My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
15
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
100615
>
15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2015 3:45:17 PM
Creation date
9/29/2015 3:45:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/6/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
BACKGROUND <br /> On August 26, 2015 and September 16, 2015, the Zone 7 Board of Directors held public <br /> meetings during which Zone 7 staff discussed and reviewed its budget forecast for <br /> 2016-2018. Zone 7's revenues have declined due to water conservation, and as a <br /> consequence, its operating reserves have been nearly depleted. In addition, Zone 7 has <br /> not and will not be able to transfer as much to its Capital Improvement Fund (CIP) as it <br /> has in prior years which has caused CIP reserves to decline. Zone 7 has presented a <br /> three-component water rate proposal which it is anticipating passing at its October 21, <br /> 2015 Board meeting and which will go into effect on January 1, 2016. A summary of the <br /> three components is as follows: <br /> Component 1- A two-part fixed charge based on 5-year rolling demand and 3-year <br /> rolling peak month. The amount of this rate component would vary between the <br /> retailers (Pleasanton, DSRSD, Livermore, and Cal Water Livermore) depending on <br /> historic usage and peaking. The City of Pleasanton's fixed charge would be <br /> proportionately larger than the other three retailers, in part because Pleasanton has the <br /> greatest number of customers (about 35%). Fixed charges do not consider the <br /> geographical variance on the expense side of cost in their design: Ground water is <br /> cheaper to produce than surface water, and Pleasanton uses a higher proportion of <br /> ground water than Livermore, yet Pleasanton will pay a higher fixed charge. <br /> Component 2- Temporary three-year Conservation Surcharge. This component <br /> would also vary between retailers and is based on the 5-year rolling demand average. <br /> Again, the City of Pleasanton would pay a proportionately higher rate than the other <br /> retailers because it has the greatest number of customers. <br /> Component 3- Fixed uniform rate on each CCF purchased. This component would <br /> be the same for all the retailers beginning at $1.68/CCF for 2016, and increasing to <br /> $1.91 in 2017 and $2.16 in 2018. <br /> During these meetings, the City of Pleasanton has argued for a rate that is consistent, <br /> fair and equitable to all of the retailers, and which would replenish operating reserves to <br /> an amount equal to between 20% and 30% of operating expenses. The City requested <br /> that the conservation surcharge be evaluated annually to determine whether or not it <br /> needs to be continued to maintain operating reserves. <br /> From Zone 7's rate presentations and supporting documents, it appears that almost <br /> 90% of the proposed rate increase will fund the CIP through increased annual CIP <br /> allocations and the payment of debt service on a $43 million bond it plans to issue in FY <br /> 2017/18. The City of Pleasanton has requested that Zone 7 take more time to further <br /> develop its CIP to ensure the proposed projects are fully justified, that there is a <br /> reasonable implementation timeline, and that Zone 7 rely on issuing bonds for the major <br /> capital projects with payback periods to reflect the useful life of the respective facility to <br /> ensure future users pay their fair share of the cost. <br /> Zone 7 has estimated that the 2016 wholesale water rate increase impact to the City of <br /> Pleasanton will be an additional $0.84/CCF, which would equate to an approximate <br /> annual increase of $3,500,000 that the City would allocate to its residential and <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.