01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Thome said currently the senior rates is a 20% discount and he asked what the difference in the subsidy would be if the City kept it at 20% only and not lower the cap on the lower income discounts. He said they are set at 40 CCF. If this were decreased to 30 CCF without a decrease in the discount, he asked what the impact to the General Fund would be. Ms. Wagner said with the senior discount change which is for both water and sewer and both senior and low income customers, she believes it would be less than $310,000. Councilmember Pentin said in moving from 40 CCF which is a lot of water to 30 CCF across the board makes sense in an era where people need to conserve water. Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. Korut Germar referred to the table showing the drought surcharge which he said is a current windfall for the City. With the drought surcharge, the city will charge residents anywhere from $1 to $2.50 and the increase goes from about $.12 to $2.56 in the drought surcharge, so the amount of actual increase is significantly higher. This is not necessarily reflected in the drought surcharge. He also suggested the option for the Council to question whether it should continue to collect it as opposed to rescinding it immediately. Thirdly, Zone 7 has proposed a 35% increase for this January and a 55% increase for the following year. Therefore, people will incur increases of anywhere up to $3.07 and $3.77 in the 2016-17 timeframe. Those increases will get automatically passed onto customers as opposed to being talked about in this hearing. Therefore, while all of the rate increases seem to be low, everybody will be significantly impacted when Zone 7 passes down its rates on customers. Mayor Thome said this is the reason he thinks residents should address the Zone 7 Board who are elected officials. Mr. Germar added that when looking at the water bill, going from $2 in addition to the Zone 7 increase, plus the drought surcharge, people's actual rate will almost double in another year. Therefore, the increase is significantly higher if the drought surcharge is implemented. It is a blanket surcharge that applies even if residents are using 5 units or 50 units and the funds all flow to the City of Pleasanton. Regarding Ruby Hill, he thinks people are getting charged for Ruby Hill by both the City of Pleasanton and Livermore, as they are already paying the highest rate and will go from $80 to about $105 with this rate surcharge. He thinks applying this rate increase to both cities is wrong and something to think about. He has an additional 50+ letters all signed by Ruby Hill residents which he submitted. Brent Cromer said he is against the price increases. He has seen that his street has become a third world country because the lawns are brown, the beautiful landscaping is no longer present and the reason people are cutting back is because of costs. The penalty rates proposed need to be reviewed. Basically, he understands there are 17 million gallons a day the City would use. They have bragging rights of 40% reduction but people are only asked to conserve 25%. There is 15% of that that could be given back to the people in terms of water or about 2.5 million a day people could be using. He asked the City to think about the revenue it would get from this. El Nino is coming and he suggested the Council consider any increases then. He said he would pay $100 extra a month if Del Vale was raised one foot and the other thing he has not heard is why can't the City go to EBMUD and go to Hetch Hetchy. He would hope the Council would reconsider the price increase and look again at the penalties. Art Tenbrink reminded the Council that he is speaking to request the Council to maintain the senior citizens level at 20%. When he retired in 2013, his income became fixed and the fact that other costs are going up which affect seniors and asked that the Council maintain the discount at 20%. Eryka Wetherall said she is a Ruby Hill owner and her water bills are about $400 every two months for herself, her husband and her 2 year old daughter. They are out of the house from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., take one shower daily and she even tries to shower at work so as not to use water. Adding more to her bill seems like a lot. Additionally, getting charged by both cities does not seem fair. She has been City Council Minutes Page 22 of 28 October 6, 2015