Utilities Rate Advisory Commission Meeting on October 26, 2011
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Utilities Rate Advisory Commission Meeting on October 26, 2011
The Utilities Rate Advisory Commission met on October 26, 2011, at 5:33 p.m. at New City Hall. The meeting featured extensive informational workshops on the City's water and wastewater systems, infrastructure challenges, a community engagement program, and a proposed long-term capital improvement and rate plan. Commissioners also elected a new Vice Chair and heard public testimony.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes (March 9, 2011): Approved unanimously.
Discussion Items
- Selection of Commission Vice Chair: Karen McBride nominated Douglas Brown; seconded by Scott Brown. Douglas Brown was elected Vice Chair unanimously. (Commission Chair Steven Archibald left after the vote.)
- Water Workshop: Staff presented a water system overview, including water rights (senior pre-1914 rights, 326,000 acre-feet), two treatment plants (Sacramento River and Fairbairn), 27 groundwater wells, and ~1,750 miles of pipe. Aging infrastructure was highlighted: the treatment plant is over 80 years old, 22% of distribution pipes exceed 70 years, and replacement values total billions. Per capita water use has dropped to 204 gallons/day (from a baseline of 278), attributed to conservation, metering, and the recession. Current average monthly bill is about $34, among the lowest in the region. Wholesale water potential could generate up to $20 million annually.
- Wastewater Workshop: The City operates two systems: a combined sewer system (7,000 acres, built early 1900s) and a separated system. The combined system handles sewage and stormwater together; thanks to $150 million in upgrades, combined sewer overflows occur only about 3-5 times per year and have occurred once in the last five years. Aging infrastructure is severe: nearly 80% of combined sewer pipes exceed 70 years old. The City faces a lawsuit from the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance over sanitary sewer overflows. Regulatory mandates (SSMP, NPDES) drive capital needs. Replacement value for the combined system is $1.4 billion; separated system $1 billion.
- Community Engagement Program: Jessica Hess presented the "Your Utilities. Your Voice." campaign. Phase 1 included a survey of over 1,144 residents, 19 community meetings, and a new website. Customer satisfaction averaged 7 out of 10. Guiding principles (e.g., competitive rates, infrastructure investment, efficiency) scored an average importance of 8.48 out of 10. Phase 2 will feature facility tours (e.g., Sump 2 on Nov. 5), Prop 218 notice, and rate workshops.
- Water and Wastewater Program (Financial/CIP): Dave Brent and Bill B. presented a 5-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and a 3-year rate proposal. Current replacement cycles are unsustainable (water: ~400 years; wastewater: ~650 years); the goal is a 100-year cycle. The 5-year CIP totals $350 million for water (including $125M for meters, $170M for treatment plant rehab, and $53M for best-practice pipe replacement) and $64 million for wastewater ($43M for combined system mandates, $10.5M for separated system, $10M for best-practice rehab). The plan emphasizes proactive investment, efficiency gains (50 positions eliminated, $3M in operational cuts), and maintaining local control over rates. Debt financing and grant seeking are key. Next steps: Council workshop Nov. 8, Commission meeting Nov. 14, Prop 218 notice Dec. 1, rate hearing Jan. 18, 2012 council adoption.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Greg Hatfield (Executive Vice President, IN Sacramento) raised several questions and requests: 1) Whether the 12th Street pipe removal was related to RT realignment (staff: it was not). 2) Requested an explanation of property tax payments by a utility. 3) Confirmed the City receives $550,000 in one-time First Five funding for fluoridation. 4) Requested a chart overlaying pipe failure rates by age category over the last five years. 5) Questioned the $14 million well rehabilitation cost, noting that groundwater is less used now. 6) Requested the total outreach program cost excluding staff salaries. 7) Contended that past rate increases intended for capital were not used for that purpose, as evidenced by aging pipes still in place. Staff responded to several points and committed to follow up on others.
Key Outcomes
- Vice Chair Elected: Douglas Brown unanimously selected as Vice Chair.
- Information Received and Filed: The Water Workshop, Wastewater Workshop, Community Engagement Program, and Water and Wastewater Program were all received and filed.
- Commissioner Requests: Staff will provide granular data on pipe age breakdowns, failure rate comparisons, and details on well rehabilitation needs. Commissioners requested facility tours and inclusion of commission meetings in the City's email blasts; staff confirmed these will be arranged.
- Follow-up Actions: Staff to report back on public comment questions regarding property tax, outreach costs, and historical capital spending. The next commission meeting is scheduled for November 14, 2011.
Meeting Transcript
The hour of five thirty three having arrived. Um we're going to determine if there's a quorum president of commissioners. So um will the secretary please call the roll. Jeff Don Levy? Stephen Archibald? Here. Carolyn Dale Hunter. Kevin Schubert? Karen McBride? Here. Douglas Brown? Here. Scott Brown? Here. The commission has a quorum. Okay. The very first order of business is approval of the um minutes for the March ninth. It's been a long time since we've met. March ninth hearing of the commission. I know this will be a tough vote for you two guys because you weren't here. But um uh are there any corrections to the minutes? We've all studied them and I need a motion and a second to approve the minutes. I move. Is there a second? Karen Mc Commissioner McBride seconds. Um in favor. All in favor say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? That motion carries. And the minutes are approved. Um our second order of business is to select a commission vice chair. And uh for we have a vacancy. We do not have a vice chair. And the the chair will uh entertain motions. Uh for a vice chair. I would like to move a motion. Okay, we have a d uh motion for Doug Brown as vice chair. Uh is there a second to that? If not, I will second from Scott Brown. Um are there other nominees for vice chair? Okay, we will close the nomination process here. And uh however, we gotta make sure that someone will vote for you. So uh all those in favor. I felt like everyone was stepping back. Do you wish do you wish to make a statement, Mr. Brown? Okay. Uh all those in favor of uh making Doug Brown vice chair. Um please say aye.
openpublica.com