I would like to call today's City of Bloomington Utility Service Board meeting to order. The City of Bloomington Utility's mission is to enhance the quality of our life, of life in our community by providing safe, sustainable, and high quality drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater services in a cost-effective manner, promoting public health, economic vitality, and environmental stewardship.
 If any board member has a personal or financial conflict with any issues or individuals on the agenda, then please be sure to recuse yourself during those portions of the meeting. We will begin today's meeting with the water race water rate case presentation. Jennifer Wilson.
 as your cost of service study experts and they actually allocated the cost and then created rate design. So I'm gonna speak thoroughly about the revenue requirements and then briefly introduce what StanTech did and the ultimate results in the rates. But I believe there's gonna be Danica online perhaps to talk about the cost service study aspects. But let's jump right into the revenue requirement side. Next slide please.
 What we do in our report is that we look at 2022, 23, and 24, and we do analysis on those just to see how your expenses and revenues are coming in. We looked at balance sheets, your income statements, your debt service, and your leases. And then we developed the test year, which we used year end 2024 as a test year, and we made adjustments for fixed known and measurable items. So made adjustments to your operating expenses for that.
 Then we look at your capital improvement plan and make a recommendation between what should be bond funded, what should be funded with ongoing cash, also called extensions and replacements. We looked at your current debt and then we determined that extensions and replacements come up with the total revenue requirements. Next slide. So your capital improvement plan was a total of $84 million and hold on a second.
 The bond funding part of it is $54.5 million and the amount that will be funded with cash or annual revenues is $28.4 million of projects. And you can see there the listing of the projects under that of how we're going to fund them, whether it's by bond or with ongoing extensions and replacements. The ongoing extensions and replacements, we're going to build it to $7.1 million annually for you to have that cash to do ongoing projects.
 Next slide please. So we look back at 22, 23 and 24. 22 is on the left, the item in blue is the amount of revenue that you brought in per year and the item in yellow is your expenses. So in the year 2022, you had revenues of almost 20 million and operating expenses and debt service of 18.1 million which allowed you to have almost 1.9 million in annual funding for extensions and replacements.
 In 2023, the amount went negative. That is mostly because of your shared services agreement that you have with the city. And so that's when you made quite a few multiple years payments of either pilot and shared services. So in 2023, the amount was actually negative 1.9. And then in 2024, the amount was additional 3.7 million for extensions or replacements that your revenues were greater than your expenses and debt service. Next slide, please.
 So we looked at 2024 as your test year and made adjustments for salaries and wages and the water's utility portion of the shared services and the pilot and other adjustments to normalize the test year. So the adjustments was about $2 million that we're looking forward as a pro forma basis. The next slide please. I always like showing this as being your total and this is just operating.
 that your employee costs are about 42% of your total operating expenses, and then purchase power is 11%, other miscellaneous 11, and then you can see the other pieces of the pie, materials and supplies at 14%, but your pro forma operating expenses is just slightly under $15 million at 14.9. Next slide, please.
 All right, here's where the number is. The total capital improvement plan for 2025 to 2029 is $84 million. And we're funding that with bond issues, either the 2026 bond or the 2028 bond. And then we'll be having the ongoing $7.1 million of cash to pay for annual extensions and replacements. Next slide then.
 This is a slide that shows you how your debt, that's the yellow is current debt. It goes until the year 2020 through 2028. It's at 7.1 million. And what we're doing is layering in this next level of debt so that we are level after that year at again, 7.1 million. So originally the debt was supposed to go from seven, it does go from 7.1 down to 1.7. And we're filling in that with
 funding of $54 million worth of projects by issuance of debt. So that after 2028, your debt service continues at $7.1 million. Next slide, please. So this comes to the total revenue requirements of $29.1 million. You are currently bringing in 22.6, so that's a deficit of $6.5 million. This means that you need 30.5% revenue increase
 I don't, and I wanna make that clarification, that it's a 30.5 million revenue increase. That does not mean any one customer was gonna get 30.5. There was a cost of service study done, and that's what they will, what they end up doing is taking these revenue requirements, allocating the costs against the different functions, compare it to those customers that created those costs, and then decide,
 then through the rates of how to reallocate the costs so that each customer class is then paying for what they cause in the expenses. And that was done by Stantec. So is Danica on the line? Very good, Danica and Andy from Stantec are the ones that prepared the cost of service study.
 So I'll hand it over to you briefly if you want to make any comments. Sure. Yeah, I can speak a little bit to the cost of service analysis. So as Jennifer mentioned, Stantec performed the cost of service and rate design. On the cost of service front, we utilized the revenue requirements that Jennifer prepared. We go through the process on our end as well as with city staff to go through
 and understand how the different customer classes utilize the system functions differently and how those cost to serve the different customers. We follow industry standards, but ultimately the goal of the cost of service is just to determine the cost to serve each class compared to the revenue that's currently collected from each of those classes. So we went through that study to determine the different spread
 cost to serve versus existing revenue between all of the different customer classes and ultimately generated, as Jennifer mentioned, proposed rates, whether that be the fixed charge or the usage charge by customer class. Happy to go into more detail on those as well if there's any questions.
 But I can say with the rate ordinance that's in front of you, we calculated and do a rate survey for what it costs, a typical residential 5H meter that use 5,000 gallons. And currently the charge for water at that 5,000 gallons here in Bloomington is $30.60. After this rate increase, if we get the full amount as we requested,
 the rate would or the charge would go to $36.64. So basically a $6, just a little bit over $6 increase to that kind of customer. For that customer, that's about a 19.7% increase. So as I said, some customers will see the 30.5 as an overall revenue increase, some customers will see less than that, some customers will see more than that. When, yeah, sorry, yes.
 is constant. Is that correct? For each customer class, yes. So residential's cost per gallon right now is 438, and that will go to 531. I know we've discussed in the past the possibility of charging different rates for the first 4,000 gallons and then raising it if people are real users of water unnecessarily.
 Is that still a possibility or are we going to stick with the constant rate per gallon no matter how many gallons? I know other cities have gone to a differential charge.
 That's not how this current rate was designed. Instead we looked at customer classes and usage based on those customer classes. So for example, the types of meter you have and the size of meter you have will impact your costs and that'll be associated more with your fixed costs as well. So the usage within a class will stay at the same, yeah. The first time we brought forward cost of service based approach,
 We were told that we couldn't combine that with a conservation-based approach. We could do one or the other. Is that still true? Or I'm asking our experts.
 Just another bit of information for you. We do a rate water rate survey for all the communities in Indiana that are greater than 25,000 population. And out of those 39 communities, you are currently at 30. So you're at the, you know, in the top of the bottom third. After this rate increase, you would move up to 26. And that's not considering where any other community might be changing their rates. So it only bumps you up.
 for places in comparison to everyone else. I know you mentioned that the 5,000 gallons would be the average. Is that the most common amount? I mean, do we have some customers that use 10,000 gallons and some that use,
 I can't do an eight and two or then it comes out to five or? Yeah, so that's just the typical number that I use for just surveys in general. I'm sure somebody else would be able to tell you what your average user in the residential is. Actually, so do you have that slide? It's maybe a good time to show it. So I wanted to have just like one slide that would show what a bill looked like before and what it would look like after. So I used my bill.
 and with all the pertinent information taken out as far as personal identification. So the average residential user, it uses three to five units, a unit being 1,000 gallons of water. My bill, which I think Frank is bringing up here, we wanted to show how that would change. So here's the before and after.
 My household typically uses between two and three units of water. We're a small household and we don't have a lot of water usage, but this is how my bill would change after the rate case. The usage stays, so that's that one that stays no matter how much you use. So that'll go from 438 to 531 per 1,000 gallons.
 taking the cost from 13, 14 to 15.93. The water service, that's your fixed costs and that's dependent on your meter. So my meter at home is a three fourth meter. It's one of our, it is the most common meter we have. And so my water service fixed charge will go from 7.93 to 9.58. And the amount that that changes will change depending on the size of the meter.
 And then fire protection, that also gets included. So I have what's considered public fire protection, which is, you know, all the hydrants that you hope that firefighters can plug into when your house is on fire. So that charge will go from 328 actually down to 290 because looking at the cost of service, it actually came down as a result of that study. And then of course there's sales tax.
 Yeah, I just wanted to show an example to answer some of that kind of questions, like what will this look like? That's what this will look like to a user who used three units of water. Thank you. I just wanna point out one thing. So on the overall bill summary, when we're looking at your increase, you do also have sanitation on as a city customer receiving that service, which is separate from our utility. Yes. Okay. Yes.
 I just kind of wanted to bring it back to, you know, what's the reality of this change for your everyday residential user? And that's what it's gonna look like for a user who uses, you know, three units of water, has a small sanitation car, is in city with a stormwater charge. Yeah. Yeah.
 all of the rates and their percentage-wise differences tonight? For the different customer classes? Do we have that slide? Okay. Can we have that for Friday? Absolutely. Okay, thank you. And will that be included in additional public presentations? Thank you.
 Any other questions or comments for Jennifer or? We may be jumping ahead a little bit because we need to have a finance committee report. But we did talk a little bit about what all this includes in the finance committee. And that might be something good to report on now. Why we're doing this, why we're headed this direction, because it's one thing to talk about increasing rates. But the next question is why. And we've got some good answers for that.
 to make sure that we've got a great system for the future. So now would this be the right time on our agenda to talk about our improvements to the water plant? If the board wishes to change the agenda at this point, you would need to vote on it. So if you wanna bring that matter up to this point in the agenda, you would need to have somebody make a motion and then have that voted on.
 I think we need to have the Finance Committee report now, but I think it's relevant in the water rate case on the agenda to talk about the improvements. Absolutely, yeah. So this rate case will afford us the rates to be able to move forward with some big projects that we are hoping to do at Monroe.
 The big picture goal at Monroe is to make Monroe Water Treatment Plant is to make sure that we have a redundant and reliable system that can continue treating water. And so a lot of the projects that are included in this are projects that are going to bring a lot of our aging infrastructure up to date. That includes, and I'll talk more of this
 later today in my budget presentation. But that includes our upgrades to our electrical and instrumentation systems, which some of these electrical and instrumentation systems are reaching their end of life. And we want to make sure that we're getting ahead of that and solving that before it becomes a big problem. We're also rebuilding just
 a lot of our chemical feed line and chemical tanks as well. That's in the chemical building improvements line item. That ensures that we're able to continue to feed our disinfection chemicals and treat the water. We wanna make sure that those systems are redundant and up to date. We're also doing a lot of work on our pumps and our
 VFDs which are a type of pump and to make sure that those are in good shape And yeah, we just have a lot of Big projects at Monroe that we really need to get going on and that this rate case will support We've got some major improvements to make at the water planet Monroe to make sure that it's a
 set up to do what we want it to do in the best quality that we can really for the next 10 to 20 years. It is getting us caught up on a few things and getting us positioned in the right place so we can be confident about the ability of the plant to produce water for us at the current rates plus I would say current capacity plus a little bit of stretch for increase in need.
 as our community continues to grow. We're not expanding the plant, but at least we'll be in a spot where we can produce as much as we expect to need in the next several years, and this would help us with that. Absolutely, this would put the plant in a really great place for the future. So I think that's what we kind of, that's the kind of answer we need to, we owe our rate payers, is that, yeah, this is a new expense,
 that we're proposing on your monthly bill but it will it will translate to that confidence that you expect from us when you turn on the faucet every day. Absolutely and I also want to make note of like you know when you think about the reasoning behind this there's all of these projects that we want to
 have done at Monroe and that's a huge aspect of it but another large aspect of raising rates is the fact that operating costs have simply gone up and we need to keep up with that. Our last rate case the test year that we used was pre-pandemic so
 We all of our estimates were before all of the inflation that happened during the pandemic and post pandemic a lot of the changes we've seen in our economy our rates were not designed for and so this helps us catch up to operating costs Yeah, just a couple of comments
 These probably don't make people feel any better, but I'll make them anyway. So it's important that people understand that we are not a profit-making organization. We do not have a CEO that gets paid millions of dollars a year.
 The monies that we spend are basically the monies that the ratepayers put in. And so I think we're fortunate that we're not a privatized water utility. Your rates would be much higher. Again, comparisons don't usually make people feel better, but I think it was pointed out that
 Comparing the rates that will come with this new increase puts us pretty much in line with other Indiana cities of comparable size. We're not, oh, this is Bloomington, you're getting a lot more money. No, we're pretty comparable to the rest of Indiana. Comparisons even further out,
 We have a property in South Carolina, and I can tell you that the water rates are twice what they are here, and that's South Carolina. We're not talking about New York or Massachusetts, or our two children live in California. I don't even want to tell you what their water bill is every year. So, you know, we're in a really good position, and, you know, I know increases hurt,
 But they're well warranted and it's not going to waste, so that's my two cents. Good point. Well said. I'll piggyback off that. I shared with Director Zager the other day that we are working with IDEM with the Clean Communities Project and we are in the infant stages of that as being a
 a member. And I can't tell you all the particulars of it, but there's a start, it's a tiered system based on the work that not only the utilities branch does, but the production of service and quality and things like that. And I would be very surprised if we aren't the first or second gold star municipality in the state by the end of the year.
 So I say that to say, while we are rate wise in the lower half, we are producing at a much higher quality for our customers. So we have a lot to be proud of. Any other discussion based on the water rate case?
 All right, moving along, item number three, Waterworks Utility Bond Financing Presentation, Bradley Bingham. Yes, Brad Bingham here with Barnes & Hornburg. We're serving as bond counsel to the city on this Waterworks Utility Bond Financing. And this is really a corollary to everything that Jennifer Wilson just walked through in terms of the rate case. As part of the IURC's consideration of the requested rate increase,
 They also want to know and see that you approve the issuance of the bonds that will be supported from these additional rates. So in terms of, before this evening, you should have a resolution in your packet. You may have recalled seeing one of these in the past, which is really the utility service board's recommendation to the full council that had considered issuing Water Works revenue bonds. This particular resolution contemplates the issuance of a total part amount of $71 million
 Again, this would be done in two separate series as currently contemplated, one series being issued in 2026, the other in 2028. And it would be used to finance the set of projects describing exhibit A to that resolution, which of course is just a component of all the projects that you intend to tackle with these additional rate increase. In terms of timing, no action is being requested this evening.
 But I think we wanted to kind of just make you aware of this, that the plan would be for this resolution to kind of move in lockstep with the board's consideration of the recommended rates and charges. So I think it would be back on your agenda at the September 8th meeting. And if approved then, the goal would be to send both the rate case and the bond ordinance to full council for its consideration September 17th and 30th. And then to provide us without saying that none of these bonds can be issued
 and less than until the IURC recruit the grade increase request. So I'm happy to pause there and answer any questions you may have about the bonds or just the overall process. Any questions or comments for Bradley? Okay, thank you, sir.
 Okay, next in our agenda is petitions and communications from the public. I will remind any members of the public, we do have a five minute time limit on your comments. So feel free to come up, state your name for the record. Any questions or comments? We are welcome. Are there any petitions or communications from the public?
 Hearing none, we will move along. Item number five is the approval of the minutes of the previous meeting. I move we approve minutes of our previous meeting. Second. We have a motion and a second. Are there any questions or comments? Hearing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Minutes are approved.
 Next, we have approval of the claims. First, we have standard invoices for a total amount of $1,584,624.18. Are there any questions or comments on the standard invoices? Hearing none, do we have a motion for approval? I move approval of standard invoices for pay date August 29th. Second.
 We have a motion and a second. All in favor please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Standard invoices are approved. Next we have utility bills for a total amount of $138,992.25. Are there any questions or comments on the utility bills? I move approval of utility bills for payday to August 21st. Second.
 Please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Utility bills are approved. Next we have wire transfers for a total amount of $533,276.81. Are there any questions or comments on the wire transfers? I'll just note that I think we've gotten through two months here without any credit card fees and so I think we're finally, it's off the list, it's off the line item. Great, okay, even better. We'll take a plus, okay.
 So thank you, that's wonderful. That's great news, thank you. I move approval of the wire transfers for August. Second. All in favor please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Wire transfers are approved. Next we have customer refunds for an amount of $9,438.23. Are there any questions or comments on the customer refunds? I move approval of customer refunds for August 29th.
 All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Customer refunds are approved. Thank you all. Item seven on our agenda is approval of the consent agenda. Will that be met? Please present the consent agenda to you this evening with agreements totaling $38,492.34, which consists of the following items. All sealed heating and air conditioning company,
 for an on-call agreement for HVAC and plumbing services for $20,000. For commercial services in Bloomington for $6,012.83 for a semi-annual preventative maintenance contract. Economy, termite, and pest control for $5,000 on call for pest control services at the service center. For Prehab Corporation for $4,579.51 for air compressor repairs at the mineral water plant.
 Then a contract with Harold Fish Incorporated for $2,900 for drain line service at Dilbin at the West plant. Would any board member like to pull any of these items from the consent agenda and discuss them individually? Hearing none, if there is no objection, then the consent agenda will be approved as presented. Hearing none, the consent agenda is approved as presented, thanks.
 Item number eight, request approval of resolution 2025-15 to designate surplus items for auction. Jose Fuentes. Good afternoon, everyone. This is a contract that we created last year and we just are running out of funds, so I just wanted to get an extra $10,000 with this company.
 We're still on surplus. Okay. These are items, items on the list are not being used or have been upgraded with CBU.
 Hearing none, do we have a motion for approval? I move approval of resolution 2025-15, designating surplus property for auction. Second. All in favor. And just a discussion item. Some of these look like we're selling and some disposing. So the disposed stuff we just get rid of or? That is correct. This one has hazardous.
 equipment. So that's the reason for that one. The rest of it we do an auction? Yes, sir. We deal with gov deals. So it's open to anybody, anybody that wants to bid on it. So then you do the individual listings on gov deals? Yes. Yes, we do. Great. Good. Thank you. Any other discussion? We have a motion.
 Do we already? Yeah, I think I did move it, didn't I? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. It is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Item nine, request approval of amendment number one for consulting services with HNTB Corporation related to Catalan Sewer Improvement Project. Kevin White. Kevin White, Capital Projects Coordinator. Yes, seeking approval of amendment number one with HNTB.
 in the amount of $54,200 and no cents. It's for additional labor required related to dealing with a couple of other public or city departments being engineering and planning and transportation related to our, on this project we decided to incorporate the MOT as part of the overall project that CBU
 Is responsible for that proved to be a little bit more challenging to our consultant than he originally anticipated Hence the amendment change. I Don't know if we'll continue to do that moving forward in the in the future, but typically the contractor has been Responsible for figuring out the MOT Implementing it and all that so we've provided the contractor a an approved MOT plan that they are to implement
 Oh, that did have the approval of the other departments. So I'm happy to answer some questions. I look like I got some questioning faces. Jeff. Oh, method of transportation. So it's the all the closed roads, the sidewalk closures, all of that is arrow boards, all of that's included in your MOT.
 It's like this increases the, is it the hourly rate we're paying HNTB to do the project? Is that how they charge us or? I believe it is hourly, yes. So what this kind of says then is we're having to pay an extra 54,000, I don't know what they charge us an hour, but that's so that they can
 It's unanticipated expenses that they had to spend hours downtown at City Hall working through permitting and other projects or questions so that we get the project done. Yes, sir. That's exactly it. So the MOT was one part of it. The floodplain permit was another part of it that required a landscape restoration plan.
 that our consultant was unaware that they would be responsible for implementing. That requires a specific person to get out on site, run their programs, tell us what we can and can't plant, where we can and can plant, quite a bit more work than what we typically do. I will say that this expense is the $54,200. This is the ReadyGrant-funded project, and we still have
 enough money in that overall contract that we're not requesting additional funds. So from the contractor's bid, the contractor's bid, including the design fee for HNTB, we still had a surplus of roughly $80,000 in the overall funding for the project. So there's not going to be a need to ask for any more money from the grant folks.
 It will just be an amendment to the contract that we have with HNTB, and we will be reimbursed for those funds via the grant folks. David, from planning, was there a lot of extra issues on this one, or? Well, I'm trying to figure out how HNTB called this wrong when they bid it. I don't have much to offer on that. I don't have.
 You can't keep track of all the projects or anything. Yeah, I could look into it, but I don't have anything off the top of my head. OK, thanks. Thank you, Kevin. Is this timing materials contract? It's OK. You've got me on the spot there, Jeff, and I don't want to speak off. I was just wondering, but this is not within their original scope. Is that correct? Correct. Yes, they did everything originally, and then
 assuming that they thought that this would just be a phone call or two when we said, hey, we would like you to, in addition to the original scope of work, also create an MOT plan and a landscape restoration plan. And they said, OK, but that's going to take more time. And so this amendment is a result of that time taken. Just for the record, who or what
 Why, where did these things come into play? Like who mandated or how was it mandated that these, the MOT and the landscaping had to be redone, like had to be done? I think I'm gonna default to Phil. I mean, was that something that we required them to do? Yes, we required HNTB to create an MOT project, but this is,
 My understanding, but who told us we had to do it. So the city engineering now has got.
 quite a bit stricter on the mainstay traffic plans that are required for any new project. And so even with James's crews and TND, they have to do a mainstay traffic for every project where we're going to do a lane closure or something like that, even if it's just for a day or two. So our engineering staff is back there creating MOTs for those smaller projects for TND. And so this was in a way of getting out in front of this so that the contractor wasn't surprised with a whole large expense. And so they don't know what that's going to take. And they end up putting a large,
 value on that cost within the contract when they bid it. The idea was, let's go ahead and have this set up. It's already done. It's already approved. When they bid, they know exactly what they're bidding for. And they hit the ground running. So they don't have to go in front of the Board of Public Works, delay the project, meet there, get approvals. And as Kevin and I learned, it's a lot of back and forth. So they created a plan, submitted. No, we want to see this.
 HNTB.
 HNDB created the MOT and then submitted it to City Engineering. And it's just similar to our review process where we have a utility plan that's submitted for new development. There's going to be a back and forth. You go through a review process, they come back, you make changes. And so we wanted to have all that done out front so the bidders would know what to expect. And so it's just an approach we took on this one to see if we could make the project go smoother. You know, you really don't know the result. We're at a point here where we're
 adding costs to the engineering fee, but we might have seen a greater cost if we had included this in the bid. We don't really know what that is. Like, you know, bringing that up to the contractor, they said, we really appreciate this. This made it easier for us. And so, you know, I think in the end, we had the headache of it versus the contractor, but I think we probably saved money in the end. Now we have a bid asking what it costs for a project of this size. That's true, yes.
 For any of the other bidders on this initial $400,000, none of them would have assumed they would be doing this for that amount of time and work. So it's not like, oh, well now with this addition of the $54,200, that would have put someone else to you've won that project, correct? So this is just an addition.
 That's true, we actually did. Outside the original, but no one was told that before. Okay, thank you, I just wanted to clarify in my mind. Okay. I was just gonna talk about RFP, but there's no, you're answering it. Okay. Any questions or comments for Kevin or Phil? Hearing none, do we have a motion for approval? I move that we approve amendment one for consulting services with HNTB. Second.
 All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Request is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Item 10, request approval of agreement with Brehab Corporation related to overhead crane replacement at the Dillman wastewater plant. Mark Minife. The overhead crane at the Dillman wastewater plant had failed a couple of weeks ago. It's very important for the operation of the plant.
 This is a contract to replace that with a new crane, and this is a contract to Brehab Corporation not to exceed $75,000. I'd be happy to answer any questions. I have a question about just pointing something out on the cover sheet. It is missing the legal department internal tracking number.
 final version of that cover memo got to Daniel, that's all. Thank you. I just want to make sure it gets put in there. Any other questions or comments? I move we approve the contract with Brehab for the crane. Second. All in favor please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Request is approved. Thank you.
 Next, we have request approval of amendment number one to on-call services agreement with Harold Fish Inc. Jose Fuentes. Okay. Thank you. This is for an extra $10,000 for on-call with HFI. They provide service to the three plants plus CBU service center.
 I approve the amendment to our own call agreement with Harold Fish. Second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Request is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Item 12, request approval of agreement with Potomac Electrical Services LLC, Hector Ortiz. Hello, good afternoon. Hector Ortiz, Assistant Director of Operation.
 This request from Potomac Electrical is to do preventative maintenance, PMs. We call them in the plant. To do maintenance in all the high voltage, everything that is more or above 480, we don't have the staffing house to do it, so happy to answer any questions.
 Questions for Hector. Hearing none, do we have a motion for approval? I move we approve the service agreement with Potomac Electrical Services. Second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. Request is approved. Thank you. Item 13 is old business. Any old business from the board? Old business from staff.
 New business, new business from the board. I just want to make a comment. I know this is an incredibly busy time of year in our beautiful city with welcoming back all the students and faculty to town. I just want to give a shout out to everybody in customer service that has worked probably very tirelessly trying to
 transfer accounts and get new customers set up. So we appreciate you guys and gals and hopefully it went smoothly and a reminder to all of these new customers that we do have online access through a portal so that you can monitor your water usage so that you won't be surprised with a high water bill. So take this time as an advance
 take this time as an opportunity to sign up and get that information. Any other new business from the board? New business from staff. Subcommittee reports. I will just give a quick update just on our finance subcommittee, which we met prior to this meeting and actually,
 Got to see the presentations that were, saw the presentation about the bonds prior to this meeting. And I believe everything was shared and we were very appreciative and supportive of moving in this direction. So that was it. Once again, we will revisit that information on the 8th, I believe.
 in this meeting, not in the subcommittee, correct? Okay, thank you. Staff reports. Petitions and communications from the public. Hearing none, do we have a motion for adjournment? I move we adjourn. Meeting is adjourned.