Item 11 - Proposed Water and Sewer Rates for FY 95-96
&.GENDA REPORT Sm9'RlCJTED
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
- FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man~
INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager
Peggy A. Stewart, Director of Administrative Servic~~
James R. Williams, Director of Public Services
DATE: June 27, 1995
SUBJECI': Proposed Water and Sewer Rates for FY 1995-96
ABSTRACI'
Water rate resolution 95- increases the water use per unit charge from $1.585 per
unit to $1.663 per unit. This increase is due to a 6% increase in the cost of raw
water purchase from Metropolitan Water District and County Water Authority and the
financing of Poway's water treatment plant upgrade. The flat rate for basic water
service increases from $6.91 average cost per month to $7.38.
Sewer rate resolution 95- increases the sewer service charge from $43.83 per
equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) bimonthly to $45.57 per EDU. a 3.98% increase.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
-
Environmental review not required for this agenda item according to CEQA guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
Water rates will increase by 4.89% and sewer rates will increase by 3.98%.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Additional public notification sent to members of the Budget Review Committee,
StoneRidge Country Club.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 95- establishing water
rates for FY 1995-96 and Resolution No. 95- establishing sewer rates for FY 1995-96.
ACTION
-
L
1 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM
11
-_.__._-_._~
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF POW A Y
TO: """,b1, "y" '"' "'b"'~' Clty C'""'l
FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Mana
INITIATED BY: John D. Fitch, Assistant City anager
Peggy A. Stewart, Director of Administrative Services
James R. Williams, Director of Public Services
DATE: June 27, 1995
SUBJECT: Proposed Water and Sewer Rates for FY 1995-96
BACKGROUND
Water Rates
The largest component of the City's water rate is the purchase of raw water from the
Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of southern California. The City projects
purchasing 12,119 acre feet (A.F.) of water in FY 1995-96 (Attachment A). Effective
July 1, 1995, MWD approved a rate increase on their wholesale raw water rate of S19
per acre foot. The County Water Authority (CWA) increased its water rate surcharge
to S80 per acre foot; and, starting July 1, 1995, an S8-per-acre-foot "readiness-to-
serve" charge is being added. This means that the wholesale cost of water to the
City of Poway will increase from S405 per acre foot to S432 per acre foot (435.6
units).
The majority of this water rate increase covers the program of capital improvements
designed to enable the Metropolitan Water District to supply San Diego County more
higher quality water.
Last year the MWD approved a new rate structure which they felt would provide stable
water rates while securing revenues and retaining operating flexibility (Attachment
B). The most significant part of this rate structure change was the addition of a
readiness-to-serve charge which would be set to recover the debt service not paid
from taxes. The charge is to be allocated to each member agency on the basis of a
rolling average of historic water purchases from MWD. Currently, all of the
property tax payers in Poway pay a $11.50 standby parcel charge on their tax bills.
This year the readiness-to-serve charge has been implemented, and the standby parcel
charge will be repealed. The new readiness-to-serve charge will be added into the
cost of providing water service and will therefore impact only those residents
actually receiving water service on the property.
ACTION:
See Summary Sheet
2 of 21
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
-" -"
Agenda Report
June 27, 1995
Page 2
Attachment C provides a detailed breakdown of the rate analysis for FY 1995-96. It
also provides historical information for FY 1993-94 and FY 1994-95, and a 7-year
projection through January 2002.
The City of Poway is taking two steps which are also adding to the water rate
increase. The first is the upgrade to the water treatment plant. This project
provides for the construction of new deep-bed dual media filters to replace the
nonconventional 12 MGD Hardinage system and to achieve compliance with the surface
water treatment rule. This is an $8 million project which will be partially funded
by redevelopment funds and water fund reserves. The remaining $2.5 million will be
funded from a revenue bond proposed to be sold in the summer of 1995. The rate
analysis includes debt service on this bond sale which will increase rates by $.056
per uni t.
The MSI cost recovery study conducted for the City in March 1993 noted that the
current $.07 per unit charge for capital replacement covered 33% of the annual
associated infrastructure replacement costs. The study recommended a phase-in
program of increasing that portion of the rate to cover more of the infrastructure
replacement costs. The proposed rate structure for FY 1995-96 continues that
process by increasing the cost per unit to $.OB a unit and continues by 1/2-cent-
per-unit increases over the next three years.
The new rate will be billed on the first full water bill following the July 1
effective date. A July/August billing adjustment has been included in the rate
analysis and factored into the overall water cost per unit.
Aori cultura 1 Rebate
Effective May 1, 1994, the Metropolitan Water District implemented an interim
agricultural water program. This program provides an agricultural discount of $113
per acre foot for untreated water and is proposed to be a four-year program. The
$113 per acre foot discount is a straight pass-through from MWD. In order to
participate in the program, a customer must be a qualified agricultural user and
also agree that in the event a water supply shortage occurs the agricultural
deliveries would first be reduced up to 30% prior to imposing mandatory reduction
targets on any other water customers. This agricultural discount equates to $.259
per unit rebate.
Basic Water Service Charoe
The basic water service charge, which is a flat rate charge based on meter size,
covers indirect operating costs to maintain the system and meet administrative
overhead. The basic water service charge is proposed to increase by an average of
$0.47/month for residential customers. The majority of meters in the City are 3/4"
serving residential customers. Their basic water service charge will increase from
$6.91 bimonthly to $7.38 bimonthly.
3 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
-"- ---..-- ~---------------._--_._---
Agenda Report
June 27, 1995
Page 3
Raw Water Surcharae
The StoneRidge golf course is presently served with raw water taken directly from
the aqueduct. In addition to the City's actual cost for the raw water, a surcharge
for raw water recovers the City's costs of administration and telemetry for the
pumping stations. The recommended charge for FY 1995-96 is $28.30 per A.F.
(Attachment 0).
Pumoina Rates
In addition to the regular water rates charged to all customers, additional pumping
charges are added to the water bills of customers who have to be served from a water
reservoir other than the clearwell. Some of these rates require adjustment to
continue to be self-funding. One of the areas increases, and the other eight either
decrease or remain the same. A comparison of the recommended rates for FY 1995-96
against rates for FY 1994-95 follows:
Proposed
Pumoina Area FY 1994-95 FY 1995-96
10 #1 High Valley 0.140 0.200
ID #4 0.055 0.055
A-73 Orchard 0.080 0.082
Donart 0.150 0.150
Service Area 6 0.140 0.130
AD #79-1 0.100 0.100
Community/South Poway 0.150 0.150
Welton 0.150 0.150
Sewer Service Charaes
Sewer service charges are applied to customers on the basis of equivalent dwelling
units (EDU). EOU's are used to distribute the cost of sewer service according to
the size and purpose of improvements on the property. The current 16,181 equivalent
dwelling units is based upon assigning one unit per home and an equivalent number is
assigned to other developed property based upon the land use.
The proposed increase is $1.74 per dwelling unit bimonthly, increasing rates from
$43.83 to $45.54.
Overall the San Diego Metropolitan sewer charges for FY 1995-96 are below those
budgeted in FY 1994-95. When Metro prepared its FY 1995 budget, it was anticipated
that all capital improvement projects would be bond financed. It is now projected
that the bond financing will not occur until 1996. Capital improvement projects
under the Clean Water Program side are also running under budget due to reduced
costs, lag in billings, and construction delays. The impacts of the recent court
4 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
- -
Agenda Report
June 27, 1995
Page 4
decisions on Metro's Clean Water Program and their revised bond financing plans are
not known at this time. Therefore, we are unable to provide forecasted sewer rates
beyond FY 1995-96. However, we do anticipate that Metro sewer charges will
escalate beginning in FY 1996-97 as they issue bonds for their capital improvement
program.
Water/Sewer Rate Studv
In the past the City Council has requested that staff evaluate alternative water and
sewer rate structures. A flow based sewer rate structure was being evaluated to be
implemented with the new utility billing system. With the establishment of the new
revenue structure by the Metropolitan Water district, and the complexity of creating
and implementing new rate structures, a complete water and sewer rate study is
contained in the FY 95/96 proposed financial plan. Requests for Proposal will be
distributed in July, and it is anticipated that recommendations from the study will
come before Council the end of 1995.
FINDINGS
Recommended rates for FY 1995-96 to cover increased charges are as follows:
Water Water Use Charge $1. 663 fUn it
Basic Water Service 6.86% increase (rate varies based
on meter size).
Raw Water Surcharge $2B.3 per A.F.
Sewer Sewer Service $45.57 per EOU, bimonthly
Oelinouencv Charge on Past Due 10% or $25, whichever is less.
Accounts
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental review is not required for this agenda item according to CEQA
guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
As noted above.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Additional public notification sent to members of the Budget Review Committee and
StoneRidge Country Club.
-
5 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
------.--.---..- ---- --- ----.----.---.-.---
~--- - --------
Agenda Report
June 27. 1995
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 95- establishing
water rates for FY 1995-96 and Resolution No. 95- establishing sewer rates for FY
1995-96.
Attachments:
A. Analysis of Water Purchases/Sales
B. MWD and CWA Projected Water Rates
C. Analysis of Water & Sewer Rates for FY 1995-96
D. City of Poway Raw Water Surcharge
E. Resolution Establishing Water Rates for FY 1995-96
F. Resolution Establishing Sewer Rates for FY 1995-96
e;\c;ty\admnserv\director\9495rate.rep
6 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
~
y~ m O~ o~~oo ~ ~ m.~ ~~
~_l ~ ~ ~~M 0 0 ~~~ Wm
...11) -- 0 I/)CQO N ~ 0('"')- ....J t
- - . - - . . . - .. '" .. c:
cn...~ N en COmU1 M "'If' .....0. (Ij~
~> ..... ~ COU1M CO CO OM""" ~~
=~ ~ ~-- ~..... _N ~N
m ~ ~ """ ~N
.;
" U
.~~ N O~ _MCOO""" """ 0 mN~.
- I CO _M """MCD U1 N 0 .co
1. ~ ~q ~q~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
c~ ..... n ocom M N U1 coco'
-> ..... en COU1CO ..... ~ co....."""
~~ q ~- ~..... N
W ~ """ """
~: COOOco MCOCOQM 0 ..... -co~
= I """ ~ """COM 0 ~ CO mM~
-M U1 V ..CO CO M N CO"-a
~~ ~ m ~~M ~ ~ ~ MM~
> ..... N ~~. CO ~ _U1
~ ~ ~- ~....._-
"'... ...
.~ _CO~~ COm"'lt'OU1 CO __MCO~
o = I comcoU1 co_en M M N~Mm~
W UN ~~U1~ q~~ ~ ~ ~~~~m
~<( <m __ ~ MO~ """ U1 .NNN~
> ..... ~ coco CO en mcn_U1
~ ~ ~ ~_N ~ _M_M
o ~. """ ~
W =
en c:
<( 0
>~ ~~ ~~ ~ "'~~N'" N "'~"'~;j1. E
~ = I com U1 ~comN_ 0 .coo_~ ~
~~ u"'" ~- ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~q~~co M
;:~ cm C N "''''N''''''''' ~"'..."'~ >-
O > ..... M ~..- co NCO_N m.
~ ~ ~ ~- en ___M C~
~w ~ M M ~
u..... ~S
o~ ~i
~ ~-
-uu..o ~~ --..... M~~_CO co _NCOCO~ _~
~e ~~ ~ ~~g~~ ~ ~~~~m -~
~ um M . ~~~~M ~ .;oo~ si
we> ..... co COCOMMM U1 NN"'If'NU'1 ~_
> u.. ..... "'If'_N_ 0 _U1_M om
..J ...... m Q)
c( CO """ U1 c.=
z E ~
c( oS
m~ m. M ~~~~~ ~ N~.~~ ~;
= I ~~ m o.~~~. .NC~~ _
1:) eft ~~a;) cD.. C"')~r--:C:O.."'..a;).. N.. ~..N..~..~..~ {,"]jj
<co a;) ~ MCNa;)N 0:) U')~U')C' 0
> ~ ~ ~~U')~C"') C"') Ma;)NNM _
u.. ... co~~ M ~U')~M cau)
co" .. N ,..: 0..>
!."
c.. f!!
'C Ql
U -
~ U) ClJ
~ ~ E
U')~.s! en
~ en 8
~ ~ :l:'~
~ Ql ~ ~Ql "
_ c: > ClJ .. en
~ -~~ ~ ~~g~
U u.:u..c:( ~.... ~ cu.S'-'(Q
0:: <Cc:(::."' Cij~ oS ~ ~ ~cn~~
~ --Cij OOCij....~ ~. N~~m
9 ~~s ~ ~en~~ ~~~ill. ~~~o
111# ....ca _ -....:>- en ca (1)0.. Q)....c-
0:: ~O~ ~ ~s>~ ~ ....Jo~ s ~s-c
W ">-E en U):>cac:!: cv Q).sca~E at U)caClJO
... c'" W Ql"~P~ en ~en~EQl ;: .. _~~]
c < Q~e ~ (ijO ~o .. ~~cQ)~ _ ~ SQ)....en
.2 ~ ~&~ ~ W~~2~ ~ ....,,~oU~ g 0 sgSca
a > ~ OU) =Q)o~~ as _5~~v# u.. ~ ~'cca~
'c C ::l~C:'" ffi lllgEc:c:;: ~~o~;j1. " E !QQl~ill
u :::. C"ca='C L- ClJ_<<lOO - > c.Q)-" ~c>.o
~ > <(~a::~ ~ a::ena::uu ~ ~~..~lll ~ ~ "'~G~
" 0 > 0 .-..>>0 CIl'" .
, C ~ > ... u~w>... ~ q;
7 of 21 ATTACH/1ENT A JUN 27 1995 ITEM 11
FTc;CAL POLIcY COMMITTEE
@ , '"'" "'EM HO. II-2
San Diego CO~~b~r~~ater Autnority
3211 Fifth Avenue. Son Diego, California 92103.5n8
(619) 682.4100 FAX (619) 297.0511
February 2, 1995
TO: Board of Directors
VIA: Fiscal Policy Committee
FROM: Lester A. Snow, General Manager
RE: Implementation of MWD Revenue Structure (Action)
SUMMARY
At the January 24, 1995 adjourned Board of Directors meeting
staff was directed to prepare final resolutions for implementing
the new MWD rates and charges. Attached are resolutions giving
notice of intention to impose a new demand charge and a readiness-
to-serve charge. Included in the readiness-to-serve charge
resolution is language requesting MWD to collect a standby charge
within the Authority's service area as a credit against the
Authority's readiness-to-serve obligation. A hearing to adopt the
charges will be held at the March 9, 1995 Board meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT/STRATEGIC PLAN
The readiness-to-serve charge levied by MWD upon the Authority
is $14,866,336 in fiscal year 1996. This charge is to be offset
with estimated standby charge collections of $12,364,000 for a net
readiness-to-serve charge to be collected of $2,502,336. Any
demands incurred above the base established for the new demand
charge will pay a one-time charge of 51,000 per acre foot to be
financed at the option of the member agency over a period of 15
years.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board adopt the attached Resolution Giving Notice of
Intentlon to Impose Readiness-To-Serve Charge and Resolution Giving
Notice of Intention to Impose New Demand Charge.
DETAIL
At the January 24, 1995 adjourned Board of Directors meeting
staff was directed to prepare final resolutions and necessary
Administrative Code modifications for implementing the new MWD
rates and charges according to staff recommendations. The staff
MEMaER AGENCIES
CITIU IltllGA7ION alST',eTS WArE' 01STltlCTS MUNIC'l'Al WA.fE/t DISTIICTS
.:.,. "0-"".=0-"'0 ,"c( '>O"'c;." 'Ioe ......'.....'0. 'CO"'lI<l' "-'-C'
. (("-' =" . ;"'~O. . >c. :.,... . . ,'~ .,,,.c...,,". . v"__'c .. ~" 01
-'c',..,' . ~..".. ~o
COUNTY '.0'''00.
'_, .OJ 'U.LtC UTILlTl' DISTlleT FEDrUL AGENCY JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
.. -~ "Cg,o,. ,. M",O', h..,.....o-
8 0 f 21 ATTACHMENT B
-
Fiscal Policy Committee
February 2, 1995
Page 2
recommendations included the pass-through of MWD's readiness-to-
serve and new demand charges according to the same allocation
methodology and formulas as MWD. This includes allocating the
readiness-to-serve charge on the basis of a rolling average of
historical water purchases from the Authority with an offsetting
credit for an agency's standby charge collections by MWD, and the
imposition of a new demand charge when a member agency goes above
its established base demand. The new demand charge base for each
member agency is detailed in the resolution of intent as is the
anticipated readiness-to-serve charge to be levied upon each member
agency.
Upon adoption of the attached resolutions, General Counsel
will prepare revisions to the Authority's Administrative Code that
incorporate the new charges. These revisions will be brought to
your Board at the March meeting.
Tables are attached showing each member agency's allocation
calculation for the readiness-to-serve and new demand charges.
Prepared By: /'ft:~ {~(I
Marti~es, ash Management Analyst
Reviewed By: ~M~'~/lL//
Robe t R. Campbel , Director of Finance
Approved By:
Manager
: IBOARP95 ~~~RATE FEa
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
9 of 21
~-~- - -~----- -- -
-----"- -----
.
READINESS- TO-SERVE-CHARGE - FY 1995-96
AGENCY ALLOCATION RTS
BASIS (AF)' CHARGE
VID (BUENO) 7,286 $266,286
CARLSBAD 14.946 $546,223
DEL MAR 1.374 $50.198
ESCONDIDO 12.292 $449.244
FALLBROOK 12.521 $457,595
HELIX 25.399 $928.256
OCEANSIDE 25,878 $945,781
OLlVENHAIN 12,465 $455.567
OTAY 20,916 $764,431
PADRE DAM 18.546 $6n,813
PEN DEL TON 1,081 $39,508
POWAY 11,151 $407,525
RAINBOW 23.937 $874,842
RAMONA 8,832 $322,784
RINCON 6,256 $228.624
SAN DIEGO 138.226 $5,051,852
SAN DIEGUITO 3,923 $143,386
SANTA FE 6,107 $223,191
SWEETWATER 5,781 $211,264
VALLECITOS 12.178 $445,059
VALLEY CENTER 36,657 $1.339.710
YUIMA 1,019 $37,224
TOT AL................ 406,766 $14,866,366
REQUIRED COLLECTION.. $14,866.366
RTS PER AF................... $36.55
. AVERAGE OF A.F. SALES IN FISCAL YEAR 1993
AND FISCAL YEAR 1994
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
10 of 21
--
~ ~Sl"'lBal16
M(iljCll-rM
CII MM!CD~M
8 51111 ~-r~
N
~ O)MMCDMN
8 O>O>c;l;"'o~
~M C\I~M
N ~ "' -[''';'4
8 ...-r~~It)N
CD~ "''''0>
"I:t MC\lMC\I
_CII
0> CCCD'V,....~_
0> ""''''''(\IU') ,....
0> VMMC\l C\I
~
(j)
W
I- CD M--.:t_CC_
0> CO,......... Ln..... I.t)
<t 0> 'VMMC\lM(\I
~
a:
0 ... (00)8-0-
~ 0> -rlt) -rg-r
0> VMMN C\I
~
~
~ COV"l:tcn"'ltCD
Nc;l;CDCIICDN
0> V C\lNNC\I
~
It) C\llnMNMN
0> ~~"'N"'N
0> "I:t C\I N C\I N
~
W
II: en Cl
::l
f- en <
. oenoClo
wU
en::l wenw<w
<II: Of-Of-Of-
uf- w<w<w<
en f-Wf-Wf-W
lJ5~ <1I:<1I:<a:
Wf-Wf-Wf-
<w II:za:za:z
CllZ f-::lf-::lf-::l
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
11 0 f 21
-.-- __._____~__...__._ _,__",.,__",.".,.___. 0"_'-"
-~'---"-'~"--
~ "~NO ~O.~ cm~ ~~ ~~~~O~~~ I~ NO N~
I ~~~. ~~~. ON~ MO .N~...g~ . ~~ ~.
~ M.M~ .~.~ OO~ OM ~NCN~~ 0 0 NO ~~
o . - ~~~~ N~O ~O ~~N~~~.O 00 CO ~~
> "~M~ 00 _ _~.N_~~- ~ ~ I
~ M~ _~ ~ --_-- N N .
~~ . ~ --
..
~ "~NO ..N~ ~"- M" N.Mio~~~ li.o.~
I ..~. .NN~ M.~ mo _M_ NN~. Nm .~
g :;:--: 1'1.'lf;.~N o..~.-: ...~ tto..~ .."t~...~ ... "!.~ ~.
""~N' ..0 _0 _M.~M~_O 00 wo _..'
> ...... ~ _~~NN ~- ~ .
~ ~~... ~ - ~- ~ N .
..... ~
..
~ :lil~~ ~:z;.,. ~~~ g" :"'~;lil~l:ll 25: ~lil ...~
. M....~ .."~ _~_ _~ .i~~N_.O 50.o:~
: .... =~;~ iic to =o:~~~=e io NO ~~
~ ~~... ~ -~~- ~ N ~
.... ~
..
.~ ~I~~ =M2~ =;~ IS .N~g2.1~ g~"2 ~~
. M"~~ .:M~ MN_ _" l:oa.5~o 50 10 .-
: .... N~P~ ~~o ~o C..~N..O 00.0 ~~
~ =~..:.; ~e:~~-=- = ~
, ..;: ..: --
~... ~....~ ......~ ....~.... ~~"!"""" I........~
... ~.M. .c...~ MO~.O .ft. .o.~ ~ ~~ 0....
M~~. ~~N ~._.M NC~ ~~oo 0 ~o _
o : ~ ~ OO~: OGo.o O~.~~..O 00 ~o ~:
~ ~ ~:~:~ ~ :~:~:-~- = ~
> ..c .V; .: --
c...." ~
~Oll:
~rnw~
m~~. CDO.M ~o~~ ~.- C~ NONOOO~_ I. N~ N~
....>w. I ~__~ _~~.... CD.~ CDO ....._N. ~ NC _r..
0~0 . M~~ .~_ CD__ ~M .....~.o 0 NO ~
>~~t: ~ N~;: ~.O to ~ti~ie=e io;o ~~
CC- ~ 1M ~= M -_- _ N ~
.. Yo .... .. __
w W .~ _
.. ..
~
! !==~ !!!~ ~;5 ~~ 5Iil!!sa II~: i~
~~ ~: .i.~'" ~OO V;o .~~N~.OOOO ~O ~..,~
CD ~ _0. ~ -."N.-~- _-10. ~
. *~ M -_- _ ~ "
.: .: --
.....
~t ~O ~ N~M~ 2CN CO 0202200N 2~ ~~ ~~
"~ 0 N_lr ~..._ .O'~~.N" .N"~..
::~ : 1It"...~ .."t~ IO.,~ e. .. .. .. .......Glt~ ..~ ...~ ~:
> ~"~..' NOJO.O ......0 eo~.. ~..'
..~ ...~ _ .~-._.- N
..... ~. ~~. -- -- -
.: .: --
~ .... ......~ ""N"" ................ ..... ..~
~ .. NNN..r _"~..._ N~~."'~.~ ~... .,
~ "., ~~O. .~_.~ "....N.O .0 ~.
CD ~ * ....:~. N.O':O t3tt3t~N.t3t.O .0 ....
> N~~..... 0 .,.~_.~O- O.
~ .~ - ~~. ---- -" .,
.: .: - - -
8
"'-
..... ,..,..
IIO.~ fI fI
~II: ~~ C
~~ ii ~ ~ Z
.... -- Z ~ I :>
!:.!5" 11 w '" 0 II:
~~ ~: ~_ ~w ~ ~ W
~ ~ ~ is!: i' '"1 5 ~ ,.. ~ I II ~ II: 1:' I i ~ =:
~~~..o m!&& 11:: ~~ ~ t;~ ,C ~~ I I Sf
~ t~ ~ ~u ~~ ~ ~.. = u
~Z:iC ~.. ~z ~o ~ ~0D
~5~~5 ~~~o ~2~E~ 1= i!2!1 I lit x= ffiiS
s: Co~;C ~~ S & C~i i:5::5 ;, N~~.5 g- Ii= J~:1 1:5 ~;
,. ~~C;:~ i:~J! ~ih~ ~~ D.~g'-ali:$ .s: ~;" II:t itJ!
~ O~s:E :E~E ~rn~"~:~ o~=e~~~~= "'SD. -~ ~E
u ~c~- ~~~u ~z~t_ ~- t.~~~~-~~ ~ _ ~_ <
~ >W-~N~ ~..~ >~-~~ ~~ ~~c~.~~.. ~:M ~M ~e
.. > >"0 coo.. 011:" 0 0.. ..~ ..~.C1 ..0 0..
C :E:EUII:.. :>uu~ ~..:E~u ~u 0 uu c..u uu ..~
12 of 21 ATTACHMENT C JUN 27 1995 ITEM 11
- -
c; ~~~:~= WJ~~
,. .,.e;,......G'J' ..
o .. .. .. .. .... ..10.
""'__N_ 0 .
it "'~..=";:..! Si. ..
p p p
q II"UI~ .I:;~
g .",~p....o. =....:
.....0.... 0 .
.. PP.......... P
.. 0..'" 1lD..t:!. .....
p p p
is :r;::::: :!::at
i N..-.."'.."t-....... ....:
"'Cft....N .. .
)>. .....,...N...
LI.. .Ift 1D..t:!. N..
p p
iii :Ut;:;;:;:... :I~
: "":.N.........~I.. .........::
fl')OO.....N .. .
~ -::gWJ:;;:3'"
.- .
p p
iF .~~.=5: =:~
.... ~""''-:'~W>>..ct cct....::
W · "'N..WJ_fI').... ~
W )>. _"''''WlNO..
~ ~ ..,. W>>..t!. ~ a
> ~ .... z
p~ ..
~~! ~ ..........2 ....~ ~t
~>~.. ~~~~:o =~.
o~...... ...... ......
~~~LI.. N~."....WJ N .
z- .. pOP.........
~= LI.. _1ft ~~ ~
u w .. ..
=< & ..
~ " ~
! 0........0 ".d ~ ~
11)0......0 ...,~ I .
= ~~~~~~ ~,..:= u t ~
t ~5i;a~ ~.. ..~ f" 8
~- ~ II ,I I
..0......0 "'pd ') Iii Ii)
~ ~~~~~~ _~5 J ~~!
t ~5;:;:~~ i" 11 ~i 8~
~- ~ ~ J 11
&! .~ J
~ ~~~~~~ ~:~ tl..ll~ 11
".......... .. j 1111; I!
t P~~..~! 5 ~ ~;~~IDl
5.f~h i) I i
~ II!!~~ ~
ijgiji ;
~ i it lltJ1ii!
! J j J~ ilr!i~lr
~ : ~~ J~" ~Sl E~~j
~ .l".;.Eo" o~"", f""ol".J!l
~ "'.2 ~ E u'" ... 1& .. .. N.I.. ..
~ ~u~~ci :~o ~ J~ait"i
~ i ji~rJ~ j~f" ~ l!lf3il~
t ,,~.. -~ Uo ~ , c ~~
~ ~ Z~ul~<.EU ~ ~~~l~~~~
u ~ !~=-jM E'U 0 O~=~~O.~
: 0 Il'~ go" ~ ~~; III uZuu.!!...~ ITEM 11
c ... .... ~ !OJ .. .... < < ~ < JUN 2 7 1995
13 of 21
--------
_._--~-----
-_.._--------'"
CITY OF POWAY
ANALYSIS OF
WATER & SEWER RATES
FY 95/96
Description FY 93-9 FY 94-9 FY 95-9
METROPOLITAN SEWER CHARGES
Metro Sewer Proposed Rate $2377/M 2203 2194
Average Flow 3.7MG 3.4MG 3.2MG
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Annualized) 96,047 95,868 97,086
Metro Sewer Charges 2,198,460 1,970,144 1,898,637
(Less Capacity Charge)
San District Admin Costs 45,503 10,000
Metro Build Out 57,000 50,000 0
Penasqultos/Pump Stn. 64 160,000 426,400 245,000
Subtotal Metro Charges 2,415,460 2,492,047 2,153,637
Cost Per EDU 25.149 25.995 22.183
Percentage Change 2.64% 3.36% -14.$6%
CLEAN WATER PROGRAM CHARGES
CWP/FIRP/SOP Charges 1,478,000 1,189,250 990,783
Front Funded Design Costs 444,390 266,572
Debt Service/Front Funded 59,000
Cost Per EDU 15.388 17.656 12.951
Percentage Change 209.76% 14.74% -2$.65%
POWAY BASIC SEWER SERVICE
Legis/Admin Servo 535,747 560,418 589,936
Public Servo Admin 183,478 224,399 401,111
Engineering Admin 57,144 54,178 52,932
Admin Charges to be Recovered 776,369 838,995 1,043,979
Cost Per EDU 8.083 8.752 10.753
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
14 of 21
-
CITY OF POWAY
ANALYSIS OF
WATER & SEWER RATES
FY 95/96
.( FY 94.95
Description FY 93.94 FY 95.9E
I
POWAY SEWER SYSTEM USE
Sewer Pumping 190,370 198,350 224,750
Sewer Collection 371,020 330,900 345,530
Less Other Revenues (62,980 (66,510 (30,950
Total Costs to be Recovered 498,410 462,740 539,330
Cost Per EDU 5.189 4.827 5.555
Apply Interest Earned and Rate Stabilization (1,270,950 (1,284,873 (570,000
Funds to Stabilize Rates ....
Cost Per EDU ($13.233 ($13.403 ($5.871
TOTAL COST RECOVERED $5,168,239 $5.486,422 $4,994,301
TOTAL COST PER EDU $40.58 $43.83 $45.57
Percentaae Chanae 11.42% 8.01% 3.98%
ASSUMPTIONS:
Cost projections for Metro Sewer/CWP for FY 95/96 program based upon
Metro budget dated 6/20/95; future projections not available at this time.)
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
15 0 f 21
22-Jun-9S
CITY OF POWAY
RAW WATER SURCHARGE
FY 1995-96
Customer Services $468,400
Less Meter Read Costs (149990)
$318,410
50% to Water Fund $159,205
Water Fund Allocation/12, 119 A.F. Sales $13.12
Telemetry Costs Directly Related
to Stone Ridge $4,272
95-96 Allocated Sales to Stone Ridge 372
Telemetry Costs/372 A.F. $11.48
Subtotal Surcharge Fees $24.61
15% Overhead ~
Total Raw Water Surcharge/A.F. $28 30
ATTACHMENT D
16 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
-
--
RESOLUTION NO. 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA
ESTABLISHING WATER RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 94-079
WHEREAS, it is necessary to retain the pumping charges for Service
Areas; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to retain the basic water service charges for
various meter sizes; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish water rates for fiscal year
1993-1994;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway:
Section 1. That the water rate schedule is hereby established as follows
for all water billed on the first full billing cycle after July 1, 1995:
Service Type Charge Per Un it
1100 cubic feet)
Water Use Rate
The basic water rate for all classes of service
including agriculture and agriculture/domestic
shall eaual" (per unit) $1. 663
Pumoino Charoes
Water Customers within the areas specified below
shall pay a bimonthly pumping charge for service
from a water reservoir:
Improvement District No. I $0.200
Improvement District No.4 0.055
Orchard A-73, Silver Saddle 0.082
Donart 0.150
Service Area VI 0.130
Assessment District 79-1 0.100
Community Pump Station 0.150
Welton 0.150
17 of 21 ATTACHMENT E JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
----- ------....--..-
Resolution No. 95-
Page 2
Service Charge
Basic Water Service Char~es
All water customers shall pay a bimonthly basic
water service charge for water service based upon
meter size as follows:
Meter Size
5/8 inch $13.98
3/4 Inch 14.30
1 inch 15.33
1 1/2 inch 18.67
2 inch 24.27
2 1/2 inch 27.2B
3 inch 30.28
4 inch 37.74
6 inch 56.18
8 inch 96.47
Raw Water Rate
The basic raw water rate for raw water usage Actual cost of raw
water from SDCWA
(currently $432 per
acre foot) plus a
surchar~e of $28.30
Other Charaes
Restoration of Service $20 during normal
working hours;
$45.00 for weekends
or after or before
normal working
hours; $55.00 for
holidays
Delinquency 10 percent of
unpaid balance or
$25.00, whichever
is less
Returned Check $10.00
Agricultural Rebate for Qualified $0.259
Agricultural Users
18 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
Resolution No. 95-
Page 3
Section 2. That the setting of such charges and rates is categorically
exempt from the requirements of CEQA, pursuant to Sections 10BO(b)(4) and
(b)(8)(I)& (2) and Section 21060.3 of the Public Resources Code, and Title 14
of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15269(c) and 15273(a)(I) & (2)
and 15307.
Section 3. That Resolution No. 94-079 is hereby rescinded.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway,
California, at a regular meeting thereof this 27th day of June, 1995.
Don Higginson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 95- was duly adopted by the City
Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 27th day of June, 1995,
and that it was so adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk
City of Poway
JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11 I
19 of 21
--------- -------- -------
RESOLUTION NO. 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA
AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
AND ESTABLISHING SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 94-080
WHEREAS, the City of Poway provides sewer service to citizens of Poway;
and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to increase the sewer service charge to provide
for the increased costs of sewer service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway:
Section 1. That a schedule of bimonthly sewer service charges is hereby
established for all sewer services billed on the first full billing cycle
after July 1, 1995:
Description Bimonthly
Charoe
Schedule of Bimonthlv Sewer Service Charoes
10.1 Single Family Residences $45.54
10.2 Multiple Dwelling per unit 45.54
10.3 Motel-Hotel Buildings, per unit 45.54
10.4 Trailer Parks & Mobile Home Sites, per unit 45.54
10.5 Rooming Houses, per unit 45.54
10.6 Schools (per each 21 average daily attendance) 45.54
10.7 Churches (each unit, capacity/l00 equals unit) 45.54
10.8 Residence-Business Combinations 45.54
10.8.1 Residence Portion 45.54
10.8.2 Business Portion (see 10.9.2 below) 45.54
10.9 Commercial, Industrial, Professional Buildings 45.54
10.9.1 Each separate business or activity that has sewer 45.54
facil ities
10.9.2 Commercial, Industrial or Professional Businesses 45.54
creating large volumes of wastewater, per unit of
8,000 gallons (The units of 8,000 gallons will be
based on monthly readings of water meters)
0.9.3 Public Restrooms, per unit 45.54
(A unit is defined as a separate space containing sanitation
facilities [toilet, urinal, floor drain, wash basin, shower,
janitorial deep sink, etc.,] with 4 or less fixtures in number. Those
spaces containing sanitation facilities in excess of 4 will be
considered as an additional unit for each 4 fixtures or portion
thereof. )
20 of 21 ATTACHMENT F JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
- -
Resolution No. 95-
Page 2
Descriotion Charae
10.9.4 Hospital, per bed $45.54
All service connections whose wastewater is serviced by wastewater pump
stations (including the Rancho Bernardo Pump Station> will be charged
$1.36jmonth surcharge for each pump station utilized.
Upon change of ownership, sewer charges will be prorated on a 60-day
billing period basis between old and new customer.
A delinquency fee of 10 percent of the unpaid balance or $25.00, whichever
is less, shall be charged on all accounts that remain unpaid for more than
30 days.
Section 2 Resolution No. 94-080 is hereby rescinded.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of
Poway, California, at a regular meeting thereof this 27th day of June, 1995.
Don Higginson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk
21 of 21 JUN 2 7 1995 ITEM 11
-~_._--~,_.- --- "~.-