My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010
>
060110
>
14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 5:01:10 PM
Creation date
5/26/2010 5:01:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/1/2010
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
A majority of these costs will be repaid from Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan <br /> fees paid by new housing development in the area. However, over sizing of the water <br /> facilities was a direct result of existing residential water customers consuming large <br /> amounts of water; therefore, it was determined that approximately $850,000 was the <br /> amount of these costs that should come from a water rate adjustment charged to single <br /> family residential water customers who have high water consumption. <br /> A fourth tier water rate is proposed for single family users and includes the extra cost of <br /> expanding the water system to accommodate these users and also has the beneficial <br /> effect of encouraging water conservation. The fourth tier will generate approximately <br /> $100,000 per year for the added costs of the Vineyard Corridor improvements and <br /> these funds will be deposited in the Water Repair and Replacement Fund to reimburse <br /> this fund for these expenditures. By adding the $100,000 per year to the cost of water in <br /> the fourth tier it resulted in approximately $.13 per Ccf of added cost. <br /> Recycling <br /> The City is in the process of developing a recycling program for commercial irrigation <br /> water for the area between the DSRSD plant located on Johnson Drive and the <br /> northeast section of Pleasanton. Recycled water benefits all water users by freeing up <br /> potable water for domestic water usage. Therefore, it is proposed that the water rates <br /> generate approximately $480,000 per year or $.10 per Ccf of added cost for the <br /> development of this program. It is proposed that this added cost be included in water <br /> rates for all customers except Tier 1 and 2 of the single family residential rates. <br /> Senior and Low Income Discounts <br /> The City currently provides a 20% discount on water and sewer bills for residents who <br /> qualify as a "senior" (age 62 or older), and a 30% discount for residents who qualify as a <br /> low income family (those who qualify for PG &E, PacBell, or cable television discounts <br /> through either the California Department of Economic Opportunity or the Social Security <br /> Administration). Discounts are not additive; therefore, residents who quality for both <br /> discounts can not receive both discounts. The cost of these discounts in 2009 were <br /> water $330,260 and sewer $326,634 for a total of $656,894. <br /> With the passage of Proposition 218, it is no longer possible for the rate payer or rate <br /> base to absorb the cost of these discounts and instead it must be borne by the City's <br /> General Fund or eliminated. Unfortunately, the current economic situation does not <br /> allow the City's General Fund to absorb 100% of these discounts. Also, the dollar <br /> amount of these discounts will only grow in the coming years due to the aging <br /> population in Pleasanton as has been seen in the growth of these programs since 1995 <br /> ($100,000) to 2009 (almost $700,000). Additionally, staff has learned through the audit <br /> of these programs that some of the City's highest consumers of water are those who <br /> take advantage of both the senior and low- income discounts offered by the City. This <br /> calls into question the effectiveness of the program and whether the program should be <br /> modified to address inconsistent objectives. Use of the City's General Fund for these <br /> purposes is also contrary to the City's fiscal policies. <br /> Page 4 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.