Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Hosterman opened the hearing for public comments. <br />John Yue, Zone 7 Finance Officer, said that Mr. Smith was provided noticed and did attend last <br />year's meeting when retailers were presented with rate proposals and recommendations. He <br />also noted that all board and budget meetings are open and agendized. <br />Mayor Hosterman closed the hearing to public comments. <br />Councilmember McGovern questioned and confirmed with Mr. Smith that Zone 7 water rates <br />increased 54% from 2001 to 2009. She asked if the increase occurred at once or annually. Mr. <br />Smith explained it was a series of annual increases adding up to 54 <br />Councilmember McGovern asked if the increases were CPI based, and Mr. Smith said no. Zone <br />7 rates are based on the prepared budget forecasts. <br />Councilmember McGovern noted that Zone 7 rates are projected to increase another 45% from <br />2010 to 2015, totaling 95% over 14 years. The public deserves to know what it is paying for and <br />questioned what the nexus was for the increase. Mr. Smith said that is difficult to determine <br />relative to someone else's prepared budget, but that he has and will continue to ask them the <br />same thing. He conceded that certain costs do increase over time but it is difficult to accept <br />when the City can provide the same sort of service without raising rates the same amount. He <br />said he was not sure that a fair nexus could be made. He noted that DSRSD, with only 112 <br />employees, has a larger human resources department than the City, which employs roughly 900 <br />full- and part-time employees. <br />Councilmember McGovern said that question should be asked when the City meets with Zone 7 <br />next. Mr. Fialho said he would sift through the justification and make that information available <br />the next time the item comes forward. <br />Councilmember McGovern said that the public as ratepayers deserve that answer. Water is an <br />enterprise fund, which means that funds collected go for paying not only for services but for <br />maintaining the system. The City's enterprise fund cannot put funds away to cover those costs <br />while absorbing these rate increases. She said she hopes Zone 7 would think carefully about its <br />next rate increase and help the community to understand the reasons behind it. The current <br />public perception is that if one conserves water, rates increase regardless, and she asked why <br />conservation does not help to keep those costs down. <br />Mr. Smith said conservation does help keep costs down, but agencies are currently struggling <br />with the costs of operating very large systems; while conservation allows those systems to <br />reduce in size, many agencies have not been as successful as Pleasanton in reducing <br />overhead accordingly. He explained that rate structure is critical as well, because the less water <br />consumers use, the less money comes in to cover the fixed costs. He said a fine balance exists <br />between conservation and rates, and staff heard the Council's comments about not penalizing <br />consumers for conserving and specifically structured this not to do so. <br />Notwithstanding Councilmember McGovern's comments regarding the 54% increase, <br />Councilmember Sullivan suggested that some of that may be related to the City's insistence that <br />the water quality be improved. The new well de- mineralizer and the buildings and systems <br />upgrade, which accomplished that, must factor into the cost at some point. He questioned <br />whether the rate structure is progressive enough to truly promote conservation. He noted that <br />the highest user's bill would increase by only about 60% while the same users PG &E bill would <br />City Council Minutes <br />Page 20 of 22 April 6, 2010 <br />