HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Announcement of public information meeting on April 16, 1985 AME9CITY OF AME
II S, IOWA 500,0
515/232-6210
ALL-AMERICA CITY
1982-1983
ANNOUNCEMENT OF PUBLIC INFCRMATION MEETING
ON NEW?ATFR POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT PROJELT
AND PROPOSED SEWER RATE INCREASE
Tuesday, April 16, 1985 - 7:00 p.m.
Ames City Council Chambers
621 Main Street
Dear Ames Resident: April 5, 1985
I would like to ask your help in disseminating information about a very
important meeting coming up Tuesday, April 16th, which affects all Ames
citizens. You are invited to this meeting to discuss with City staff
plans for the new wastewater treatment plant and proposed rate schedules
to provide financing needed for the local share of construction cost.
Water Pollution Control Project. Planning for the WPC project began in
1975. A Facilities Plan (preliminary engineering report) was completed in
1979 and was approved by the City Council in 1979 and again in 1980. The
report recommended that a new wastewater treatment plant be built at a
site halfway between Ames and Cambridge. That plan was reviewed and
approved by state and federal agencies in 1981 and 1982.
It is anticipated that a federal grant will be received this summer or
fall and that construction of the interceptor serer to the site will begin
this winter. Construction of the new plant itself should begin late in
1986 with completion expected in the summer of 1988.
Sewer Rates. The federal grant is expected to cover approximately half of
construction costs, leaving the other half to be financed locally. Sewer
rates were raised 50% effective July 1984 in anticipation of this need.
The serer bill for a typical family of three is now $9.50 per month for
600 cu.ft/mo.
A staff report to be presented to Council on April 9th proposes an addi-
tional rate increase of 25% effective this July. This would raise the
typical sewer bill from $9.50 to approximately $12.00 per imnth. A fur-
ther increase to approximately $15.00 per month is anticipated for mid-
1986. The staff report outlines these two alternative rate proposals.
The saire result could be obtained by other combinations.
- Retain the minimum bill at $3.00 per month and raise the unit rate
from $1.30 to $1.70/100 cu.ft.
- Raise minimum bill to $3.50 and raise the unit rate from $1.30 to
$1.65/100 cu.ft.
It would be greatly appreciated if you would inform the other members of
your organization as well as your friends and neighbors of this very impor-
tant meeting. We look forward to seeing you on April 16th so that we can
explain has these projects will affect you personally.
Sincerely,IL N IiJQ�
.
Steven L. Schainker
City Manager
/lw
c: Mayor and City Council
PROJECTED SEWER SERVICE CHARGES IN FY 1988-89
Initial Year of New Treatment Plant Operation
Minimum Bill (IF NO ALLOWANCE) $1 .50/month
User Charge
For Wastewater Treatment $0.43/100 cu.ft.
For Sewer Eng'g. + Maint. 0.39/100 cu.-Ft.
For Debt Service 1 .38/100 cu. ft.
TOTAL $2.201100 cu.ft.
Typical Bill for Family of 3, for 600 cu.ft./month:
Minimum Charge $ 1 .50
User Charge, 600 cu.ft. @ $2.201100 cu.ft. 13.20
TOTAL CHARGE $14.70/month
Typical Bill in Present Format:
Minimum Bill (INCLUDING 100 CU.FT. ALLOWANCE)
($1 .50 + $2.20) $ 3.70
User Charge, next 500 cu.ft. @ $2.20/100 11 .00
TOTAL CHARGE $14.70/month
INCREASED SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
CITY OF AMES, IOWA
rxvvzi
AMES
Betty Jo Harker, Director, Finance Department
Alice Martin, Assistant Director, Finance Department
Thomas W. Neumann, Assistant Director, Water & Pollution Control Department
Harris F. Seidel , Director, Water & Pollution Control Department
Partners in T.P.I .R. Consultants, Ltd.
April 1985
•
r 1 -
INCREASED SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
• CITY OF AMES, IOWA
April 1985
Outline
Introduction and Scope
History of Sewer Service Charges
Contractual Agreements
- Iowa State University
- National Animal Disease Center
- City of Kelley
- Contract Amendments
Wastewater Volumes Billed
• New Water Pollution Control Project
- Facilities Plan
- Changes in the Grant Environment
- Elements of Project
Financial Capability
- Revenue
- Expense
- Proposed Bond Issue
- Cash Flow Projection
Rate Proposals
- Present Billing Pattern and Yield
- Specific Proposals
- Effect on Consumers' Bills
• Introduction and Scope
The purpose of this report is to outline a proposed rate increase which
is the second in a series of rate increases needed to support construction of
a 66-inch interceptor sewer to the new water pollution control plant site and
a new treatment plant there.
This project is the realization of a Facilities Plan first approved by
(then) Iowa DEQ in December 1981 and by U.S. EPA in early 1982. An updated
Facilities Plan Addendum was submitted to Iowa DWAWM in December 1984.
Approval is expected in the spring of 1985. It is anticipated that Ames will
receive a grant offer in federal FY 1984-85, or more specifically in late
summer of 1985. This grant offer will be contingent on our being ready to
proceed to construction. This includes the financial base to support our
• share of the cost.
Present sewer revenue comes from two types of customer billing. The
first, which is based on the established rate schedule, includes all
customers with City sewer service except Iowa State University, the National
Animal Disease Center, and the City of Kelley. These three customers are all
billed through individual contracts under which they pay actual treatment
costs plus appropriate overheads based on metered wastewater flow volumes.
Since these three contract customers are not affected by ordinance rate
changes, this rate proposal will deal only with usage, billing, and revenue
for those customers covered by the conventional rate schedule.
•
• History of Sewer Service Charges
The first sewer service charge enacted by the City of Ames went into
effect in December 1946. This was in advance of construction of the present
waste treatment plant which was a joint effort of the City and Iowa State
University. The money was used for construction and to help support a bond
issue for the City's share of the project. The rate remained the same until
the next increase in the fall of 1958.
In 1971 a new sewer service rate schedule was enacted which included a
number of changes. One result was to bring the number and range of rate steps
into agreement with the water rate schedule adopted in 1969. A multiple
dwelling rate feature was added, similar to that initiated for water in 1970.
Perhaps the most interesting change was a summer beautification rate
• which eased the blow for summer watering. While still having to pay for all
water used during the summer months, customers were relieved of sewer charges
on the excess water, based on a computer comparison with previous winter
water use.
The summer beautification rate was canceled in July 1977 as part of the
same ordinance which included water conservation measures and use
restrictions. This was a part of the community' s response to the severe
1976-77 local drought.
A modest adjustment in sewer service charges was enacted in December
1973, primarily with the purpose of reducing the minimum bill and the
allowance on the minimum bill , again corresponding to changes made in the
water rate schedule. The result was a reduction in sewer service revenue of
about two percent.
In the spring of 1979, the City Council enacted an ordinance providing
• for a two-stage sewer rate increase. The first stage, effective with bills
paid beginning in July 1979, provided approximately 72 percent increase in
revenue yield. The second stage became effective with bills paid starting in
January 1980 and provided an additional 32 percent increase in yield. Taken
together, these two increases resulted in approximately 125 percent rise in
revenue for the same billing volume.
The 1979-80 rate increase also represented a departure from the
traditional declining block rate structure which had been used since 1958.
After the first 100 cubic feet, the rate became a flat or uniform amount per
100 cubic feet regardless of the volume used.
The 1984 rate adjustment represented an increase of approximately 50
percent. The monthly minimum bill for an allowance of 100 cubic feet per
• month was raised from $2.00 to $3.00. The unit rate for all use above 100
cubic feet per month was raised from $0.86 to $1 .30/100 cubic feet. The rate
ordinance was passed by Council in final form on May 15, 1984, effective with
collection beginning in July.
i
Sewer Service Charge Schedules
Ames, Iowa
Adopted
• December 1946
(in effect) First 5,000 cu ft/mo $0. 10/100 cu ft
All over 5,000 cu ft/mo 0.05/100 cu ft
Minimum Bill (500 cu ft allowance) - $0. 50/mo
September 1958
First 500 cu ft/mo $0. 201100 cu ft
Next 500 0. 16
Next 4,000 0. 14
All over 5,000 0. 10
Minimum Bill (500 cu ft allowance) - $1.00/mo
March 1971
(effective May 1971)
First 300 cu ft/mo $0.667/100 cu ft
Next 700 0.38
• Next 9,000 0. 28
Next 90,000 0. 22
Next 400,000 0. 20
All over 500,000 0. 16
Minimum Bill (300 cu ft allowance) - $2.00/mo
Multiple Dwelling Rate - $1. 50/unit ; 300 cu ft allowance
Summer Beautification Rate for Residential Customers:
"Water usage billed during the summer months , May through
October, in excess of the monthly average billed during
the previous winter months, November through April , shall
not be charged for sanitary sewer service. "
December 1973
First 200 cu ft/mo $0.75/100 cu ft
Next 200 0.40
Next 600 0.38
Next 9,000 0.28
Next 90,000 0.22
Next 400,000 0.20
All over 500,000 0. 16
Minimum Bill (200 cu ft allowance) - $1. 50/mo
Multiple Dwelling Rate - $1. 25/unit ; 200 cu ft allowance/unit
July 1977
Sumner Beautification Rate Canceled as Conservation Measure
Sewer Service Charge Schedule continued
April 1979
• (effective July 1979)
First 100 cu ft/mo $2.00/100 cu ft
All over 100 0.60
Minimum Bill (100 cu ft allowance) $2.00/mo
(effective January 1980)
First 100 cu ft/mo $2.00/100 cu ft
All over 100 0.86
Minimum Bill (100 cu ft allowance) $2.00/mo
May 1984
(effective July 1984)
First 100 cu ft/mo $3.00/100 cu ft
All over 100 1 .30
Minimum Bill (100 cu ft allowance) $3.00/mo
History of Sewer Service Charges
(assuming single-family water use of 600 cu ft/month)
• Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Sewer SerVice Bill Consumer rice Index jus a or
Rate Date for 600 cu ft Base Year 1967 - 100 (Col . 1 _ Col . 2)
Dec. 1946 $ .60 58.5 $1 .03
Sept. 1958 1 . 16 86.6 1 .34
May 1971 3. 14 121 .3 2.59
Dec. 1973 3.06 133.1 2.30
July 1979 5.00 218.9 2.28
Jan. 1980 6.30 233.2 2.70
June 1980 6.30 247.6 2.54
Dec. 1980 6.30 258.4 2.44
June 1981 6.30 271 .3 2.32
Dec. 1981 6.30 281 .5 2.24
July 1982 6.30 292.2 2. 16
Dec. 1982 6.30 292.4 2. 15
July 1983 6.30 299.3 2. 10
Dec. 1983 6.30 303.5 2.08
Feb. 1984 6.30 305.2 2.06
July 1984 9.50
Dec. 1984 9.50
• Contractual Agreements
Iowa State University
In 1947 the City of Ames and Iowa State University entered into an
agreement for a joint effort on wastewater treatment. Each had dealt with
this problem separately for decades before. In fact, the initial treatment
plants built by ISU on campus in 1898 and by the City in 1904 at the present
site of University Inn were among the earliest in the country.
The 1947 contract provided for sharing the cost of the new joint
treatment facility placed in service in the fall of 1950. The sharing of
both capital and operating costs was to be based on proportion of flow
contributed by each party, and this continues to the present as the key
element in this agreement. A 1972 amendment provided for payment of
• operating costs by ISU to the City on a monthly basis rather than annually as
before.
National Animal Disease Center
A generally similar agreement was negotiated with the USDA in 1959 for
utility services to NADC. The initial agreement provided for billing
operating cost charges based on flow and strength of the effluent from the
NADC site. However, since effluent strength has been consistently very
similar to domestic waste strength, the agreement was amended in 1971 to
provide for charges by the City based on volume of waste alone. Strength
charges can be reinstated at any time if waste characteristics change
sufficiently to make this necessary.
•
• City of Kelley
In the fall of 1975, a contract was signed with the City of Kelley which
was developed in a similar manner. Payment is made monthly based on
estimated operating cost and volume contributed.
Construction of the Kelley sewer system was completed in the late fall
of 1978. From a pumping station in Kelley, wastewater is discharged through
a 4-inch force main northward along the county road to the intersection of
State and Oakwood, then by gravity line down to the Worle Creek sewer.
For all three contracts, waste treatment charges are adjusted to actual
costs following each fiscal year, eliminating any concern over which party is
temporarily ahead of the other.
Contract Amendments
All three contracts are currently being reviewed and revised to bring
• them into conformance with EPA grant regulations and for general updating.
Each will be brought to the City Council for review and acceptance.
In each case, the basic concepts will continue unchanged. EPA's primary
requirement in this area is that all users share in operating, maintenance,
and replacement costs in proportion to their actual use of the facilities.
Also, it is necessary that the City of Ames clearly have the right and
obligation to develop and maintain a system of user charges to accomplish
this.
•
• Wastewater Volumes Billed
A summary of wastewater volumes billed over the last 16-year period is
presented. Volume billed to NADC is based on records from a continuous flow
metering station at the southwest corner of the site on Dayton Avenue. These
data are of particular interest because they show the dramatic effect of a
steady and continuing water conservation effort at this facility. This
conservation program was planned and directed by Jack Kennedy, former Chief
Engineer of NADC.
Wastewater flow from the ISU central campus is measured at a
continuously recording meter installation at Beach and Lincoln Way. In
addition, the wastewater contribution (based on metered water use) from all
other facilities is added to the flow discharged from central campus to
• provide the total wastewater volume shown in the attached table. This
involves some 16 separate facilities including the Iowa State Center, Vet Med
group, all off-campus housing, and ISU farms.
All other customers are billed on the rate structure as established by
City ordinance. Metered water use is the basis for billing. The severe
drought of 1976-1977 was responsible first for unusually high water use as
the drought was developing and then sharply reduced water use in response to
water conservation measures.
After several "normal " years, a modest drop in water use was again
experienced in FY 1981-82 because of conservation measures in the summer and
fall of 1981 , followed by plenty of precipitation in the spring of 1982.
•
WASTEWATER VOLUMES BILLED
• Ames, Iowa
All in million cu ft per year
ISU, All Other
NADC Kelley All Facilities Customers
Year (by Contract) (by Contract) (by Contract) (Rate Schedule)
Cal . 1968 8.7 65.4 96.0
1969 10.2 67. 1 94.6
1970 9.2 67.0 103.2
1971 9. 1 67.9 109.0
1972 8.4 69.0 95.3
1973 8. 1 67.4 101 .3
1974 7.0 60.5 101 . 1
Cal . 1975 6.4 64.2 1092 (e)
FY 1975-76 5.5 65.4 1132 (e)
• 1976-77 5.0 70.5 132.5
1977-78 4.9 67.8 109.7
1978-79 6.3 .2 75.5 121 .7
1979-80 5.3 .6 75.2 128.3
1980-81 3.9 .6 71 .2 136.2
1981-82 4. 1 1 . 1 67.6 128.8
1982-83 5. 1 1 . 1 72.3 132.6
1983-84 5.2 1 .4 72.8 143.4
1984-85 4 (e) 1 (e) 72 (e) 140 (e)
•
New Water Pollution Control Project
•
Facilities Plan
Engineering work on a Facilities Plan for a new treatment plant was
first completed in 1979. Required public hearings were held, and Council
voted unanimously to accept the project and proceed, following regulatory
approvals. At the request of EPA, a series of four public participation
hearings were held in the spring of 1980. The additional questions raised
required additional engineering and site review. Finally, in December 1981,
the Iowa DEQ issued its letter of approval for the Facilities Plan as
completed two years earlier. This was followed by a FONSI (Finding of No
Significant Impact) statement by EPA in early 1982.
In 1984 it became necessary to update the Facilities Plan because of the
• 5-year interval since its completion in 1979. This included bringing all
cost estimates up to date and recalculating the cost per local household to
reflect the change in federal grant support from 75 percent to 55 percent of
eligible project costs. The cost effectiveness of each alternative was again
evaluated, resulting in confirmation of the selection of a new plant at the
new site downstream. A further review of technical options resulted in
modification of the treatment method to the TF/SC or trickling filter/solids
contact process. The Facilities Plan Addendum was submitted to DWAWM in
December 1984, and approval is expected in the spring of 1985.
The completed Facilities Plan consists of a trunk sewer to a new site
approximately 412 miles downstream and a complete new water pollution control
plant on that site. The new plant is planned for approximately twice the
present capacity of the existing plant and will be designed for much higher
• treatment efficiencies. Total estimated cost of the project was $27.8
million based on fourth quarter 1978 estimating costs.
Changes in the Grant Environment
• For a number of years, eligible water pollution control projects
received 75 percent federal grant funding, although the delays in such
funding seemed interminable. In recent years, major changes have been made
in the rules of this game. Four years ago, federal grant funding was
blocked, then authorized again; informed judgment seems to be that such
grants may be completely terminated in the next several years.
However, cities with pollution control problems will still be under a
mandate to meet a 1988 deadline for compliance even if this must be done
essentially with local funds.
During the last year, the administration of the wastewater construction
grant program in Iowa underwent either an "agonizing reappraisal " or a
"return to reason and equity", depending on the viewpoint. Suffice it to say
that the return to an emphasis on pollution control needs, as expressed in
• DWAWM's priority points rating system, elevated the Ames project from No.
"nowhere" and 1992 scheduling to No. 2 right behind Des Moines and the
probability of funding within the next year.
The current priority list shows Ames eligible to receive $3.85 million
grant support in federal FY 1985 and $4.4 million in FY 1986. Since the
needs of the Des Moines project are so large, the best we can hope for in
subsequent years would be continuation of grant funding at the level of $4.4
million per year until completion sometime in 1988.
i
Elements of Project
• The project will include two major elements.
1 . Construction of a 66-inch interceptor trunk sewer from the
present plant to the new plant site. The design of the
interceptor was done by City engineering staff, and the work
of obtaining easements along the route is nearly complete.
2. Construction of a complete new secondary treatment plant at
the new site. RCM Associates, Inc. , the consulting
engineering firm which prepared the Facilities Plan was
authorized in January 1985 to begin the design process, and
work has begun on preparation of plans and specifications.
Estimated construction costs based on June 1984 estimating data are
summarized as follows:
Interceptor Sewer $ 5.76 million
• Treatment Plant 20.87
Land 1 .00
Contingencies, Eng'g. ,
Legal , Admin. , Etc. 5.40
TOTAL $33.03 million
Financial Capability
•
Revenue
Recent and current revenues are shown in Table 1 . As mentioned earlier,
revenues from NADC, ISU, and Kelley are based on sharing of actual operating
costs, then calculated on proportion of flow contributed by each to the
plant.
The large increase in revenue budgeted for FY 1985-86 is predicted from
an assumed 25 percent rate increase for regular billing customers. This is
in accordance with information previously provided to the City Council during
budget and planning sessions.
Similar increases are not shown for contract customers. However, they
do participate in capital costs, as well as operating costs, and will
eventually also be paying their fair proportionate share of impending
construction costs.
Expense
Recent and current expenses are shown in Table 2. Wastewater treatment
operation has traditionally been the major expense item in the Sewer Fund,
but each year more of the public works and administrative support activities
are financed from this "cash cow".
Two major land acquisitions have been made and both completely paid for.
The 257-acre Wagner farm was purchased in 1981 for $783,850, and final
payment was made in January 1984. A 40-acre wooded tract was purchased from
Terry Hathaway in 1982 for which complete payment of $84,750 was made at the
time. Final settlement for the Banks property will complete plant site
acquisition.
TABLE 1
• WPC - Sewer Utility Fund
Revenue Summary - $1 ,000' s
FY FY FY FY FY
1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86
Meter Sales (estimated) ( ub dgeted)
Regular Billing 1 ,234 1 ,330 1 ,426 1 ,950 2,500*
NADC Contract 19 13 17 30 60
ISU Contract 130 116 131 120 126
Kelley Contract 4 3 4 3 5
TOTAL BILLING 1 ,387 1 ,462 1 ,578 2, 103 2,691
Other Revenues
Interest Earned 229 179 209 90 90
Farm Land Rental 3 42 22 25 25
Miscellaneous 5 6 17 21 21
EPA Grant Participation 18 - - - 7, 175
• (55% of eligible costs) -
ISU Capital Participation 5 40 + +
(est. 25% of local 45%,
= 114% of total costs)
Sale of Revenue Bonds - - - - 4,650
TOTAL NON-BILLING 260 227 288 136 11 ,961
GRAND TOTAL REVENUES 1 ,647 1 ,689 1 ,866 2,239 14,652
* Assuming 25% rate increase effective June 21 , 1985
+ ISU indicates it may pay its share through amortization payments rather than up-front
capital participation.
•
TABLE 2
WPC - Sewer Utility Fund
• Expense Summary - $1 ,000's
FY FY FY FY
1982-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86
(es�ima ed) (Tucge ed)
Operations
WPC-Wastewater Treatment 140 292 328 168 174
Supporting Plant Operations 135 14 17 206 198
P.Works-Sanit. Engineering 51 41 82 88 92
Sanit. Sewer Maint. 76 86 105 82 92
Finance-Customer Services 76 82 88 93 99
Other finance Services 25 28 35 37 40
General Administration 194 174 173 207 201
Depreciation — 67 74 81 119 399
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 764 791 909 1 ,000 1 ,295
Non-Operating Expenses
Interest Expense 21 31 11 -- --
Transfer to Internal Service
and other funds 72 11 4 -- --
0 TOTAL NON-OPERATING EXPENSES 93 42 15 -- --
TOTAL EXPENSES 857 833 924 1 ,000 1 ,295
Capital Improvements
Land Acquisition 868 -- 2 15 15
Plant Maintenance 62 81 23 52 20
WPC Plant 8 15 2 -- --
Sanit. Sewer Rehab. 92 62 187 114 100
Infrastructure Study 57 -- -- -- --
F.D. Conversion 1 1 24 100 100
Treatment Impr./Pumping -- 5 -- -- --
Outfall Sewer -- 228 -- -- --
WPC Plant Construction -- -- 266 2,630 13,800
TOTAL CAPITAL 1 ,088 392 504 2,911 14,035
GRAND TOTAL EXPENSES 1 ,945 1 ,225 1 ,428 3,911 15,330
•
• The amount shown in FY 1985-86 for WPC Plant construction is $13.8
million. This includes $5.0 million for the Interceptor Sewer and $8.8
million for the Treatment Plant, all as shown in the Capital Improvements
Plan approved earlier by the City Council . It is not possible to predict at
this writing how closely actual construction outlays will match those
estimates.
•
Proposed Bond Issue
• In preparing the FY 1985-86 budget for the activities included in the
Sewer Fund, a revenue bond issue of $4,650,000 was proposed. This was in
recognition of the need for borrowing to support project construction, while
acknowledging that the size of the bond issue needed was subject to many
uncertainties at that time.
To be consistent with the approved budget, the bond issue is still
assumed to be $4,650,000. It appears that it will not be needed until late
1985. The actual size of the bond issue can then be determined based on
construction underway, grant participation, and our cash position.
Therefore, no speculation is included here on interest rate, term, etc.
•
Cash Flow Projection
• A simplified cash flow projection for recent and current years is
presented in Table 3. It is based on revenues and expenses as shown in the
two previous tables.
Thanks to recent rate increases, the Sewer Fund is in strong position;
and we are well able to move into project construction now that the grant
arrow has come to rest on our number. Even after purchase of the Wagner and
Hathaway properties, a special transfer of $1 , 197,246 was made in December
1982 to a Sewer Reserve Trust Fund specifically designated for this project.
Another $537,635 was added to the Trust Fund after audit of FY 1982-83. With
interest, this Trust Fund now has $2 million available for transfer back as
needed for project costs.
It will be necessary to maintain a fairly strong level of working
capital during the coming years to deal with contract payments and possible
slow reimbursment of grant participation funds.
TABLE 3
WPC - Sewer Utility Fund
• Cash Flow Projection - $1,000's
FY FY FY FY FY
1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86
(es ima ed) ( u�g_ef_ed)
Beginning Balance 1 ,538 1 ,664 802 438 [999]
Cash Inflows
Metered Sales 1 ,391 1 ,446 1 ,535 2,038 2,603
Other Operating 19 47 69 53 46
Non-Operating 218 215 195 106 90
Grants
EPA Participation - - - - 7,175
Transfers
From Sewer Reserve Tr.Fund - - - - 2,000
Bond Issue
Proposed - - - - 4,650
TOTAL CASH INFLOWS 1 ,628 1 ,708 1 ,799 2, 197 16,564
Cash Outflows
Operations 718 688 814 893 894
Capital Improvements 713 599 667 2,630 12,923
Debt Service 51 41 21 - -
Transfer to Int.Svc.& Other 21 11 4 - -
Transfers
To Sewer Reserve Tr. Fund - 1 ,231 657 111 -
TOTAL CASH OUTFLOWS 1 ,503 2,570 2, 163 3,634 13,817
Ending Balance 1 ,663 802 438 [999] 1 ,748
•
Rate Proposals
•
Present Billing Pattern and Yield
A summary of various statistical data with regard to the present rate
structure and revenue result is presented in Table 4. The data include the
number of customers in an array of use categories (200-400 cu. ft./mo. for
example) . These rate blocks are no longer used in billing, but they were
retained in the data processing system and are of value in rate and revenue
analysis.
Also shown are average use and average bill for customers in each
category and total billing in cubic feet and dollar amount. The data shown
are based on the average of recent winter months. The present rate comprises
a $3 minimum bill for the first 100 cubic feet per month, then a uniform rate
of $1 .30/100 cubic feet for all use above the minimum amount. As shown at
• the bottom of Table 4, the average yield from this rate schedule applied to
all customers is $1 .45/100 cubic feet billed.
TABLE 4
• Sewer Service Customer Billing
(Except ISU and NADC Contracts)
Present Rate Schedule
$3.00 Min. Bill , then $1 .30/100 cu ft
Composite Use Pattern Nov. 1984 - Feb. 1985
Total Total
Rate No. of Avg. Cu.Ft./ Billed, Avg. Bill Billed,
Block Customers Customer Cu.Ft./Mo. $/Customer $/Month
Misc.-S 10 -- --
S-Min-A
(0-100 cf/mo) 800 -- 70,000 3.00 (min) 2,400
S-Min-B
(100-200) 600 135(e) 80,000 3.45 2,070
S-1
(200-400) 1 ,700 306 520,000 5.68 9,660
S-2
(400-1000) 4,850 666 3,230,000 10.36 50,250
i
(lA-10M 2,000 2,075 4, 150,000 28.68 57,360
(10M-100M) 135 20,000 2,700,000 261 .70 35,330
(100M-500M) 5 170,000 850,000 2,212.00 11 ,060
S-6
(Over 500M) 0
(ISU & NADC)
TOTALS 10, 100 11 ,600,000 $168, 100
Yield - $1 .45/100 cu ft
Specific Proposals
• As stated earlier, the objective of this second rate increase is to
achieve a 25 percent increase in regular billing revenue. This is consistent
with the financial plan presented during budget review the last two years and
is intended to be made effective late June 1985 so that its effect will cover
the next full fiscal year.
Rate Proposal A. This proposal holds the minimum bill at $3 but
increases the uniform rate for all use above the minimum 100 cubic foot
allowance to $1 .70/100 cu. ft. As shown in Table 5, this is sufficient to
raise the yield to $1 .81/100 cu. ft. and to meet the 25 percent target
increase.
Rate Proposal B. In this proposal , the minimum bill is increased to
$3.50 per month for the first 100 cu. ft. , and the uniform rate of $1 .65/100
cu. ft. is established for all use above that allowance. As shown in Table
6, this will also provide the desired 25 percent increase in revenue. Many
other combinations would meet this objective as well .
Effect on Consumers' Bills
Tables 7 and 8 are designed to show the present monthly bill for an
array of monthly use amounts or quantities; the new or increased monthly bill
resulting from the proposed rate increase; and the percent increase at that
use level . Again, many other combinations are possible. However, under
current EPA regulations, a uniform rate to all users is a requirement.
•
TABLE 5
• Sewer Service Customer Billing
(Except ISU and NADC Contracts)
Rate Proposal A
$3.00 Min. Bill , then $1 .70/100 cu ft
Total Total
Rate No. of Avg. Cu.Ft./ Billed, Avg. Bill Billed,
Block Customers Customer Cu.Ft./Mo. $/Customer $/Month
Misc.-S 10 -- --
S-Min-A
(0-199 cf/mo) 800 -- 70,000 3.00 (min) 2,400
S-Min-B
(100-200) 600 135(e) 80,000 3.60 2, 160
S-1
(200-400) 1 ,700 306 520,000 6.50 11 ,050
S-2
(400-1000) 4,850 666 3,230,000 12.62 61,200
S-A
(1 -1OM) 2,000 2,075 4, 150,000 36.58 73, 160
• ri-1 M
(1 O 1 3 5 20 000 2 70 1( 00 ) 0,000 34 .30 46,080
S-5 M M
(100 -500 ) 5 170,000 850,000 2,891 .00 14,450
S-6
(Over 500h1) 0
(ISU & NADC)
TOTALS 10, 100 11 ,600,000 $210,500
Yield = $1 .81/100 cu ft
•
TABLE 6
• Sewer Service Customer Billing
(Except ISU and NADC Contracts)
Rate Proposal B
$3.50 Min. Bill , then $1 .65/100 cu ft
R Total Total
Rate
No. of Avg. Cu.Ft./ Billed, Avg. Bill Billed,
Block Customers Customer Cu.Ft./Mo.
$/Customer $/Month
Misc.-S 10
S-Min-A
(0-100 cf/mo) 800 -- 70,000 3.50 (min) 2,800
S-Min-B
(100-200) 600 135(e) 80,000 4.08
2,450
S-1
(200-400) 1 ,700 306 520,000 6.90
11 ,730
S-2
(400-1000) 4,850 666 3,230,000 12.84 62,270
S-A
( 1 -10M) 2,000 2,075 4, 150 000
36.09 72, 180
M(1O -100�1) 135 20,000 2,700 000
331 .85 44,800
S-5
(100M-500M) 5 170,000 850,000 2,807.00 14,030
S-6
(Over 500r�) 0
(ISU & NADC)
TOTALS 10, 100 11 ,600,000
$210,200
Yield = $1 .81/100 cu ft
•
TABLE 7
Sewer Service Rate Proposal A
Minimum Bill remains at $3.00/month for the first 100 cu. ft./month.
For all use after the first 100 Cu. ft. , the uniform rate is $1 .70/100 cu.ft.
Quantity Monthly Bill Monthly Bill
Cu. Ft./Month Under Present Rate Under Proposed Rate$ 3.00 Increase
0 $ 3.00 (min) _
(min) _
100 3.00 (min)
3.00 (min) __
200 4.30 4.70
300 9
5.60 6.40 14
400 6.90 8. 10 500 17
8.20 9.80 19
600 9.50 11 .50
700 21
10.80 13.20 22
800 12. 10 14.90
900 23
13.40 16.60 24
1 ,000 14.70 18.30
1 ,500 25
•
21 .20 26.80 26 2,000 27.70 35.30
3,000 27
40.70 52.30 28
4,000 53.70 69.30
5,000 29
66.70 86.30 29
6,000 79.70 103.30
8,000 30
105.70 137.30 30
10,000 131 .70 171 .30
12,000 30
157.70 205.30 30
15,000 196.70 256.30
18,000 30
235.70 307.30 30
20,000 261 .70 341 .30
25,000 30
327 426 30
30,000 392 511
40,000 30
522 681 30
50,000 652 851
60,000 31
782 1 ,021 31
80,000 1 ,042 1 ,361
100,000 31
1 ,302 1 ,701 31
200,000 2,602
3,401 31
300,000 3,902
5, 101 31
TftBLE 8
Sewer Service Rate Proposal B
• Minimum Bill increased to $3.50/month for the first 100 cu. ft./month.
For all use after the first 100 cu. ft. , the uniform rate is $1 .65/100 cu.ft.
Quantity Monthly Bill Monthly Bill
Cu. Ft./Month Under Present Rate Under Proposed Rate Increase
0 $ 3.00 (min)
$ 3.50 (min) 17
100 3.00 (min) 3.50 (min)
17
200
4.30 5. 15 20
300 5.60 6.80
21
400
6.90 8.45 22
500 8.20 10. 10
600 23
9.50 11 .75 24
700 10.80 13.40
24
800 12. 10 15.05
24
900 13.40 16.70
25
1 ,000 14.70 18.35
25
1 ,500 21 .20 26.60
25
2,000 27.70 34.85
3,000 26
• 40.70 51 .35 26
4,000 53.70 67.85
26
5,000 66.70 84.35
26
6,000 79.70 100.85
8,000 27
105.70 133.85 27
10,000 131 .70 166.85
12,000 27
157.70 199,85 27
15,000 196.70 249.35
18,000 23 27
5.70 298.85 27
20,000 261 .70 331 .85
25,000 32 27
7 414 27
30,000 392 497
40,000 27
522 662 27
50,000 652 827
60,000 78 27
2 991 27
80,000 1 ,042 1 ,322
100,000 27
1 ,302 1 ,652 27
200,000 2,602 3,302
300,000 27
3,902 4,952 27