Item 5.1 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL posted 12/2/14ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Peter De Hoff.[mailto:pldehoff @gmail.comj
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2014 11:28 AM
To: Don Higginson; Dave Grosch; Jim Cunningham; John Mullin; Steve Vaus
Cc: Dan Singer
Subject: Item 5.1 water rates
To City Council,
I have some concerns with the current proposals to alter the water /sewer rates. I have a 3/4"
service and use something like 30 -40 units /month.
Water
Fixed cost concerns:
I do not think that there should be as large a difference in price people pay for differently sized water
meters. The only reason I can see for a monthly cost difference for different meters would be the
replacement cost amortized over the predictable life of the meter. I cannot see why an 8" meter will
cost —53x that of a 3/" meter. If someone upgrades to a 1" or larger meter from a 5/8" or 3/4 ", why
should they pay an additional monthly fee if there is no need to upgrade the source pipe to
accommodate the new meter? The wear and tear on the water system should be covered in the
variable cost and is dependent on the units of water used, not the size of the meter.
Variable cost concerns:
I do not think there should be any tiered rates at this time. Tiers without regard to lot size /house size
are inherently unfair and should be scrapped until they are tied to an allocation model system.
Sewer
I think that the only consideration for sewer rates should be based the winter water used plus a uniform
fixed cost component. The size of the water meter should not play a role in the cost.
Overall
I suspect that this will raise the water bills for a lot of people (myself included), but it is a more fair
system than what we currently have.
Other concerns regarding the water system:
Water loss
I would like to know how much water is lost in the system, possibly due to leaky pipes /junctions. It can
inform decisions on where /when upgrades will actually be needed. This process can be done by
subtracting the number of units used in the city from the units bought by the city. The water people
only read the units on the meter as whole numbers, so do the analysis over the previous year to smooth
out the noise. This will give you a quick idea of the current state of the water delivery system. I would
be surprised if the water folks do not have this number quickly at hand, and having it well known would
provide a nice justification for upgrades to the aging water infrastructure.
Future water rates
1 of 2 December 2, 2014 Item # 5.1
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
I think that there is a reasonable chance that the state or regional water authority will require water use
cutbacks to the various water districts. The three ways this appears to be handled are:
1. Across the board cuts
2. Uniform tiered rate structure
3. Tiered allocation model
Across the board cuts unjustly punish those who are "water wise" already. A uniform tiered system
unjustly punish those on large lots. Allocation models are traditionally implemented in a manner that
have a "big brother" feel to them. However, allocation models can be implemented in fashion in which
the base allocation is determined by the water users, and not by the local water authority. A user
defined allocation model would take some time to set up and the legwork would best be done prior to
this becoming an example of emergency planning.
The local water authority should use the Poway GIS system to analyze the size of each lot, the number of
bathrooms, when their meters are read, etc, and use this data for clustering analysis in order to group
properties with similar characteristics together. Clustering analysis is an established statistical
technique for grouping like things together. (or different things apart, depending on how you look at it)
For each cluster, take the average (or 70% or whatever number seems to work out) of the water use in
each payment period and set that as the baseline water use. If a tiered system becomes needed, then
this is a useful starting place. Even without a tiered system, informing the user of how much water they
use in relation to others within their cohort will likely lead to a use reduction of 10 -20% due to
normative behavior. (if I recall, an example is the Olivenhain water district)
To be clear, I would not recommend actually implementing this type of system until such a time as more
extensive water use restrictions become mandatory. If the state chooses the across the board cuts, it's
best to be in a higher water use situation than in one where the low hanging fruit has already been
picked.
Just some of my thoughts on the water system. I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Peter De Hoff
Sent from my iPhone
2 of 2 December 2, 2014 Item # 5.1