Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rate Stabilization Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends board adopt rate‑stabilization reserve policy after staff presentation; public urged stronger board vote and replenishment plan
Summary
The FRMC recommended board adoption of a rate‑stabilization reserve policy that would permit deferring surplus revenue under GASB guidance to smooth rates; the policy authorizes up to the equivalent of 45 days cash on hand (~$125M) and sets triggers requiring CEO recommendation and board approval for recognition in rate setting. Public commenters urged a required majority board vote and explicit replenishment plan.
The Finance & Risk Management Committee on March 19 recommended that the full board adopt a rate‑stabilization reserve policy designed to smooth year‑to‑year rate volatility and support financial covenants.
Senior Strategic Finance Manager and Interim Treasurer Jeb Spangler and Rates & Strategy Manager Aaron Lou presented the policy, which staff said aligns with the agency’s recently revised financial reserves policy and with common practice among other community choice aggregators. Staff described the policy as an accounting and rate‑management tool that permits deferring surplus revenue under applicable accounting guidance (GASB‑referenced treatment) in stronger years and recognizing it in weaker years to mitigate rate spikes.
Aaron Lou described the proposed parameters: staff analysis cited a target stabilization fund corresponding to roughly $125 million (an amount staff said would equal up to about 45 days cash on hand under the agency’s revised financial reserve policy). Staff said the balance would provide coverage for a portion of market‑price benchmark volatility and equate to roughly 10% of operating revenues in the FY26 adopted budget. The policy sets two decision points: (1) a pre‑fiscal‑year‑end decision (often in June) where the CEO may determine whether to transfer eligible revenue to the reserve, with staff required to report the transfer to the board at the next regular meeting; and (2) during the rate‑setting process—when staff recommends new rates—the CEO would recommend recognition of reserve revenue to the board, and any recognition would require board approval.
"This protects our ability to meet cost recovery and be transparent through expectations," Spangler said, explaining the mechanics and how the deferral appears on financial statements as a deferred inflow under the accounting treatment discussed.
Public commenters said the agency should adopt stronger governance guardrails before moving money into a reserve. One regular commenter urged that transfers out of the agency’s funds to the rate stabilization reserve should require an explicit board majority vote rather than executive or administrative discretion, and asked for a clear plan to replenish the fund before it is used.
Committee discussion: a director said the presentation was clear and moved to recommend board adoption; the motion passed on a committee roll call (Director Insuna, Vice Chair Suzuki and Chair Yammani recorded yes votes). Staff said the policy includes replenishment requirements and that any recognition of reserve revenue to mitigate a rate increase would come to the board for approval, and committed to presenting replenishment plans as part of any request to recognize the reserve.
Next steps: the committee’s recommendation will be considered by the full board, as staff continues to finalize policy language and replenishment plans and to provide any requested supplemental materials.
