Water Infrastructure Finance Commission – Group 2
Monday, August 29, 2011
Held at the Lexington Department of Public Works
Call to order at 9:30 a.m.
Introductions by Tom Walsh, Chairman Group 2
Nate Keenan, MWPC Trust
2 people from “Who Decides” Gloucester, Bruce Maki, Linda Maki
Reviewed minutes from previous meeting held on February 14, 2011
February 14, 2011 minutes approved.
Draft review of privatization recommendations for general report.
Chairman Walsh – Draft reports are “Drafts” and represent “Opinions” of WIFC Group 2 members. This draft report will be voted on by full commission…
Suggested by Chairman Walsh that we adopt language from paragraph 2, page 2.
Bill Callahan will submit edits to draft report in “blue”.
Chairman Walsh asked for recommendations.
Phil Jasset – 2004 construction reform bill should be looked at. Do we need to reinvent…Chapter 151A, Section 28.
Make recommendation to state.
Callahan recommended a further review of both drafts and blend both reports.
Hanlon suggested CIP planning and bond capacity is issues….
Omnibus legislation recommendations:
Regulation & oversight of contracts
DPU? AG? IG?
Hanlon questions DPU ability to be considerate of municipal issues regarding utility operations.
Jasset commented on GAO reports relative to payback of federal loans if private entity takes over municipal water or wastewater utility.
Tilas recommended – state assists communities thru IG & AG in contract development.
Callahan – Standards must be set-up for oversight of these long-term contracts….A guidance document…
– the decrease in funding from Federal & State government will push “private sector” options for construction and operation.
– Walsh suggested that a representative sample of communities who have gone through PPA’s be part of the discussion.
Issues associated with Alternative Delivery:
– No SRF for private suppliers
– Single point of responsibility
– Alternative approaches – better solutions
Hanlon – Feds do DB projects on a regular basis
Tilas = recommends that DB not be selected on price alone. There must be qualitative and quantitative analysis…with strong OPM/Project Management.
– Omnibus legislation that leaves local option to select DB or DBO
– Is OPM required for DB or DBO
– Review process in which filed subbidders/contractors are managed and selected
Callahan: Drafted recommendations regarding QBS. Draft needs to be included into text.
Walsh: Review all drafts and develop 2 or 3 page final document for submission to full WIFC.
Next meeting to be held on September 12, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. at UBPAD in Millbury.
Nate Keenan, WPAT
Linda/Bill Maki, “Who Decides”
Joseph Welch, Retired Norwood DPW
Phil Jassett, UCANE/WIFC Group 4