Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala indicated she had received a question about the expansion component <br />of the project being paid for by connection fees. The rehabilitated portion is being paid <br />for by existin~ end new customen. There was concern expressed about double billing <br />the x~w customers. She wanted to be certain there was a stable revenue source. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling responded that it is a standard principle of utility management that <br />an attempt is made for everyone to have the same rates and user fees. It is difficult to <br />manage a program where users from different time periods are billed at different rates. <br />The basic concept for this financing program is to set a user fee now which will cover the <br />rehabilitation component with the existing user base. It is Ixue that in the future there will <br />be a larger user base and more revenue. One option to deal with that is to allocate the <br />funds to future capital improvement costs of the enteq3rise. Secondly, what is being built <br />today will wear out and the funds could be allocated to a replacement fund. Thirdly, it is <br />possible that all user rates could be lowered. The concept is still that everyone pays one <br />rate. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala then referred to the controversy regarding south San Ramon and the <br />possibility that it would leave the Dublin San Ramon Services District. <br /> <br /> Dave Requa, Engineering Manager, Dublin San Ramon Services District, <br />believed the issue was a Central San controversy. He said there is a section of San <br />Ramon that has been in the DSRSD area for a long time that is overlapped by Central <br />San. The original plan was for DSRSD to service that area because of gravity flow. <br />However, because there was no capacity in the original LAVWMA pipeline, Central San <br />provided services for the area. That wastewater has always gone to Central San. Last <br />year the area was finally detached from the DSRSD service area. There is no change in <br />the DSRSD service area or customer base. <br /> <br />Item 6C (4) <br />Approval of Second Supplemental Agreement for Wastewater Disposal Services <br />between the City and DSRSD addressing additional capacity allocations. <br />(SR00:328) <br /> <br />Randall A. Lum presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico indicated this is an $80 million commitment by the City of Pleasanton <br />and he wanted to make certain Council has all its questions answered. <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell wanted to make certain the rates will not be increased for existing <br />users throughout the life of the bond. <br /> <br /> Ms. Rossi said in this type of financing it is impossible to guarantee that will not <br />happen. Staff has added extra hyers of protection for the ratepayers and is comfortable it <br />has done everything possible. However, there could be a drastic donturn in the <br />-economy or a natural disaster, which would affect the rates, but that is not expected to <br />happen. There is a provisions that if funds have to be advanced for debt service, that the <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes 13 12/05/00 <br /> <br /> <br />