IID Board passes Plan B Resolutions



“The new policy is more stringent than any other public code policy”

(September 20, 2012. El Centro) The IID Board of Directors unanimously adopted the three resolutions associated with the Final Report presented by Charles DuMars for the Plan B to the Quantification Settlement Agreement at their regular meeting on Tuesday, September 18th.

The Resolutions are a part of the Final Report that was presented to the Board on September 5th.

The three Resolutions are:

* The acceptance of the Final Report

* Adoption of the Guiding Principles that would used by the Board on a going-forward basis

* The establishment of Committees charged with developing the Critical path forward for the QSA

All Directors were present.

(To comment, click on the title and then scroll to the bottom of the page.)

The Board approved an amendment to the IID Purchasing Policy No. 3130 that was Updated and approved at the regular meeting of April 17, 2012.

At the July 24, 2012 Board meeting General Manager Kevin Kelley announced that the policy should be further revised to provide a greater emphasis on price. He directed staff to amend the policy to give a 40 percent weighting on the price component of all formal solicitation responses.

In the event that an award may be given to a solicitation that is not the lowest price, the matter will be brought to the Board for approval, along with the reasoning for the decision.

“Approving this amendment,” said IID Board of Director President John Pierre Menvielle, “should show COLAB that we are taking care of the concern that we were ‘only 95% there’ as far as being above board on the new policy.”

Kelley stated the he feels that the new policy is more stringent than any other public code policy.


  1. Re reading all the hoopla again this morning in IVP and DR regarding the very expensive and very simplistic QSA Plan B one thing again pops out at me as very apparent. It is politically opportune at this time for incumbents and incumbent management to at least appear to have some common direction and success on this important issue- we have once again allowed a highly paid out of town consultant Charles Dumars to imbed himself in a future strategic process “without skin in the game”. What is the difference to how we have been previously proceeded besides the fact that Dumar’s firm is not licensed to do business in California? Think about it and listen closely, a highly paid out of town legal consultant imbedded in a QSA process strategic to the very future of our region with no skin in the game. Don’t be wooed to sleep-VOTE OUT IID INCUMBENTS AND SEND THE GM PACKING OR FACE MORE OF THE SAME REACTIVE IID BUSINESS PRACTICES WITH HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF LOCAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES WASTED LOST OR STOLEN. ENHANCE AND ENFORCE IID’S GOVERNANCE POLICY ONCE AND FOR ALL GETTING THE FOCUS OF THE IID BOARD OUTWARD TOWARD VISION, DIRECTION AND STRATEGY, POLICY…. AND THEIR HANDS AND THEIR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OUT OF THE DAY TO DAY IID BUSINESS OPERATION AND OUT OUR PUBLIC TILL.

  2. My, my, my…..it took nearly a year to get to a purchasing policy product. You can’t really place blame on more sophisticated public agencies or business interests for bypassing dealing with us can you? The question is- is this reactive slow method of conducting business endemic or can the IID business culture ever be fixed and cost effective electric and water services provided to IID ratepayers? Hundreds of millions of dollars of regional financial resources are being wasted, lost or stolen.

Comments are closed.