May 25th Status Report

The highlight of the week was the IVGID Board meeting where the fiscal year 2018-2019 operating and capital improvement project budgets, the collection of the recreation and beach facility fees, and Central Services Cost Allocation transfers were all approved with a 3-2 split. 

I identified discrepancies between the Utility Rate Study budget approved in April and the proposed 2018/2019 Utility Fund budget and reached out for answers. I learned the Utility Rate Study budget included only revenues and expenses for water and sewer, while the 2018/2019 Utility Fund budget also included sanitation services (trash) expenses. As a result, the 2018/2019 Utility Fund budget had additional expenses of $673,080. What remains unanswered is where the District reported revenues related to the Waste Management franchise fee. Another unresolved difference is the $207,240 cost of insurance in the approved Utility Rate Study budget yet missing from the 2018/2019 Utility Fund budget. While I focused my review on analyzing the Utility Fund budget, others identified additional anomalies in the District's Community Services and Beach Fund operating budgets. I would have preferred everyone had a few more days to review analyze all of the Budget documents to ensure the budget is complete and accurate before the Board approved it on a 3-2 split vote.      

The Board unanimously approved the Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) for Red, White and Tahoe Blue.

Also on the addenda was approval of $3.7M for the Diamond Peak culvert project. The construction project contract was made available for review only ONE day before the meeting.  I enlisted the assistance of a citizen with extensive large construction contract experience and asked for his expert review. He recommended a number of changes be made to the contract to protect the District and our public funds.  I'm not sure if changes will be considered since the Board approved the agenda item.  I had written the Board and GM Pinkerton with my request that this almost $4M contract be reviewed by a construction contract expert prior to approval.  I didn't receive a response. My concerns rests with the Board being pressured to make quick decisions without expert legal opinions and thorough analysis.

This was the third meeting which staff chose to exclude public correspondence from the Board packets, ignoring the direction from the Board.