Adoption of Resolution Approving a Workforce Change at Alameda Municipal Power to Add One Position, Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) System Administrator and Amending the Salary Schedule of the Electric Utility Professionals of Alameda (EUPA) to Add the Classification of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) System Administrator, Effective June 5, 2018. (Human Resources 2510)
Adoption resolution approving a workforce change at medium to some power to add one position advanced metering infrastructure system administrator and amending the related salary schedule. So I mean. Brody Yeah. I have three quick questions if. Good evening, Mayor Spencer. Council Members. Niko Prokop General Manager, HAMP. Thank you, sir. So first question. This was on your request, correct? Correct. And you're the department head. And is is in your professional opinion, as the department had you judge this as an essential need of AMP. Is that correct? Absolutely. As you are aware, we just finished replacing 36,000 meters. We have a lot more data that we're dealing with. We're getting ready to launch a customer portal. We need somebody with a high degree of expertize to be able to monitor the health of the system. We get alarms and we get notices that tamper validations that need to happen. We have meters that sometimes go silent. A lot of these issues we did have before with the old meters, we just had no visibility in them. We did. We have a consultant who's currently doing the work, but now the amount of data and information that's coming in that we need to troubleshoot really justifies this position. And this is a personal. So we're going to be a paying person on this. This is Percival, correct? Okay. I don't have any more questions. Thank you. The other questions. I have a question. Vice Mayor. Was this costs factored into or included in the consideration of switching over to the metering? So when we embarked on the AMI program, we did do a cost benefit analysis and we looked at. Kind of a broad view of the organization, and some positions were fairly obvious that they were going to be phased out. So for example, meter reading positions we did have three of those were now down to one. And then at the same time, though, there was a recognition that this is we're moving towards more of a technology focused platform with these smart meters. We're going to need to maybe a disposition. I don't think there are any plans at present to add another position or more positions related to the program, but they're kind of somewhat of an offset. But I think overall the benefit there is a benefit to the utility in terms of cost reductions, both in this perspective and then also in operational efficiencies, other operational efficiencies. So for example, we have significantly less truck rolls right now. We're able to do a lot of activities remotely that saves on greenhouse gas reduction and other things like that, that saves on wear and tear on vehicles and and other personnel related issues. So this position wasn't factored in into the initial estimate. When you switched over to the MRI system. I don't know whether this one was specifically identified. It was there was a recognition that we would need as part of monitoring the platform. A position of this nature. I don't know whether that was a bit before my time. I turn to Bob as Bob is nodding his head. So that was part of the original business case assessment. So it was included as part of our analysis. And this cost was considered as part of that analysis. Yes. So this was factored into the potential budget of an anime program? Yes. Cost? Correct. Okay. Um, my second question is, um, you know, for this for this position, um. Do we have an internal candidate? Is this a position that's going to be posted later on? We will be opening up the position and there are some potential internal candidates. It will be an open recruitment, so there could be outside interested parties. This is a very technical, IT focused position. So it requires a unique skill set. And that's what we'll be looking for when we when we do the recruitment. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from council? Move approval second. I do. Oh, sorry. I do have a question. Um, my question is. Okay, so if we don't approve this, then what happens? Because I know you installed all the new meters. So currently we have a consultant who is performing to a large degree this function. There are other parts of the workforce who are filling in here and there on other components of the function. But by and large, it's a it's a third party consultant. It has worked up until now as we've ramped up the deployment of the meters. But we do feel that we need somebody in-house who's going to be able to be there day to day. This position not only has the a high technical component, they're also going to be interfacing with many other areas of the department. So, for. Example, when. Field crews, crews need to go out and and look at meters, they will work with them and then so that they can do their work. So it really makes a lot more sense to have this position in-house as opposed to have it with a consultant. So that in here it says something about there is a net savings overall, but there's not a, you know, do you have a dollar amount to give us some idea what kind of savings by I know you've let go some people that go out to the homes and actually do the reading. Correct. And now this is going to replace that. Do you have any idea of what the savings is? I don't have the numbers. We did we did start out with we had three meter readers. We're now down to one. In the pay of a meter reader. I don't know the exact approximately. Yes. Oh, yeah. And this. This starts at 91,000 per year. The range is 200,000. Good evening, Nancy Bronstein. Sorry. There is some savings because the meter readers, probably two meter readers, are probably closer to about 150 between them fully loaded or about 60,000 apiece for salary. So there's still some savings. Even with the addition of this position. Okay. Thank you. I have one more question. Oh, Vice Mayor Brody. Did the cost go up recently or aren't services? So did the cost go up recently for AMP services? Nice Mary. Talking about rates. Yes. So the board recently approved a 1% average rate increase starting in July that will impact different customer classes differently depending on the cost of service. At this time last year, we were projecting a 5% rate increase. So we were very happy to to refine the numbers a little bit. And it looked like based on the strong financial performance of the utility over the past year, that we were able to return that value to the ratepayers in the form of a lower than expected rate increase. Edit I swear. Did you have any other questions? That's it. I said a quick comment. I know we had a budget meeting a few weeks back and there was a request by a department head who we trust to know what his department needs to fill a position that in his best business judgment he felt was necessary and that even would have been covered by cost recovery. And it was the majority of the council said no because it was personal. And now we are faced with a similar situation today with a very high level paid employee being asked for by the department head who we presume knows the business needs of his department. And it's also personal. Yet it seems we are poised to approve that. So it seems a little bit, you know, inconsistent with me that, you know, we have one standard for one department and one standard for the other. That's my comment. I'm happy to respond to that, and I appreciate that. This to me is different in that you have cut other positions because we are installing the automatic what do you call these readers? Smart meters, smart. Meters for installing the smart meters. And so you eliminated three or two of the people that walk around. There's two, and we have a third left and we'll revisit based on workload in January 2019. And I will point out that in the last four years, our staffing level has actually reduced. So some of that's related to the Smart Meter program and some of that is other other things going on as well. Thank you, member Ashcraft. And I'll just add to the mayor's comments that as I believe it was, the fire chiefs request that was being referred to. And I do recall that we also informed the chief to come back when these prospective cost savings were known. At this point, they're just, you know, on paper. And we couldn't we can't base a budget on on speculation. But when those figures are known, then we will take another look at it. But there's always a lot of balancing that goes on. But I'm I believe there's been a has there been a motion in the second of. I believe, member matters to make a motion and your second on it and yeah. So any other questions or comments at this time? All right. Does the acting city manager I. Just wanted clarification that thank you that the this is not general fund money. We all okay. For another distinction? Still personal time. Still personal. But then general fund. Somebody somewhere in Alameda is going to be paying that. Thank you. Call the remember as the article I addressed. I. I. No. Mayor Spencer. I. Thank you. Thank you very much. One note. Thank you. Okay. Five. I was withdrawn or will be coming back to council on a later date. Five. Oh, I just said I voted no on, but we did already vote on that. So now I believe we're on six a we're on our regular agenda. Item six a mayor member asked. My request on six A would be that we bifurcate the vote on the two members. Maybe you were going to do that anyway because.