their monthly market cost of gas supply directly to
their customers. Oar current reporting methodolo~; does not reflect the benefit of the
"~smoothing" provided by the CPAU gas supply portfolio and laddering strategy. CPAU
will separate future billing averages and comparisons (with PG&E and Long
Beach) into "Supply" and "Distribution" components for more accurate determinants of
customer costs.
CPAU will also, by the end of the calendar year, complete an analysis of the current
Supply and Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR) policies, in combination with
projected risk management profiles, and provide the UAC and Council with
recommended options to optimize the various Fund Reserves, so as to not hold more
cash than necessa~ or require significant rate increases to refill reserve balances.
With respect to Financial Stren~h, one of the measures is the Bond Finance Rating. A
new review just came out in June of 05 and CPAU’s rating is still at the goal value of
AA- with stable outlook.
CPAU continues to have no debt in the Electric Fund other than Calaveras and the
Calaveras Reserve fully covers this debt. Debt Ser¥ice Coverage Ratio, therefore, is
reported as being ~ot/Applicable" for this reporting period.
D.P~ople Perspective
To measure progress in the People perspective, CPAU measures Job Safe%~, and Job
Satisfaction.
Page 7 of 9
Job Safety is measured by the number of OSHA recordable accidents. This number xxas
four for the two six month periods (lower than the previous six month period of seven.
This is still higher than the goal of 0. Therefore, CPAU received an unfavorable score
and has not attained the goals set for all the performance measures updated for this
reporting period. In order to support the previous Action Plans developed in the past,
CPAU decided to go one more step forward mad create self-directed safe%’ teams. The
safe~ councils for Electric and WGW Operations and Engineering are tlying to
reinforce the support and buy-in of the employees in each group towards the action
plans to achieve the safeb~ goals. These groups started last year and they seem to be
working well. Using management for support, they take the lead on safe% related
issues and work to resolve the problem(s). They can use new tectmolo~’, training,
information, and peer to peer influence to effect positive change.
CPAU measures the job satisfaction by the Gallup Q12 survey. This measure was 3.91
(based on 183 responses Utilities-~x,~de) this year, therefore, exceeding the goal of
previous year’s score which was 3.65.
II.Previously Reported Action Plans
There was one Action Plan reported in the previous report.
Action Plan:
Complete 90% of budgeted CIP for infrastructure replacement program to reduce
maintenance costs in future years (Measure: A3. Customer & Communi%,, Accelerated
CIP (electric)). This Action Plan is completed as reported under the discussion of this
measure results on page five.
NEW Action Plans for unfavorable scores received for the report period startin~ in
July 2004 and endino~ in June 2005:
New Action Plans:
Electric ReliabiliD’ SAIDI: Electric Operations ~x.~ill continue their efforts in
identifying potential hazards through their annual inspections of the Electric
infrastructure to bring this measure back in line with current goals.
Palo Alto Green: Pro~am targets for this voluntary program were revised do~xxm:ard
to better reflect current market momentum.
Competitive Rates: CPAU will be monitoring future cost comparisons to determine if
CPAU water rates mad the rates of our Benchmark Cities/Agencies will be approaching
each other again in the near future or continuing to diverge. CPAU will separate both
our billing comparisons into "Supply" and "Distribution" components for more
accurate determinants of customer costs. CPAU will also, by the end of the calendar
year, complete an analysis of the current Supply and Distribution Rate Stabilization
Reserve (RSR) policies, and provide the UAC and Council with options to optimize the
Page 8 of 9
Reserves so as to not hold more cash than necessao~, or require significmat rae
increases to refill reser~ e balances.
Job SafeD,: Continue the Safeb. Cotmcils initiative started in Electric and WGW
Operation and Engineering. Support this initiative to take the lead on safety related
issues to. work to resolve problems. Use new technolo~;, training, information m~d
peer-to-peer influence to effect positive change.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Utilities Strategic Plan with Strategies and Tactics
B.Detailed Balanced Scorecard Measure Results
C.Customer Bill Comparisons
PREPARED BY:
Ipek Connolly
Resource Plarmer
REVIEWED BY:
Paul Dornell, Assistant Director Tomm Marshall, Assistant Director
Tom Auzenne, Assistant Director Girish Balachandran, Assistant Director
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
JOI-kN ULRICH
Director of Utilities
Page 9 of 9
UAC USP Update 9/7/05
ATTACHMENT A
Utilities Strategic Plan -
Key Strategies and Tactics
MISSION
"Provide valued utiliO’ sem,’ices to customers and dependable returns to rhe Cio~. ""
SUPPORTING OBJECTIVES
1. Eldmnce customer satisfaction and utility infrasm~cmre.
2. Employ balanced enviromnental solutions.
3. Provide fair mad reasonable returns to the Ci~ and competitive rates to customers through
municipal m~ nership.
4. Ensure a safe mad en_~aued world’orce.
KEY STRATEGIES, Years 2005-10
STtL4TEGY l: Ensure a high level of system reliability in a cost effective and timely
manner.
SIILdTEGY2:Manage supply portfolio risk as per council policy to provide stable gas
mad electric rates, to preserve a supply cost advantage, mad to manage
business processes cost effectively.
STRATEGY 3:Improve inter- and intra-departmental business processes to reduce
cost, improve efficiency and enhance information flow.
STRATEGIc-4:Provide low and stable rates, adequate reserves, and budgeted transfers
to the General Fund.
STRATEGY 5:Provide proactive, responsive and imegrated communication to
customers.
STRATEGY 6: Provide targeted customer and environlnental programs and services.
STRATEGY 7:Foster a productive workplace environment that promotes safety, job
satisfaction and self improvemem goals.
S:"UTL’~OldHx01DIRECTOR",InterDepartmentProjects\Utilities Strategic Plan\Performance Measures JuI5 - December
2004\UAC and Couucil Reports’, UTILITIES STRATEGIC PLAN WITH STP, ATEGIES AND TACTICS.DOC ]
UAC USP Update 9}7/05
ATTACHHENT A
KEY STRATEGIES with TACTICS
STRATEGY 1: Ensure a high level of system reliabili~ in a cost effective and timely
manner
A.Complete budgeted CIP projects as scheduled.
B.Flush mad clean ½ million feet of sewer main per year.
C.Flush and clean 1/3 of the water system main lines each .,,’ear.
D.Check mad operate 1/3 of the main line water valves each ?ear, replace or repair as needed.
E.Check and operate all Gas system Key valves each ?ear, repair or replace as needed.
F.Check and operate al! gas system valves once eveI3’ 3 years, repair or replace as needed.
G.Complete tt~e gas leak survey of the business districts once per year, leaks repaired (depending upon
grade) within specified time frames.
Gas leak SUla~ey 1/5 of the city each year, leaks repaired (depending upon grade) within specified time
frames.
I.Gas leak SUla~ey all bridges, railroad crossings and creek crossings each year, leaks repaired (depending
upon grade) within specified time t’rmnes.
J.Inspect all x~ater reservoirs once eveI3’ 3 years.
K.~aintain all traffic signal cabinets and lighting systems once per tear.
L.Test all traffic signal battery backups montNy.
M.Continue the citywide madergrounding of utility ~dre~.: Minimize the impacts of undergrounding on
street tree root systems and planting areas.
N.Continue with line clearing and vegetation management activities and meet the goal of 9000 trees per
year that interfere x~ith power lines.
O.Complete annual GO 95 and GO 128 inspections and make corrections by December of each ?:ear,
complete the GO 165 report by the following Februa~<
P. Evaluate transmission alternatives and implement physical, regulator: and legislative alternmives tl-mt
improve reliability.
Q. Evaluate the potential for small-scale distributed generation and demand-side measures to improve
distribution svstem reliability and power qualitv..
STRATEG’~~ 2: Manage supply portfolio risk as per council policy to provide stable gas mad
electric rates, to presela.’e a supply cost advantage, and to manage business processes cost effectively.
A. Prepare a recolIm~endation for policy-makers on the remaining elements of the WIRP not already
addressed in the Council-approved WIRP Guidelines.
B.Comply with the Urban Water Management Planning Act by updating the Ci),’s U\\rM~/UWSCP by
December 2005.
C.implement Council adopted long-term electric acquisition plan @EAP).
D.Implement Local Generation Feasibility Study.
E.Develop efficiency goals and integate efficiency into resource planning.
F.Work towards achieving Renewable Portfolio Standard goals of 10% by 2008 and 20% by 2015, and
review or revise those goals to meet customer needs and regulator" requirements.
Evaluate transmission alternatives and insplement physical, regulator: and legislative alternatives that
reduce cost.
H.Implement Council adopted gas utility long-terns plan (GULP).
I.Manage the electric and gas portfolio as per Council adopted recommendations and risk management
policies.
J. Develop and implement annual regulato~ and legislative goals by working individually and through
collaboration with BAMx, BAWSCA, NCPA, TANC, and ClvIUA.
K. Monitor and influence cost structure of partner agencies such as NCPA, TANC and BAWSCA.
S:\UTL\OIdH\0 IDtRECTOR’,InterDepartmentProjects\Utilities Strategic Plan~,Performance Measures July - December
2004’,,UAC and Council Reports~ UTILITIES STRATEGIC PL.~N WITH STRATEGIES AND TACTICS.DOC 2
UAC USP Update 9/7/05
ATTACHMENT A
STtE~TEGY 3: ImproYe inter- and intra-departmental business processes to reduce cost,
improve efficiency and enhance il~formation flow.
A.Identify and map key business processes to eliminate waste, increase accuracy and minimize
complaints.
B.Ensure timely information related to preparing accurate budgets and financial forecasts.
C.Identit~~ areag where teclmology would increase efficiency and implement.
D.Establish backtup s? stems for mission critical billing and communication s? stem.
E.Evaluate and implement a CIS System.
F.Review and mod~" bill presentation.
G.Design and implement a depam~ent-wide complaint tracking and respol~se database.
H.Evaluate the integration of Automated Meter Reading, Advanced Metering. SCADA and Dark Fiber.
I.Evaluate SAP solutions for business process improvements.
J.Improve recordkeeping and tracking
a.Maintain and publicize Point-of~Contact nmnbers for customer problmns
b.Update Blockfmder database and online search applications
c.Update customer phone number database and circuit mapping for the automated Porsche
Outage Notification s3 stem
K.Develop and maintain a centralized system of key administrative information for frequently used
templates and critical timelines
L.Review and update Service Level Agreements as appi’bpriate.
M.Ensure tinIely interdeparanental communications at the manager level and above.
N.Coordinate major project initiatives x~ith other Ci~r priorities (e.g. Alma Sub - Housing; Local
Generation/ESC/WQP; etc.)
STtE~.TEGY 4: Provide low m~d stable rates, adequate reserves, and budgeted transfers to
the General Fund
A. Explore SAP solutions in designing and implementing effective (user friendly) financial and other
reporting systems to include:
a.Budget -to-Actual reports for Operating and Capital Budgets for both labor and expenses.
b.Asset management in compliance ~4th FERC requirements,
c.Revenue margin guidelines:
d.Review the use of allocated vs direct charges for charges for support services from other
depamnents and develop a methodology to track these charges and their impacts on the
financial health of CPAU,
e.Develop a system to study, review, and authorize all budget transfers to other departments,
both for support services and other services.
Review the use of financial reporting tools such as income statements, balance sheets, and others for
drivers for decisions at the appropriate time within the appropriate ranges.
Establish and manage retail cash management policies that include credit policies, deposits, cycle
balance and working capital.
Evaluate and implement contractor damage cost recoveD, plans that encourage reduction in
occurrences.
Implement changes to rates and reserves policies as necessaD;.
Monitor and pursue outside funding opportunities to leverage City resources
C.
D.
E.
S:\UTL\OldH\01DIRECTOR\InterDepartmentProjects\Utilities Strategic Plan",Pertbrmance Measures July - December
2004’,UAC and Council Reports\ UTILITII~S STRATEGIC PL.~N \~.~TH STRATEGFt~S .~\’D TACTICS.DOC .~
UAC USP Update 9/7/05
ATTACHMENT A
STRATEGY 5: Provide proactive, responsive and integrated co~rm~ua~ication to customers
A. Maintain ongoing and effecti~ e customer communications in the service areas of:
a.Red Tags
b.Tum-ons and Tum-offs
c.Unscheduled Service Disruptions
d.Planned Shutdo~ns
e.Changes in Water Quality
B.Enhance ongoing and effective internal and customer communications:
a.ConmmNcate CIP plans
b.Communicate CIP construction schedules and status
c.Communicate long-tenn resource plans
d.Engage the public on major initiatives @P!reservoirs/intertie/water and electric rates)
e.Promote visibiliD, in the community through public speaking opportunities at neighborhood
groups, service groups, etc.
f. Develop and hnptement a plan to improve reliability perception
g. Create New Customer "Welcome Packet"s for Residential and Business customers
Implement mad evaluate targeted customer communications:
a.Website
b.Email list serve
c.Promotional events
d.Bill stuffers and UCAs
e.Progran materials
f.Form letters to customers
g.Customer Satisfaction Sun~eys
h.Required annual notifications: Water quality notifications, Gas safe~~’, Call Before You Dig
i.Brand awareness campaigns
S:’,UTL\OldH’\01DIRECTOR\,InterDepartmentProjects\Utilities Strategic Plan\Performance Measures July - December
2004".UAC and Council Reports\ UTILITIES STR_a_TEGIC PLAN WITH STRATEGIES AND TACTICS.DOC 4
UAC USP Update 9/7/05
ATTACHH ENT A
STRATEGY 6:_Provide targeted customer and environmental programs and services
A.Continue providing high quality" Key Accoua~t Services
B.Expand Low Income Assistance Progran~
C.Provide integrated energy; and water efficiency program, s
D.Continually evaluate and revise forecasts for electric power demand. Pursue adequate low cost
supplies to meet this demand by participating in cost-effective programs offered by Northern
CalifonYa Power Agency ~NCPA) or other suppliers and marketers of energy.
E.Work individually and through parmer agencies such as SCVWD, NCPA, CM-UA, BAWSCA,
CUWCC to maintain and erflaance efficiency and conservation progrmn effectiveness
F.Monitor other utilities that successfully use alteruative energy sources and seek funding for similar
projects that would be appropriate in Palo Alto
O.Support implementation of City’s Sustainabitity Program
H.Support implementation of the enviromnental components of the City’s Comprehensive Plan
a. Continue providing staff support and technical assistance in energy consen;ation and demand
side management to architects, developers, and utility customers.
b.Regularly review the water rate structure to e~sure that it encourages efficiency and is
competitive.
c.Maintain ci~;wide water conser~ation and efficiency pro~mns for all customer classes.
d.\\q~ere practical, incorporate federa!, state, and od~er agency policies and standards for water
efficiency into City; codes, regulations, and lJi-ocedures.
e.Implement incentives for the use of drought-tolerant landscaping and recycled water for
landscape \rogation.
f.Implement gas and electric rate structures that encourage energy conservation and that are in
balance with other rate-making objectives, such as providing competitive rates. Set rates to
achieve a balance between actual service costs, market prices, and the goal of promoting
conservation mad efficient use. Continue to provide a baseline sen;ice rate.
g.Encourage establishinent of pubIic education programs addressing energy conser~,ation and
efficiency.
h. Provide information and advice on the use of alternatix;e energy technologies, including the
relative costs and benefits of different types of fuel to all customers.
i.Encourage the use of compact and well-designed utility elements, such as transformers,
switching devices, and backflow preventers. Place these elements in locations that will
minimize their visua! intrusion
I.Work xqth the Santa Clara Valley Water District to identify and map key groundwater recharge areas
for use in land use plarming and pennitthag and the protection of groundwater resources.
J.Embrace Envirorm~ental Solutions: Invest in equipment, facilities and programs that reduce the
enviromnental footprint of providing utility services: increased efficiency, lower’losses,
enviromnentally friendly materials and processes, and reduced enviromnental impact.
a.Use environmentally friendly materials for parts and equipment
b.Use less destructive construction methods
c.Continue to support the Right Tree in the Right Place program
d.Continue to support the Shade Tree Pro~am
e.Continue to stay up-to-date on current industry practices on minimizing, mitigating negative
envirorm~ental impact
K.Evaluate fossil fuel efficiency and gree~zhouse gas impacts of thermal generation [per AB 1478]
L.Develop the City’ Council approved fiber optic ring around the City" as recommended in the 1996
Telecommunications Strategy Study and evaluate and implement eiahancements to the system
a.Improve dark fiber billing, pricing and contract terms
b.Promote VOIP to hoteIs
c.Use dark fiber as A_MlZ and advanced metering back bone infrastructure [and evaluate use for
SCADA or distribute resources monitoring and control even though it is not in the report?]
S:’;UTL’~OldH\01DIRECTOR\InterDepartmentProjects\Utilities Strategic Plan’~Performance Measures July - December
2004\UAC and Council Reports’,, UTILITIES STRATEGIC PLAN \~,,’iTH STRATEGIES .~N’D TACTICS.DOC 5
UAC USP Update 9/7/05
ATTACHNENT A
STRATEGY 7: Foster a productive workplace environment that promotes safer3.’, job
satisfaction and self improvement goals
A.Maintain OSHA Reporting System and incent employees to adhere to safety regulations
B.Provide employees with ergonomics recommendations
C.Ensure all employees are aware of and implementing security procedures
D.Ensuring t~eted safety meeting participation
E.Implement Phase II Gallup Q12 Program
F.Schedule quarterly conmmnication from department/senior management to entire department (State of
the Deparm~ent) [rotate divisions chairing meeting]
, G.Ensure 100% involvement in Strategic Plan development [input and bu?-in]
I H.Develop interdivisional work teams for identified projects.
I.Track skills related training hours and dollars
J.Implement Career Development Actions
J.1.Career-day once per quarter / open house
J.2.Cross-training
J.3.Shadow mentoring
K. Ensure all emplo~ees have a leamin_~ and development plan
S:’,UTL,OldtF,,01DIRECTOR’,InterDepartmentProjects",Utilities Strategic Plan",Performance Measures July’- December
2004’,UAC and Council Reports", UTILITIES STRATEGIC PL.%N \~,qTH STRATEGIES AND TACTICS.DOC 6
÷ ÷ -F I
+¸++I I I I I
Attachment C: Customer Bill Comparisons
Residential Customer Bill Comparisons
Electric
Palo Alto E-1 650 kwh
PG&E E-1
Santa Clara D-I
Alameda D-1
NCPA Average
(less Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Alameda)
July thru Jan thru
Dec June
FY 03-04 FY 04-05 FY 04-05
s
$
$
s
47.94 $47.94
85.94 $85.05
50.08 $50.08
80.40 $80.40
$ 73.39
FY 05-06
51.98 $57.93
85.05 $85.88
50.08 $50.08
80.40 $82.01
73.39 $73.39
Gas
Palo Alto G-1
PG&E G-1
Long Beach
30 therms Summer $
100 therms Winter
$
Water
Palo Alto W-1 14 ccf& 5/8" meter
Los Altos Cal Water
Mountain View Municipal
Redwood City Municipal
Menlo Park Cal Water
Purissima Hills Municipal
BAWSCA related survey 03-04
45.44 $49.95 $59.24 $69.76
61.47 $72.42 $72.42 $76.12
$46.95 $46.95
49.07 $54.12
37.92 $37.92
33.45 $35.15
37.37 $38.81
47.36 $45.74
40.10 $42.80
54.12 $54.12
39,40 $39.0!
35.15 $35.15
38.81 $42.56
46,81 $46,81
42,80 $42.80
40,86 $44.79
Att C Page 1 of 3
Attachment C: Customer Bill Comparisons
Commercial Customer Bill Comparisons
Electric
Palo Alto E-4
PG&E E-19
NCPA
Santa Clara CB-1
500,000 kwh
700 kw
FY 03-04
$31,485.50
$61,229.17
Palo Alto
PG&E
Long Beach
Water
Palo Alto
Los Altos
Mountain View
Redwood City
Menlo Park
Gas
G-2
G-NR1
W-4
5000 therms $
$
300 ccf & 3" meter $
Cal Water $
Municipal $
Municipal $
Cal Water $
4,025.00
4,097.94
!,095.00
675.58
752.00
842.55
854.05
FY 04-05
S 31,485.50
$56,671.13
$ 56,800.00
$ 38,953.27
$4,425.00
$4,780.22
$4,127.09
$1,207.50
$664.08
$790.05
$ 893.40
$ 807.27
Post Jan 1
FY 04-05
$34,461.50
$56,671.13
$56,800.00
$38,953.27
$5,140.00
$4,780.22
$4,127.09
$1,207.50
$717.00
$790.05
$893.40
$844.68
Att C Page 2 of 3
Attachment C: Customer Bill Comparisons
Industrial Customer Bill Comparisons
Electric
Palo Alto E-7
PG&E E-20
NCPA
Santa Clara CB-3
5,500,000 kwh
10,000 kw
FY 03-04
$345,101
$617,463
Palo Alto
PG&E
Long Beach
Water
Palo Alto
Los Altos
Mountain View
Redwood City
Menlo Park
Gas
G-NRt
W-4
10,000 therms $
$
8,050
7,792
3000 ccf & 6" meter $10,950
Cal Water $6,186
Municipal $7,239
Municipal $7,309
Cal Water $ 7,906
Post Jan 1
FY 04-05 FY 04-05
345,101 $374,951
566,710 $566,710
441,650 $441,650
421,370 $ 421,370
$8,800 $10,280
$8,894 $8,894
S 7,668 $7,668
$’12,075 $12,075
$6,071 $6,495
$7,606 $7,606
$7,778 $7,778
$7,438 $7,732
Att C Page 3 of 3
City of Palo Alto
Utilities Advisory Commission
September 7, 2005
4.Utilities Strate~c Plan Performance Report (7/o4 - 6/o5)Information
John L~rich introduced the format of the USP and the process we go through. We will ask for
feedback on our performance and some of the issues that the Commissioners may see about
measuring ourselves in this way. John introduced Ipek Connolly who has collected this
information. Ipek directed the Commissioners to Attachment B, detail. She went over the
changes that have been made to the Plan.
Dawes asked about ’unique municipal values’ that the Actuals don’t show - how do you get
those numbers? Ipek said it ties to first presentation today, what’s budgeted and what is
spent. We wanted to complete greater than 9o% of the projects. These figures represent the
encumbered in the budget expenditures. Ulrich said none of the measures have to do with
purchasing computers or anything like that. Melton said he thinks it deals with the
reapportion thing that deals xsdth carrying money over. Ulrich said it’s important to look at
the amount of work being accomplished and not just the amount of money being spent. This
is not a simple thing to do because you want to know you actually got work accomplished for
money being spent. Melton said maybe a better measurement tool would be to measure the
street number of projects - did you meet your goals.
Ipek spoke of the Environment measures- we met or exceeded our renewable target. The
PAGreen program we are proud of but the market has come to a certain saturation and we
realize our target was too aggressive. We fell a little short of this target and as a result of the
saturation, we will adjust our target. Resource efficiency we are looking at potential in Palo
Alto and as we get results we will be able to set these goals.
Next is the Financials there are two general areas: competitive bills and financial stren~hs.
You, as a Commission, have asked us separate the electric, gas and water bills and compare
Palo Alto bills against neighboring utilities averages. We did that and the results are shown
on the report. Palo Alto customers are enjoying lower electric bills. Water bills are higher
and results are mixed for gas, depending which Utilib~ we are comparing ourselves against.
People, safety and job satisfaction. We did not meet our goal of 0% safe)- index. We have not
met that goal and it may be unrealistic but we are improving our incident counts.
Rosenbaum asked about bill comparison. Santa Clara’s bills are lower than ours and perhaps
this should be pointed out when this report goes to the Council.
Tom Auzenne said the difficulb~ of comparing our bills w-ith PG&E has worsened because
they do pass on the costs on a monthly basis. We will be modif3dng our reporting
methodolo~ to reflect that difference betaveen our supply cost and distribution cost and their
supply cost and distribution cost.
Rosenbaum asked why do we have to separate out those two? Auzenne said this ~sdll enable
us to more accurately track market changes (going back). Going forward, eveI%;one does
market forecast on what they anticipate what the market price ~11 be. Forecasts are often
w~ong.
Rosenbaum said we have set the rates for o5/o6 so we know, assuming there are no
emergencies, we know what our costs will be for o5o6. You have no information on PG&E’s
supply cost for next year. He suggested we don’t try to make that comparison since we have
no way to do it.
September 2005 UAC Minutes Approved 1 I-2-2005 Page 10 of 11
Balachandran remarked that the difficult7 when we present you with a budget and rate
projections, is we say here is what we think our rates are going to be in o5o6 and we compare
it to an estimate of what we think PG&E’s rate is going to be which is the current market
price because that is what Council asked for. What’s your rate versus what’s PG&E rate?
Rosenbaum said clearly going back~’ard is the only accurate on, why not just tell people we
can’t make comparisons to PG&E looking forward.
Ulrich said we don’t have a problem with that. We’re t~%4ng to be responsive and answer your
questions. If you and the Council are not interested in guesstimates and going forward then
we can stop doing that. A couple of months ago, one of our customers was here talking about
a different methodolo~ for billing for distribution gas rates and that ours is a flat rate
depending on the class of customers whereas PG&E has a declining rate block for the same
group of customers. It may be valuable for everyone to know what those differences are in the
distribution methodolo~ and why our rates are higher in Palo Alto for gas than they would be
at PG&E or ~4ce versa. Distribution may be easier to make comparison with.
Dawes asked about Long Beach gas - they only do it once a year? Tom Auzenne said he is not
familiar with what they are doing. He ~dll be glad to come back to the Commission with more
information.
Melton observed that under municipal value - 3.5 transfer to the General Fund. He doesn’t
use that as anything that is under the control of the Utilib~. It is a City policy decision. It is an
item over which you have no control and it serves no purpose to report on this in the balanced
scorecard. Dawes said if the cash flows were extremely adverse, there would be some
pressure to deal ~4th that. They would certainly hear from the UAC but if they would do
an?~hing about it remains to be seen.
Rosenbaum said in the early 9o’s we did not make the General Fund transfer in water because
of the drought. There is some virtual to showing we are able to meet our obligation to the
General Fund.
Melton commented "under financial strength !.~ - debt ser~,-ice coverage’. Earlier this
evening we were talking about a recent bond issue for gas/water. Why is this debt ser~,-ice
coverage only measured on the electric utilib~, why not to all utilities?
Ulrich said that has to do with Calavaras. Ipek Connelly - Off microphone). Auzenne said
Calavaras reserve represented such a large stranded cost back in 2ore when eve~-~hing hit
the fan. We have recovered the cost and that is why it shows up there. Ulrich said he doesn’t
think we have debt in other areas. Melton said when he hears debt service coverage, he
assumes that includes all the bonds that are outstanding and payments that are required on
those bonds. Melton said this measure should cover all the debt the Utilities faces. Ulrich
agrees. He will verify that the only reason electric is listed is because that is the only area we
have debt.
Rosenbaum will not be here October 5th. Dawes ~.ill be an absentee call in member for.
Ulrich asked Dawes to confirm by email where he will be. Rosenbaum said you can call in
but you need a quorum present to allow the call-in participation.
Meeting adjourned.
September 2005 UAC Minutes Approved 11-2-2005 Page 11 of ! 1