The Nome Joint Utility Board is working to trim fat from its 2015 budget after financial difficulties have led to a $2.2 million line of credit from the city earlier this year.
The board met to go over potential budget changes in a special work session Wednesday, but that session got off to a late start after it was delayed by a two-hour executive session that preceded the public portion of the meeting. It was the third time such hours-long closed-door sessions have preceded the utility’s public meeting.
Once the work session was finally underway, NJUS manager John Handeland summarized the financial situation of the utility: “Basically we need to figure out how to get $1 million closer than we are today.”
Handeland said some money-saving adjustments in the form of personnel changes had been agreed upon during the board’s executive session, but were not yet reflected in the proposed budget. Though details of those potential changes remain confidential before the board makes a final vote, the general tone of the meeting appeared to reflect an attitude of cutting back. Handeland said the utility will dispose of some assets in the coming year; one example given was leasing excess space to the city for other uses.
Another anticipated savings will come in the form of Banner Wind Farm, which Handeland said will change ownership from Bering Straits Native Corporation to the Nome Joint Utility at the start of the year. The wind farm can generate as much as 20 percent of the community’s power needs, but struggles to provide a constant source of energy. Nonetheless, Handeland touted the transfer should cut down on fuel costs for the city.
“The projection is that we, hopefully, are using 156,000 gallons less of fuel,” he told the board.
City finance manager Julie Liew also attended the meeting, lending her financial oversight as stipulated by city council after extending the multi-million dollar credit line to the utility. Liew drew attention to proposed administrative cuts and asked if projected numbers reflected cuts in salary, or overtime and benefit pay as well.
Handeland said administrative cuts—including those to his own salary—would include overtime and holiday pay.
“To answer your question, we are, at least on the administrative side, looking to significantly cut overtime,” he said.
In addition to scaling back expenses, the utility looked to increase revenue sources, like tariffs billed to the city for collecting honey buckets and disposing of waste. Conspicuously absent, however, was any talk of raising consumer rates. Board member Carl Emmons said he was against raising utility rates and instead advocated cutting expenses.
He pointed to the utility’s fund for grant writing and legislative advocacy as a place for potential cuts. Board member Pat Knodel followed with a question about whether advocacy expenses could be cut on a temporary basis.
“All this money we’re coming up with here, we’ve got to get that from somewhere. If that takes raising the rates, to pay some guy in Washington who may or may not do something for us,” Emmons began.
“Can you not use him for a couple of years, and then when you need him, can you hire him back?” Knodel asked.
Handeland explained that the utility’s advocacy budget, which does include a lobbyist salary, doesn’t directly translate to funding, but does ensure that rural energy interests are represented at the state and federal level. “I think overall the community does benefit from having the advocacy services,” Handeland said.
Emmons responded that, while he thinks that representation is important, the utility shouldn’t be stuck with the bill.
“That’s fine,” he said in response to Handeland’s comments on the effectiveness of the lobbyist. “If the community feels that way, the community should pay for it. We shouldn’t be putting that on someone’s electric bill. I mean, if the city thinks that lobbying is a valid thing for the City of Nome, the city should be funding it.”
There were other conflicting perspectives on the utility’s financial outlook. Board member Fred Moody said sweeping cuts are unlikely to solve all of the utility’s problems, while Emmons contends that the utility can’t spend money it doesn’t have.
“First of all, I don’t agree with just cutting everything out. That’s a big mistake,” Moody said.
“If you’re broke … you can’t spend money you don’t have,” Emmons interrupted.
“We ain’t broke,” Moody responded. “We ain’t broke.”
“We are in a deficit position,” Handeland added.
“Yeah, that’s just broke,” Emmons concluded.
Handeland said developing a comprehensive budget plan for that deficit will likely require another work session before Christmas. The board’s next scheduled session will take place Saturday, Dec. 13.
