►
From YouTube: Burlington Electric Commission - 3/8/2023
Description
Agenda: https://www.burlingtonelectric.com/wp-content/uploads/03.08.23-AGE-signed-1.pdf
https://linktr.ee/townmeetingtv
00:00:00 Introductions
00:00:19 Agenda
00:00:31 Minutes of February 8, 2023
00:01:28 Public Forum
00:01:59 Commissioners’ Corner
00:13:23 GM Update
00:28:29 Financials: FY23 January
00:52:41 IRP Update #2022
00:58:44 Commissioners’ Check-In
This video belongs to http://www.cctv.org and published with permission under Creative Commons License CCTV Center for Media & Democracy Programming is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
March
meeting
of
the
Burlington
electric
commission,
we
meet
here
at
585,
fine
Street,
every
second
Wednesday
of
the
month
and
as
always,
members
of
the
public
and
ratepayers
and
they're
welcome
to
come
down.
Talk
to
us
give
us
your
concerns.
Praise
whatever,
but
here
we
are
so
we'll
start
the
meeting
off
with
the
agenda.
Are
there
any
changes
or
additions
to
the
objective?
A
B
D
A
A
Well
again,
I'll
reiterate
public
repairs
here,
bro
and
always
welcome
here.
Second
Wednesday
of
the
month.
Please
come
down
and
join
the
conversation.
If
you
have
any
concerns
or
anything
like
that
with
your
electricity
or
lights
or
whatever
come
all
right.
We'll
move
on
to
the
commissioner's
corner,
70
Kingsman,
commissioners,
congratulations.
D
C
C
C
C
To
the
road
map
metrics
at
least
the
major
metrics
I
had
a
small
item
on
this,
but
we're
expecting
to
have
the
updated
synapse
report
on
the
2022
emissions
and
fossil
fuel
use
data,
hopefully
in
April,
so
we'll
at
least
be
able
to
give
kind
of
the
high
level
what
we've
done.
You
know
comparison
over
the
last
now
it'll
be
2019
20,
21
22.,
so
four
years
of
data
relative
to
the
2018
Baseline,
so
I'm
hoping
to
have
an
item
to
discuss
that
in
April.
C
A
Fantastic
and
then
the
other
third
thing
I
want
to
bring
up.
Was
you
had
a
couple
members
of
the
commission
had
a
meeting
a
couple
weeks
ago
with
some
engineers
and
designers
here
and
an
outside
person,
or
a
long
discussion.
We've
been
having
for
quite
some
time
about
lighting
standards
and
IES
here
in
Burlington,
so
I
just
wanted
to
tee
that
up
and
get
the
mic
to
Bob.
To
give
us
a
little
more
detail
on
that.
B
That's
also
partially,
my
excuse
for
not
being
totally
up
to
speed
on
what's
going
on
since
that
meeting,
Gabrielle
or
previous
board
member
and
chairman
actually
sent
a
note
around
which
I
got
today.
My
I
forgot
to
check
the
date,
but
so
I'm
actually
going
to
quote
some
of
that.
I'll
also
say
personally
that
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
significant
goals
at
this
point
about
this
I
think
I'll
come
back
to
that.
B
Mr
Arnold
did
tell
us
something
we
had
heard
about,
which
is
that
the
IES,
the
Illuminating
engineering
Society,
has
reduced
its
recommendations
for
light
levels
in
a
couple
of
small
cases
were
lightly
traveled
streets,
that's
encouraging,
but
not
terrific.
Also,
the
the
IES
has
become
more
emotional
about
dimming
lights
and
off
hours,
and
that
latter
thing
is
what
we
mostly
ended
up
looking
to
for
further
investigation,
because
we
seem
to
start
regardless
of
where
we
started
the
discussion.
B
B
But
the
dark
sky
question
also
speaks
to
Aesthetics
and
about
that
dimming,
typically
after
midnight,
which
is
also
done
in
Pepperell
Massachusetts,
by
the
way
that
one
example
I've
mentioned
before
is
done
because
it
doesn't
affect
many
people,
but
because
it
doesn't
affect
many
people,
it
doesn't
change
their
dark
sky
experience.
Their
ducks
are
experiences
dominated
by
their
10
pm
times.
B
B
So,
to
sum
up,
there's
going
to
be
some
more
work,
but
right
now
we
don't
have
a
strong
advocate
or
pushing
the
IES
recommendations
and
we
don't
have
a
strong
connection
to
places
which
have
done
it.
Many
in
the
West
Coast
or
in
the
west,
rather
which
also
have
astronomy
as
a
part
of
their
consideration.
D
E
A
B
A
very
fair
question:
I,
don't
think:
we've
really
got
it
articulated
if
you're
a
dark
sky
Advocate,
you
say
the
sky
is
too
too
bright,
aesthetically
and
then
there's
a
whole
argument
about.
What's
really
enough
from
Safety
Stand
points,
and
there
are
issues
out
there
in
the
great
literature
about
that.
But
that's
it
I
think
it
only
read
only
two
reasons
to
think
about:
coming
down
money
and
Aesthetics.
A
C
Our
policy
requires
when
we
do
work
in
an
area
that
we
update
the
lighting
to
the
standard
and
if
the
street
hasn't
been
updated
in
a
while,
that
can
appear
to
be
a
really
dramatic
shift
from
having
out-of-date
light
to
kind
of
more
up-to-date
light,
and
so
that
sparked
the
conversation,
but
the
the
piece
on
our
end,
that's
been
a
challenge.
We've
talked
about.
C
A
lot
is
we're
kind
of
liable
for
the
safety
of
the
roads,
and
so,
if
we
have
the
standard
we
have
to
meet
it,
we
feel
a
little
bit
constrained
on
that
end
and
there's
a
lot
of
good
discussion
about.
You
know
other
ways
to
go
about
it,
but
that's
that's
kind
of
been
one
of
the
sticking
points
for
us.
D
G
D
E
But
even
if
you
replace
one
light
on
the
street,
the
light's
been
there
for
a
couple
of
years.
You
know
the
light
I
mean
decrease
with
over
time
right,
the
light
output.
So
when
you
replace
it
with
the
new
LED
light,
the
the
light
is
so
bright
initially,
and
sometimes
you
get
complaints
from
people
and
at
the
same
time,
we
get
compliments
from
defense.
F
B
B
C
Before
I
get
into
the
items
in
the
report,
I
wanted
to
remember
to
mention
the
commission
that
we
have.
We
had
submitted
I.
Think
I
mentioned
this
five
concept
papers
under
the
infrastructure
Bill.
Some
of
the
federal
funding
that
was
available
we've
been
encouraged
to
submit
a
full
application
for
two
of
those,
and
we
would
like
to
have
the
opportunity
for
the
chair
to
sign,
on
behalf
of
the
commission
supporting
those
two
Grant
proposals.
C
If
that's,
if
everyone's
amenable
to
that
these
would
be
one
page
fairly
brief
letters
of
support,
the
two
am
I
able
to
mention
the
proposals
that
were
encouraged,
yeah,
okay,
just
just
confirming
yeah
I'm
happy
to
to
mention
one
of
them
is
to
support
our
our
adms
system,
which
is
really
to
help
with
greater
visibility
into
the
grid
for
our
power
system.
Operators,
enhanced
reliability,
our
outage
management
system
for
our
customer
care
team.
C
C
Okay,
our
deadline,
I
think
for
one
of
them
is
this
Friday.
Is
that
right?
Okay,
both
next
Friday?
Okay,
perhaps
what
we
can
do
is
share
a
copy
via
email,
maybe
as
early
as
this
evening
or
tomorrow,
and
then,
if
there
are
any
concerns,
maybe
either
communicate
to
me
or
communicate
to
the
chair
and
then,
if
everybody's
good,
we'll
work
to
get
your
signature.
If
that's
do
we
have
an
electronic
Scott,
Moody
signature?
No,
we
don't
okay,
so
we
may
have
to
send
it
to
you
to
be
printed
signs.
D
C
I
can
work
on
that
so
we'll
follow
up
on
that.
Okay,
so
jumping
into
the
update
good
news
relatively
on
the
on
the
legislative
front,
there
was
a
bill
introduced
h320
which
encompasses
renewable
energy
Vermont's
proposal
for
changes
to
the
renewable
energy
standard.
We
don't
necessarily
see
eye
to
eye
with
them
on
the
bill
as
a
whole.
There's
still
some
major
cost
concerns.
We
had
a
commentary
myself,
Ken
Nolan,
Rebecca
town
and
Lewis
Porter,
representing
the
Public
Power
utilities,
or
many
of
the
Public
Power
Utilities
in
the
State.
C
Raising
some
serious
cost
concerns
with
changes
to
the
renewable
energy
standard
that
ran
in
Vermont
Digger
last
week,
but
at
least
on
wood
energy.
The
bill
is
much
improved
from
the
initial
proposal.
It
makes
sure
that
plants
like
McNeil
can
continue
to
count
towards
Vermont's
renewable
energy
targets
that,
if
we're
able
to
move
forward
with
things
like
District
energy,
that
won't
negatively
impact
our
ability
to
count
towards
Vermont's
renewable
targets,
and
if
somebody
was
to
build
a
new
plant,
then
there
are
some
language
in
there.
C
If
this
was
to
become
law,
which
obviously
it's
a
bill,
not
not
a
statute,
but
that
would
set
some
efficiency
standards
and
emission
standards
for
new
plants.
That
would
not
be
something
we're
subject
to
at
McNeil
if
we
were
to
move
forward
with
District
energy
or
repower
the
facility
in
any
way,
so
at
least
on
wood
energy.
It's
helpful
that
Renewable,
Energy
Vermont
and
the
groups
working
on
that
bill
have
acknowledged
the
benefit
of
having
wood
energy
count
towards
Vermont's
targets.
C
So
I
appreciate
that,
there's
more
to
come
on
wood
energy,
certainly
I
know
that
the
took
the
transportation
energy
utilities
Committee
of
the
city
council
is
planning
to
hold
some
sort
of
a
forum,
possibly
in
April
related
to
Wood
energy.
We'll
certainly
share
with
the
commission
to
the
extent
that
you're
interested
in
being
a
part
of
that
or
calling
in
or
anything
and
then
it
did
come
up.
C
I
was
on
the
morning,
drive
radio
show
for
about
an
hour
earlier
this
month,
or
maybe
it
was
late
last
month
that
was
actually
late
last
month,
and
we
talked
some
about
McNeil
and
District
energy
in
a
variety
of
these
subjects.
So
we
know
it'll
continue
to
be
a
subject
of
discussion,
but
good
progress
there
on
the
renewable
energy
bill
on
act,
151,
which
is
the
bill
that
lets
us
use
a
portion
of
our
efficiency
dollars
towards
Innovative
programs.
C
A
bill
has
been
introduced
in
the
Senate,
a
committee
bill
they
kind
of
paused
their
work
on
that
in
the
natural
resources
and
energy
committee
to
take
up
a
housing
bill
that
had
come
through,
but
the
bill
that
was
introduced
includes
some
Concepts
from
bed,
including
that
we
could
potentially
use
our
thermal
energy
process.
Fuel
funds
tepf
funds
which
we've
been
using
to
support
District
energy
feasibility,
but
that'll
conclude
the
feasibility
work
will
conclude,
hopefully
over
the
next
several
months,
we'll
be
able
to
use
those
funds
to
support
the
ACT
151
program.
C
So
this
would
be
a
revenue
that
comes
to
us
from
our
participation
in
the
regional
greenhouse
gas
initiative
and
from
bidding
Energy
Efficiency
into
the
forward
capacity
market.
So
this
is
revenue,
that's
Burlington
revenue
from
our
customers
that
we
might
otherwise
lose
and
that
we're
able
to
retain
currently
because
because
we
can
use
it
for
district
energy.
C
When
we
developed
the
budget
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
mitigate
that
in
terms
of
positioning
McNeil's
operations.
James
and
his
team
have
done
a
great
job
working
with
the
McNeil
team
on
creating
a
bidding
strategy.
It
maximizes
the
benefit
for
McNeil
when
it
does
run
relative
to
the
economics
on
the
New
England
grid.
We've
had
a
great
run
in
terms
of
wood
supply.
We've
run
almost
24
7
really
since
December,
and
we
still
have
enough
wood
I
think
to
get
through
to
the
end
of
March.
I.
Think
we're
hopeful.
C
We
think
and
and
then
we
have
an
outage
scheduled
for
the
beginning
of
April,
so
that
would
be
a
natural
time
to
begin
to
restock
the
fuel
supply.
But
all
of
that
said
we
are
working
on
a
number
of
strategies.
Try
to
conserve
cash.
We
want
to
end
the
year
with
90
days,
cash
on
hand,
that's
kind
of
a
Bedrock
metric
for
us
in
terms
of
the
a
rating
for
Moody's.
We
know
our
adjusted
debt
ratio,
which
was
improved
last
year,
was
I.
C
Think
a
1.22
last
year
to
end
the
year,
which
had
been
up
significantly
from
prior
years,
is
likely
to
be
impacted
by
some
of
the
Dynamics
that
we've
mentioned.
So
as
we
develop
the
fy24
budget,
we're
taking
a
more
conservative
approach,
I
think
relative
to
the
power
markets
and
trying
to
build
a
budget
that
will
also
have
certainly
have
a
rate
increase.
C
We're
trying
to
keep
that
as
moderate
as
possible,
given
the
Dynamics
so
we'll
April
will
be
our
draft
budget
and
rate
discussion
that
we
have
every
year
and
may
would
be
the
time
where
we
come
to
you
for
a
final
approval
on
the
rate
and
budget
pieces.
So
we'll
obviously
be
digging
into
this
quite
a
bit
more
over
the
next
couple
months
with
the
commission
but
I
just
wanted
to
flag
kind
of
where
we
are
with
District
energy.
C
C
C
I
do
expect
that
there's
going
to
be
discussion
because
of
this,
and
and
because
of
the
form
I
mentioned
at
the
tuke,
about
what
counts
as
renewable
for
our
purposes
here
in
Burlington,
and
what
we've
advocated
for
and
what's
included
currently
in
Burlington
ordinance
is
a
fairly
broad
definition
and
inclusive
definition
of
renewable
as
the
municipal
electric
company,
we're
always
happy
when
people
Electrify.
That's
our
that's
that's
one
of
our
key
strategies,
that's
something
that
we
support
strongly,
but
we
don't
support
it
as
an
exclusive
strategy.
C
We
believe
there
are
building
applications
where
electrification
may
not
make
the
most
sense
from
a
technical
or
economic
perspective.
So
we
see
District
energy
as
a
viable
solution
for
some
customers
and,
obviously
that's
why
we're
working
so
hard
to
advance
it.
It's
part
of
the
road
map,
one
of
the
four
key
pillars
of
the
road
map
so
having
renewable
District
energy
be
an
option
under
Burlington's
policy
is
very
important
in
that
context.
It's
also
currently
included
in
the
state
clean
heat
bill,
that's
advancing.
C
In
some
applications
we
may
have
a
situation
where
there
is
some
residual
fuel
use
and,
having
that
be
renewable,
as
opposed
to
fossil
fuel
makes
sense
from
our
perspective
and
in
addition,
there
may
be
some
buildings,
particularly
existing
buildings,
where
the
distribution
infrastructure
is
such
that
converting
away
from
a
conventional
fuel
system
may
be
prohibitively
or
technically
impractical
or
impossible,
and
having
the
option
for
those
buildings
to
use
renewable
fuel
is
important
as
well.
We
don't
see
a
lot
of
modern
wood
heating
used
in
Burlington.
C
We
see
it
in
the
rest
of
the
state
places
where
people
may
be
relying
on
oil
or
propane.
Obviously,
Burlington
is
95
percent
natural
gas.
What
we're
seeing
is
is
largely
either
people
are
using
natural
gas
or
increasingly
they're
using
electrification,
geothermal
heat
pumps,
vrf
systems,
so
we
don't
really
see
a
huge
number
of
wood
heat
systems,
but
nonetheless
we
left
that
in
as
an
option
to
the
extent
that
that's
necessary
as
a
complementary
system
or
or
in
some
cases
could
be
a
primary
system.
C
The
high
school
building
I
believe
had
a
wood
heating
system,
I
believe
they're
moving
towards
having
a
geothermal
system
for
the
new
building
with
our
support,
but
there
may
be
applications
where
that's
necessary
or
appropriate.
The
more
you
limit
the
definition
of
what's
renewable,
the
more
costly
the
policy
could
potentially
be
the
more
impractical
that
policy
could
potentially
be.
C
So
our
view
is
that
it
would
be
sound
to
include
a
broad
and
comprehensive
renewable
definition,
just
like
they're
doing
at
the
state
level,
but
that
debate
will
happen
and
I
just
wanted
to
preview
for
the
commission
kind
of
where
we've
been
coming
from.
In
terms
of
the
Department's
position
in
that
discussion,
I
think
I
covered
the
Net
Zero
roadmap
item
a
little
bit.
We
do
expect
to
have
metrics
for
April
early,
read
at
least
on
the
building
side.
C
I
don't
have
transportation
data
yet
is
I,
believe
we
have
an
increase
in
natural
gas
use
in
Burlington
from
2022
relative
to
2021..
I've
asked
Chris
Burns
to
kind
of
dig
in
on
that.
That's
not
final,
so
we
may
find
you
know
discrepancy
from
from
what
we
see
original
from
the
original
data.
It's
conceivable,
and
this
is
not
a
per
capita
measure,
so
it's
conceivable
if
there's
construction
and
New
Uses,
then
that
might
be
a
source
of
of
additional
natural
gas
use.
C
C
C
A
H
We
had
a
net
loss
for
the
month
bit
of
566
thousand
dollars
that
compares
to
a
budgeted
net
income
of
1.1
million
dollars
so
about
1.7
million
worse
than
budget,
as
you
can
see,
there
two
primary
reasons:
first,
big
one
being
purchased
power
and
the
second
being
sales
to
customers
which
unfortunately
broke
against
us
as
well
the
mild
weather
contributing
to
lower
sales
than
expected.
So
you
can
see
there
was
a
388
thousand
dollar
unfavorable
variance
to
budget
in
sales.
H
For
the
year
to
date,
there
are
only
about
two
percent
under
budget
which
isn't
too
bad
really,
but
it
definitely
was
didn't
help
didn't
help
us
this
month.
Other
revenues
were
favorable
to
budget
by
a
hundred
and
nineteen
thousand
dollars.
Most
of
that
is
efficiency,
Energy,
Efficiency
utility,
reimbursements
and
then
on
the
expense
side.
H
You
can
see
the
big
1.39
million
dollar
negative
variance
in
power
supply
just
about
all
of
that
difference
was
due
to
purchased
power,
and
most
of
that
was
due
to
unfavorable
variants
and
the
iso
exchange
caused
by
lower
than
budgeted
Energy
prices.
Just
to
give
you
a
sense,
we
budgeted
at
an
average
energy
price
of
230
dollars
per
megawatt
hour.
Actuals
were
about
an
average
of
about
50.,
so
really
significantly
lower
than
we
had
expected.
H
B
H
D
H
D
C
That's
the
source
of
our
challenge
yeah
this
budget
was,
we
kind
of
noted
at
the
time
was
uniquely
that
was
our
one
risk
factor
and
it
broke
against
us,
but
it's
a
big
one,
and
so
we
are.
We
are
budgeting
more
conservatively
next
year
and
you
know
we'll
probably
have
a
slightly
higher
rate
need
because
of
that
than
we
would
otherwise,
but
I
think
that's
going
to
be
necessary
need
to
use
an
actual
number.
Save
a
deal
is
comparable
cost
of
66
dollars.
D
F
D
D
H
F
H
Okay,
so
then,
moving
on
to
Capital,
we
have
spent
about
4.7
million
January
year
to
date
against
the
budget
of
about
6.3
million.
At
this
point
in
time,
that's
about
52
percent
of
the
Year
budget
of
9.1
million,
so
we're
generally
I.
Think
tracking
well,
in
terms
of
you,
know,
Capital
spending
on
the
pace
that
we
had
planned.
H
Moving
down
to
cash,
we
did
see
an
improvement
in
cash
versus
the
December
numbers.
A
lot
of
that,
due
to
the
timing
of
when
we
received
a
drawdown
from
the
revenue
Bond
construction
fund,
so
we
received
the
amount
for
December
in
January,
so
December
was
kind
of
short
and
January
was
richer
than
we
had
thought.
It
would
be
so
we've
improved
a
little
bit
on
the
cash
position,
6.8
million
dollars
in
operating
funds.
That
is
still
about
four
million
dollars
off
of
where
we
had
budgeted
to
be
in
terms
of
cash
flow.
H
H
If
the
decrease
in
cash
on
hand
leads
to
a
rating
downgrade,
then
yes,
it
would
make
borrowing
money
more
expensive.
It
wouldn't
affect
any
of
the
rates
that
we
have
sort
of
currently
set
for
the
bonds
we've
already
issued
or
a
line
of
credit,
or
you
know
anything,
that's
kind
of
out
there
it'd
be
if
we
were
to
issue
new
debt
and
our
credit
rating
is
less
than
it
is
now,
because
this
day's
cash
on
hand
has
declined
or
has
sort
of
hit
a
level
right.
D
H
So
we're
evaluating
kind
of
places
where
we
can
either
draw
down
more
funds
from
the
construction
fund
than
we
had
planned
or
kind
of
accelerate
that
we're
looking
at
our
rearrages
and
weather,
because
that's
essentially
cash,
that's
owed
to
us
that
we
haven't
collected
and
is
there
a
way
that
we
can
Whittle
that
down
a
little
bit.
We
are
looking
at
things
like
overtime
and
vacancy
savings,
so
try
to
think
of
the
other
things
that
we're
looking
at.
C
A
normal
year
if
this
was
going
to
happen,
and
we
didn't
have
the
revenue
Bond
funding
kind
of
locked
in
over
a
three-year
period,
we
would
have
had
a
capital
budget
that
was
relying
on
our
cash
more
than
this
year's
budget
is,
and
then
you
would
defer
capital
projects,
for
example,
to
conserve
cash.
That's
been
a
tool
we've
used,
including
during
the
pandemic,
so
this
year's
budget's
unique
because
we
actually
have
a
pretty
significant
capitals
spend,
but
deferring
projects
doesn't
actually
help
us.
G
C
And
the
other
thing
is
just
positioning
you'll
know
strategically
for
the
remainder
of
the
Year
try
to
bring
in
whatever
additional
variance,
positive
variance
that
we
can
against
the
potential
energy
markets,
and
we
did
I
think
in
March
we
saw
a
mild
decrease
in
the
fuel
costs,
as
diesel
is
coming
down.
We
have
a
ratchet
now,
essentially
so
we
had
a.
C
We
had
a
slight
decrease
in
the
wood
fuel
costs
and
that
could
continue
if
diesel
prices
continue
to
come
down
that
helps
a
little
bit,
but
but
really
cash
is
your
flux
and-
and
so
the
90
days
to
me
is
not
just
important
because
the
Moody's
braiding
it's
really.
What
what?
During
my
time
at
bed,
we
viewed
as
The
Prudent
level
to
try
to
maintain
just
for
operational
purposes
as
well.
C
Go
right,
that's,
and
so
to
the
extent
that
number
starts
to
creep
down
from
you
know,
instead
of
being
90
or
100
or
120,
20
or
so
yeah.
So
if
it's
lower
it's,
because
when
you
net
everything
out
with
the
income,
the
revenue
and
the
expenses,
if
we're
not
pulling
in
as
much,
we
need
to
pay
that
cash
is
there
to
be
the
buffer,
essentially
right,
but.
H
G
F
F
Which
is
that
there's
a
problem
with
the
rates
development
process
in
Vermont,
because
the
BTS
we're
evaluating
our
rate
case
last
year
used
forwards
that
were
higher
than
our
budget
employees?
We're
determining
how
much
money
they
would
agree
that
we
should
get.
So
if
we
go
to
file
a
rankings
they're
going
to
plug
in
four
words
and
say
that
determines
how
much
money
you
will
make
in
the
spot
market
and
set
your
so
again
that
you
know
other
states
there's
a
fuel
adjustable
cost,
so
it
automatically
passes
through
to
modulate
rates
to
recover.
F
These
expenses
does
not
have
that
and
to
date
the
BTS
has
used
these
projections
of
price
in
rates
it
we
raised.
All
of
these
concerns.
The
last
Ray
case
said
it
is
putting
us
in
a
position
where,
if
there's
a
lot
of
winter,
you
know
that's
about
that's
the
map
they're
using
and
so
there's
a
challenge.
You've
been
asking
for
more
money.
D
C
C
So
that's
a
six
month
or
a
four
month
period
where
they
can
recover
more
money
because
fuel
prices
went
up
and
then
that
comes
off
the
bill,
whereas
we
do
traditional
rate
making,
where
you
set
your
rates
for
the
year
based
on,
what's
known
at
the
time
and
there's
not
a
process
at
the
municipal
level
currently
to
be
able
to
adjust
because
the
winner
didn't
go
the
way
we
wanted.
We
can't
put
in
a
fuel
adjuster
for
three
months
to
try
to
recover.
So
that's
a
tool
we
don't
have
in
the
toolbox
as
well.
F
F
It's
difficult
to
build
past
expenses
into
forward-looking
rates
as
well,
because
typically
rates
are
designed
to
recover
the
expenses
for
a
forward-looking
year.
You
know
there
are
methods
and
we're
talking
about
it
to
deal
with
past
issues,
but
they're,
not
easy,
I
mean
you're.
Not
you
can't
just
say
I
want
this
much
for
next
year's
known
and
measurable
changes.
Oh
by
the
way,
can
you
give
me
back
the
the
2
million
you
didn't
give
me
last
year
that
that
process
does
not
directly
exist.
D
Yeah
I
guess
I
was
thinking
because
you
know
Burlington
has
a
little
bit
of
a
we've.
Had
a
history
of
this
I
think
the
school
district
is
the
biggest
one
like
where
there's
just
financial
problems
and
nobody
and
then
we're
like
what
we
owe
how
much
money
we
can't
do
right,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
sensitive
to
how
what
they
answer
it,
what
the
end
game
is
and
how
we
can
get
out
of
this,
also
Burlington's
so
expensive.
Already
that
any
increase
is
going
to
be.
D
C
Think
that
the
balance
there
is
is
that
is
the
issue,
is
you
know
we
went
12
years
with
no
rate
increase
in
retrospect,
part
of
me
wishes.
We
had
had
a
one
or
two
percent
rate
increase
each
of
those
years,
we'd
be
in
a
better
position
now,
but
at
the
time
people
enjoyed
those
benefits,
so
we're
we're
now
in
a
position
where
we
need
rate
changes
annually.
Inflation
is
Sky
High
over
the
last
few
years
and
that
affects
our
business
as
well.
C
Even
our
rate
changed
last
year,
3.95
well
below
the
rate
of
inflation,
I
mean
almost
half
of
the
rate
of
inflation.
So
a
relative,
you
know
positive
I
mean
in
utility
rates.
I've
always
been
taught
that
if
you're
under
the
rate
of
inflation,
then
that's
a
positive.
So
that
was
a
good
thing.
We're
gonna
try
again
to
be.
You
know,
either
at
or
below
the
rate
of
inflation,
if
at
all
possible,
but
yeah
I
think
the
the
thing
that
would
the
thing
if
I
was
in
your
shoes.
C
That's
much
more
precarious
and
as
painful
as
it
is
to
go
through
and
it's
not
a
process
any
of
us
relish
or
any
of
you
relish,
and
certainly
not
one
that
are
our
ratepayers
and
customers
want
modestly
increasing
the
rates
on
a
regular
basis
to
account
for
the
costs
that
we
know
and
to
maintain
the
cash
margin
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
manage
when
things
don't
go.
Well
is
the
best
financial
strategy
in
the
long
run,
I.
D
C
C
Looking
to
be
in
that
position
either,
so
we
want
to
kind
of
stay
in
the
single
digits
have
have
a
kind
of
reasonable
trajectory
and
do
all
the
things
we
can
do,
and
and
perhaps
next
year
the
power
markets
break
in
a
different
way
and
we're
in
a
different
position.
But
that's
just
that's
not
something
we
can
predict
or
I've
asked
James,
and
he
said
if
he
could,
he
wouldn't
be
working.
F
G
G
F
Of
well
again,
the
concern
is
that
the
economic
damage
that
Emily's
talked
about
has
happened
right.
It's
going
to
be
hard
to
undo
that
level
of
cash
loss
with
minor
levers.
Right
I
mean
that's
and
my
concern
about
the
methodologies
in
which
which
rates
are
made
in
the
state
you
know
remains,
but
the
for
the
Fords
for
the
next
winter,
which
would
be
an
array
case,
are
lower
than
275
dollars,
which
also
aligns
with
more
with
the
budgeting
we're
doing
this
year.
So
you
know
and
there's
a
couple
of
things
we
can
do.
F
I'd
rather
not
stay
out
specifically
on
camera
right
now,
but
there
are
a
couple
of
things
we
can
do
to
potentially
help
over
time
recover
that
past
damage,
but
it
wouldn't
be
quick
and
it
would
tend
to
increase
rate.
So
it
depends
on
whether
the
rates
can
sustain
that
too.
So
again,
things
that
can
be
done.
F
I
mean
you
know:
some
markets
are
breaking
away.
The
problem
is
like
the
Ford
capacity.
Market
is
falling,
that's
good
for
us
because
we're
in
that
capacity,
buyer,
but
that
doesn't
take
effect
until
three
years
from
now
right.
So
the
new
market,
just
the
new
auction,
just
closed
lower
great,
but
it's
not
great
tomorrow.
C
But
even
in
the
Emily
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
even
the
position
we're
in
we're
going
to
work
as
hard
as
we
possibly
can
to
end
the
year
with
the
90
days,
cash
yeah,
that's
good!
That's
the
goal
it!
The
net
income
may
not
look
good.
The
adjusted
debt
metric
may
not
be
where
we
want
it,
but
that's.
Our
primary
goal
is
to
end
with
90
days,
cash
on
hand,
not
going
to
be
easy,
but
we're
that's
everything.
All
the
mitigation
strategies
are
working
towards
that
end.
C
Yeah
no
well,
they
have
multiple
metrics
and
they
look
at
it
over
multiple
years
and
they
look
not
only
at
what
you've
done,
but
what
your
forward-looking
plans
are.
So
the
fact
that
we're
on
a
trajectory
that
we've
demonstrated
we're
willing
to
raise
rates
yeah
and
that
we're
on
a
trajectory,
that's
relatively
consistent
with
the
rate
path
that
we
laid
out
for
them
a
five-year
rate
path
a
few
years
ago.
Those
are
positive
factors
for
us.
The
fact
that
the
power
markets
didn't
go
our
way
for
one
winter.
C
Don't
it
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
there
is
a
you
know,
a
negative
correlation
for
your
credit
Outlook.
It
may
mean
that
some
metrics
are
not
where
we
want
them
to
be
for
one
particular
year,
but
they
tend
to
look
at
things
on
a
three-year
cycle,
not
a
one-year
cycle.
We
did
have
Improvement
in
a
variety
of
metrics
last
year,
so
that'll
enter
to
our
benefit.
C
F
You
know,
and
looking
two
years
out,
softening
energy
markets
reduce
the
cost
of
replacement
power
when
our
contracts
expire.
So
again
it's
nothing's
without
its
benefits.
It's
just
the
timing
of
it
can
create
the
pinch
that
they're
describing
so
you
know
again,
the
price
of
replacing
our
expiring
contracts
is
coming
down
too.
C
Digit
rate
increases
that
happen
this
winter
for
Massachusetts,
for
example,
there
was
an
article
on
CBS
News,
where
somebody
who
drives
an
electric
vehicle
in
Massachusetts
because
of
those
rate
structures
now
pays
more
to
fill
up
their
EV
than
they
do
when
they
use
gas,
they
have
a
plug-in
hybrid.
So
it
that's
how
dramatic
the
shift
has
been
in
other
states
and
even
in
Vermont,
there
have
certainly
been
double
digit
rate
requests
from
some
utilities
and
and
higher
single
digits
for
others.
C
So
this
is
not
unique
to
bed
and
in
fact
our
3.95
for
the
current
year
is
one
of
the
best
rate
numbers
I've,
seen
from
any
utility
in
Vermont
or
New
England
that
had
to
raise
rates.
So
you
know
we'll
always
look
at
things
relative
to
how
we're
doing
our
residential
rate
remains.
One
of
the
lowest
in
the
entire
region,
for
example,
I
know
that
doesn't
help
when
your
bill
is
going
up
by
3.95
percent
relative
to
what
you
had
last
year.
D
C
They
have
those
those
adjusters
which
aren't
even
part
of
the
base
rate,
but
they
may
reflect
the
fuel
cost
changes
so
going
into
the
winter
when
natural
gas
commodity
costs
were
going
up.
That
means
that
you
know
the
energy
Market
costs
were
potentially
going
up
and
those
didn't
materialize.
The
way
we
thought,
but
those
utilities
raised
those
fuel
adjusters
for
that
period
of
time
and
and
now
they'll
be
coming
down,
see
what
you
get
is
a
bit
of
a
yoyo
effect.
C
If
you're
a
customer,
your
bill
might
have
been
really
high
in
the
winter
and
you
hit
the
shoulder
season,
and
maybe
it's
going
down.
I
mean
the
thing
you
get
with.
Our
model
is
at
least
a
measure
of
stability.
You
know
kind
of
what
your
bill
is
for.
You
know
that
12-month
period,
so
you
know
each
each
model
has
its
benefits,
but
Vermont
tends
to
be
more
stable
than
the
rest
of
the
New
England
states
because
of
our
regulatory
model.
So.
F
F
F
Good
evening
everybody
we're
going
to
try
to
make
sure
that
we
come
to
you
guys
each
month
on
IRP
stuff,
regardless
of
whether
we
have
a
really
fancy
PowerPoint
or
we're
just
telling
you
what's
happened
since
the
last
IRP
update,
but
in
the
interest
keeping
you
sort
of
aware
of.
What's
going
on,
I
thought.
I
would
tell
you
some
things
that
have
happened
in
the
last
month.
We
did
receive
the
itron
forecast,
we
received
it
over
this
weekend
and,
of
course,
Tuesday
was
a
holiday.
So
we
have
not
fully
assimilated
that
forecast.
F
Nor
have
we
signed
off
on
it.
It
will
be
candid
and
saying
it
is
materially
lower
than
the
Net
Zero
roadmap
forecast
materially
Lower,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
what
is
not
included
in
the
assumptions
or
is
included
in
the
assumptions
of
which
one
you're
talking
about
before.
We
show
that
difference
to
the
world
and
say
this
is
our
IRP
forecast,
particularly
for
Peak
loads.
F
F
Okay,
we
have
started
actually
executed
contract
for
the
updated
McNeil
economic
study,
which
was
the
one
of
the
appendices
to
the
2020
IRP,
and
one
of
the
requirements
of
the
mou
for
the
2020
RP
was
that
that
study
be
updated,
so
that
study
is
being
updated,
it
is
being
done
and
its
delivery
date
is
end
of
March.
So
we
would
hopefully
be
able
to
share
that
updated
economic
study
before
the
next
meeting
and
answer
questions
on
it.
F
The
Five-Year
budget
model
is
done,
and
the
very
next
thing
we
do
is
we
take
the
five-year
budget
model
and
we
extend
well
as
we're
preparing
The
Five-Year
budget
model.
We
put
in
any
longer
projections
that
we
have
at
the
time
and
do
you
know
Energy
prices,
capacity,
prices,
transmission
prices
and
all
of
that
we'll
finish
populating
the
20-year
projections
of
those
and
turn
it
into
the
IRP
model,
the
economic
side
of
the
power
supply.
F
At
the
same
time,
Casey
will
also
be
able
to
use
that
to
do
a
quick
litmus
test
against
the
RFP
response,
as
we
got
last
December,
because
really
you
would
need
to
test
them
against
an
IRP
and
it's
a
lot
more
rational
to
test
them
against
a
current
IRP
assumption
than
a
2020
IRP
assumption.
So
that'll
be
part
of
that
and
see
this
oh,
and
the
last
thing
I
want
to
mention
is
that
we
are
working
on
talking
about
what
topics
will
be
in
the
chapter.
That
was
the
Net
Zero
roadmap
chapter.
F
One
of
the
things
we
think
we'll
do
is
we
will
update
the
Net
Zero
roadmap
chapter
for
current
assumptions,
make
sure
it
still
holds
true
on
changes
in
energy
markets.
Changes
in
costs
of
construction,
transmission,
distribution
equipment,
things
like
that,
so
that
chapter
will
get
updated,
but
we
think
we're
going
to
add
to
it.
Some
other
topics
and
we
just
ask
you
to
sort
of
take
them
away
and
mull
them
or
over
right.
F
They're
not
work
we're
doing
today,
but
it
would
be
inconvenient
to
do
too
too
much
work
on
them
and
have
you
say
that
doesn't
make
any
sense
at
all,
and
so
the
topics
were
we
were
thinking
about
what
would
happen
to
the
power
supply
portfolio
and
cost
if
you
tried
to
switch
from
an
annual
average
renewability
metric
to
an
hourly
renewability
metric?
If
you
then
said,
I
want
to
be
able
to
meet
my
load
with
renewable
resources
on
an
hourly,
a
more
granular
basis
than
just
annual
average.
What
would
be
required
for
storage?
F
What
we
required
for
load
shifting
to
make
that
happen,
and
what
would
it
cost
we're
talking
about?
What
would
it
what
would
happen
to
our
portfolio
if
we
simply
ceased?
Rec
Arbitrage,
that's
not
a
very
complicated
math
compared
to
the
first
one,
but
it
is
at
least
something
that's
of
note
to
us
to
keep
track
of
that
changing
potentially
to
the
renewable
energy
standard
as
and
if
something
starts
to
get
sort
of
solidified
or
gelled
at
the
legislature.
F
We
might
run
that
through
the
model
and
that's
really
the
those
would
probably
become
additional
pieces
of
that
chapter
of
sort
of
current
topics
that
last
year
or
last
IRP
was
really
all
around
the
implications
of
the
NetZero
roadmap.
We
think
we'd
be
bringing
in
some
more
stuff
on
the
noble
energy
standard
and
more
granular
renewability,
and
so
those
are
kinds
of
the
things
we
were
thinking
about.
We
would
always
do
the
evaluation
of
cost
of
new
generation,
which
ones
look
economical.
F
F
Well,
it's
still
it's
still
abstract
for
us
at
this
point.
For
that
chapter
at
least
that
you
know
some
parts
of
it
are
fairly
tangible,
but
the
the
you
know:
how
do
you
model
hourly
renewability
right,
in
other
words,
you're
moving
all
of
your
resources,
so
they
align
with
your
load.
And
what
do
you
do
to
do
it?
You
know
we'll
figure
it
out,
I
think,
but
it.
But
it's
it's
a
it's.
It's
of
note.
It's
the
ultimate
step
right.
F
If
everyone
is
100
renewable,
then
the
hourly
generation
has
to
match
the
hourly
load,
one
way
or
the
other
right.
It's
only
at
lower
levels
of
renewable
saturation
that
you
can
have
this
sort
of
Free
banking
effect
that
we've
been
utilizing
to
good
economics,
but
you
know
how
how
much
would
our
portfolio
need
in
terms
of
load,
shifting
and
resource
movement
to
to
sort
of
weather?
That
change
so
I
think.
That's
that's
interesting,
very
interesting.
It's
probably
a
little
early
I!