In its initial findings, the Georgetown Consulting Group said the CUC executive director “serves as the cash management supervisor” of the agency.
The CUC chief, the consulting group added, makes decisions on a day-to-day basis regarding what bills get paid or delayed and what projects get authorized or deferred across all the three utility services — electricity, water and wastewater.
All cash is co-mingled as CUC spends money without regards to the source of funds, the purpose of payments, and formal and rational resource allocation protocol, Georgetown stated.
CUC Executive Director Anthony Muna was unavailable for comment yesterday.
CPUC wants to know why there is a lack of full cost recovery and accountability in CUC.
Georgetown said these issues will be investigated this year as part of the ongoing investigation into the rate adequacy and structure of the water and wastewater divisions.
Georgetown said in developing a CUC business plan, these issues should be addressed.
CUC should come up with strategies to transfer liabilities appropriately to the water and wastewater divisions while minimizing the impact on the customers.
CPUC should require CUC not to co-mingle funds and ensure that each facility should be operated on a stand-alone basis, Georgetown stated.
CUC has discretion on approved rates sufficient for the water and wastewater divisions to be financially independent, Georgetown added.
The federal government’s stipulated orders, it said, also require that water and wastewater revenues from any source be applied only to expenses and investments in water and wastewater operations.
