Laserfiche WebLink
City of Pleasanton Water Rate Study <br /> Table of Contents <br /> TABLE OF CONTENTS <br /> EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 <br /> Findings And Recommmendations 1 <br /> Implementation 2 <br /> 1. INTRODUCTION 5 <br /> 1.1. Current Rates 5 <br /> 1.2. Rate- Making Objectives 5 <br /> 2. REVENUE REQUIREMENT PROJECTION 8 <br /> 2.1. Expense and Revenue Projections 8 <br /> 2.2. Revenue Requirements 9 <br /> 3. COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 11 <br /> 3.1. Revenue Components 11 <br /> 3.2. Revenue From Service charges 11 <br /> 3.3. Revenue From Consumption Charges 11 <br /> 4. RATE DESIGN 14 <br /> 4.1. Rate Making Objectives 14 <br /> 4.2. Residential Consumption Charges 14 <br /> 4.2.1. Existing Tiers 14 <br /> 4.2.2. Recommended Tiers 15 <br /> 4.3. Commercial and Irrigation Consumption Charges 16 <br /> TABLE OF FIGURES <br /> Figure ES -1. Cost -of- Service Allocation Summary 3 <br /> Figure ES -2. Consumption Charge Summary 4 <br /> Figure 1 -1. Current Water Rates 7 <br /> Figure 2 -1. Financial Trends 10 <br /> Figure 2 -2. Zone 7 Projected Rate Increases 10 <br /> Figure 3 -1. Cost of Service Summary Consumption Charge Revenue 13 <br /> Figure 4 -1A. SFR Bill Distribution With Existing Tiers 17 <br /> Figure 4 -1B. SFR Bill Distribution With Recommended Tiers 17 <br /> Figure 4 -2. Comparison of SFR Tiered Rate Structures 18 <br /> Figure 4 -3. Comparison of Current and Recommended SFR Structures 18 <br /> Figure 4 -4A. SFR Graphical Bill Comparison 19 <br /> Figure 4 -4B. SFR Tabular Bill Comparison 19 <br /> Figure 4.5A. Commercial Graphical Bill Comparison 20 <br /> Figure 4.5B. Commercial Tabular Bill Comparison 20 <br /> Figure 4.6A. Irrigation Graphical Bill Comparison 21 <br /> March 18, 2010 Page i HF &H Consultants, LLC <br />