12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Exhibit A -Scope of Work information requested for this study should be, for the most part, readily available information (e.g. financial, statistical, customer, capital plan, etc.). The key issue for data collection purposes may be the level of detail that is readily available and needed for the study. It is important to keep in mind that a rate study often requires data and information that is more detailed than the data typically reported for annual financial statement purposes. One component of this task is the development of capital improvement project and funding sources. The City will provide to HDR a detailed listing of the planned capital projects for the utility. It will be advantageous if the City can segregate the projects between renewal and replacement projects and growth-related projects. This segregation is important in that different funding sources maybe used for different types of projects. For those azeas where the data is not readily available, or will require significant labor and expense on the City's part to provide, HDR and the City will determine the "sensitivity" or "importance" of the data required and if alternative data sources aze available. As with any study, it is imperative that the City provide a timely response for the data requested. Expected City Staff Support for Task 1.2: For this task, the City will be expected to: ^ Gather the data requested in the written data request provided by HDR. (Note: typically requires 20 - 40 hours of total staff time to provide.) Deliverables as a Result of Task 1.1 Data Collection and Analysis. From the work accomplished above, the deliverables for this task will be as follows: ^ An initial written data request to the City. ^ Development of the City's capital improvement plan in draft form. ^ Identification of any data constraints. Task 1.3-Review Policies, Prop 218, and Government Codes Task Objective: Review and examine any Zegal constraints that may impact the City's financial/rate setting policies and the City's rate setting process An important starting point of any rate study is understanding any legal limitations or constraints within the rate setting process. For Califomia utilities, two major legal constraints often come into play. These two legal limitations are Proposition 218 and Government Code 66000 (Mitigation Fee Act). In providing the services under this task it is important to note that HDR is not proposing a legal review or providing a legal opinion. Rather, HDR is providing our non- legal interpretation or understanding of these requirements in the rate setting process and the potential impacts of these constraints. To gain a legal opinion on these issues, the City will need to consult their City Attorney or other outside legal counsel. Government Code 66000 is concerned with the establishment and imposition of growth-related impact fees. There are specific legal limitations on the use of these funds which must be taken into account in the rate setting process. In contrast to this, Proposition 218 (Right to Vote on Taxes Act) is primarily concerned with the notification and implementation process of setting rates. For a number of yeazs, many utilities were unsure whether Prop 218 applied to their rate setting process. Recent California Supreme Court decisions have provided greater clarity. This ~+~^ Comprehensive Loeal Sewer Rate Study A-2 1 L~ City of Pleasanton