HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 17, 2010 J-02AGENDA ITEM4�Z
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Approve Water Meter Cost, Extended Payment and Payment Deferral Plan
MEETING DATE: March 17, 2010
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve water meter cost, extended payment and payment deferral
plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the March 2,2010 Shirtsleeve meeting, the City Council was
presented a number of alternative construction schedule, payment,
and payment deferral options. The City Council requested
additional information be provided relative to extending the
construction timeframe by two years and extending the payment deferral timeframe by one or two years.
Additionally, the City Council expressed interest in a $1,200 cap for property owners for installing new
meter services and that information also be provided relative to using Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funds for grants to very low- and low-income property owners.
Staff has performed these additional analyses, and the results are reported below. Based upon staffs
review of the results, the following Water Meter Program construction schedule and property owner payment
plan is recommended for approval by the City Council. The final City Council action setting usage -based
water rates, water meter costs, extended payment option, and payment deferral plan will occur at the close
of the Public Hearing scheduled for July 21, 2010.
Recommended Plan
A. Five-year construction schedule beginning 2011 and ending 2015.
B. Set cost now for five classes of meter service installations. Costs would be set as follows:
1. Meter and electronic radio transmitter [ERT] ($300)
2. Meter and ERT installed in an existing nonstandard box ($450)
3. Replace Rich Box assembly in rear yard ($1,200)
4. Replace Rich Box assembly in front yard ($1,100)
5. Install new service and meter assembly from new water main to residence ($1,200)
C. Optional lump sum payment by property owners or seven-year payment installment plan (fixed
interest rate at City's Investment Portfolio rate — around 1.5 percent).
D. Lump sum payment period from April 1, 2011 through June 30, 2011.
E. Payment installments begin for all property owners on July 1, 2011.
F. Payment assistance program for very low- and low-income property owners.
Five -Year Construction Schedule. The Water Meter Program combines the replacement of 22.5 miles of
substandard water transmission mains with the installation of approximately 13,306 water meters. The
estimated total cost of construction is $37,000,000 including design, construction administration,
inspection and construction. Funding for construction is coming from infrastructure replacement revenue
and water meter charges. Construction will be divided into five approximately equal phases sequenced
APPROVED: r �r�
a"
Blair King. f=.anager
K:\WP\PROJECTS\WATER\Meters\CWaterMeterFinancing.doc 3/10/2010
Approve Water Meter Cost, Extended Payment and Payment Deferral Plan
March 17, 2010
Page 2
across the community in a northwest to southwest direction. Construction activities will occur from April
through October in each year 2011 though 2015.
Previously, a three-year construction timeframe has been at the forefront of discussions with the Council.
As presented below, the results of analyses demonstrate that the shortened construction schedule has a
negative impact on the cash flow of the Water Capital fund that is partly mitigated by extending the
construction timeframe to five years.
Optional Lump Sum or Payment Installments. ExhibitA provides a summary of cost by installation cost,
recommended property owner charge by class, and payment installments by class for varying time
periods. The six- and seven-year alternatives have been added at City Council's request. The total of all
payment installments for the seven-year option is also provided. At the Shirtsleeve meeting, five classes
of installation types were reviewed and a diagram of each is provided in Exhibit B. The installation costs
vary from $300 to $2,000 with an estimated 3,623 properties in the Class 5 category at a cost of $2,000
each. Results of the water model analysis capping the Class 5 cost at $1,200 are provided below.
Set Costs Now for Five Installation Classes. Staff recommends that the City Council approve a fixed -cost
schedule at the levels presented in ExhibitA for the Water Meter Program. This is a departure from
staffs prior recommendation that property owner meter costs be based upon actual construction bids.
The recommendation, if approved, will establish equity across all installation classes and simplify the
billing and collections process. It is consistent with the methodology incorporated by other communities.
Lump Sum Payments. Canvassing of the 13,306 meter installation locations will be completed by
April 1, 2011. By that time, notices will be sent to property owners informing them of their installation
class and cost. There will be a 60 -day property owner review period and lump sum payments would be
accepted through June 30, 2011.
Payment Installments. Payment installments as presented in ExhibitA will be added to the customers'
billing (if the property owner) or sent separately to the property owner beginning July 1, 2011 and continue
for seven years. Initiating the payment installments at a uniform time and early in the Water Meter
Program has a positive impact on the cash flow in the Water Capital fund. Provisions for early retirement
of the payment installments will be available. Conversion of a lump sum paymentto a payment installment
program will not be available. Upon transfer or sale of the property, the payment installment plan will
terminate and the balance due will be required to be paid upon notice of service termination.
Payment Assistance Program for Very Low- and Low -Income Property Owners. Staff recommends
dedicating CDBG funds to provide grants to at least very low- and possibly low-income property owners
receiving a new meter service. The grant program would be initiated this year and grant applications will
need to be returned by December 31, 2010 so that property owner eligibility and coverage of the grant
program could be determined by the City Council. For example, if eligible grant applications from very
low and low income property owners amounted to $1,500,000 and the work was evenly distributed
across the community, the City Council would be asked to commit an average of $300,000 per year for
the next five years. On the other hand, if eligible grant applications amounted to $3,000,000 and no
additional CDBG were available, the City Council might consider funding only the very low-income
category and part or none of the low-income category. This decision would be presented to the Council
early in 2011 prior to the start of payment installments on July 1, 2011.
Analyses Results. Five different cash flow analyses have been prepared as described in Exhibit C. The
fifth alternative resulted from comments at the Shirtsleeve Session and is similar to Alternative 2 but with
a five-year construction timeframe. Embedded assumptions in these alternative analyses include:
1. I -percent rate indexing in the first year and 4 -percent rate indexing each of the following nine years.
K:\WP\PROJECTS\WATER\Meters\CWaterMeterFinancing.doc 3/10/2010
Approve Water Meter Cost, Extended Payment and Payment Deferral Plan
March 17, 2010
Page 3
2. 30 percent of property owners in the Classes 1 and 2 pay lump sum.
3. 10 percent of property owners in Classes 3 through 5 pay lump sum.
4. Payment installments begin in the year of construction for Alternatives 1 through 4 and on
July 1, 2011 for Alternative 5.
5. Infrastructure replacement revenue is dedicated to the pipeline replacement (22.5 miles) portion
of the water meter program.
6. PCEITCE cleanup revenues are reserved.
Results of the five analyses are presented in bar chart form in Exhibit D. The results are described
below.
Alternative 1. Three-year construction, five-year extended payment plan, payment installments begin in
year of construction, and no cap on meter charges —fund deficit occurs over a three-year period with the
peak reaching minus $8.2 million but recovering two years later.
Alternative 2. Three-year construction, five-year extended payment plan, payment installments begin in
year of construction, and $1,200 cap on meter charges —fund deficit occurs over a four-year period
(because the water fund is covering the difference between $2,000 and $1,200) with the peak reaching
minus $9.3 million and recovering three years later.
Alternative 3. Five-year construction, five-year extended payment plan, payment installments begin in
the year of construction, and no capon meter charges —fund deficit occurs over a three-year period with
the peak reaching minus $4.5 million and recovery occurs a little more than a year later.
Alternative 4. Five-year construction, five-year extended payment plan, payment installments begin in
the year of construction, and $450 capon meter charges —fund deficit occurs for five years reaching a
peak minus $9.8 million and recovery occurs four years later.
Alternative 5. Five-year construction, seven-year extended payment plan, payment installments begin
July 1, 2011, and $1,200 capon meter charges —fund deficit occurs for just over three years reaching a
peak of minus $6.5 million with recovery in just over two years.
Alternative 5 is recommended over Alternative 2 if the meter cost is capped because the deficit is smaller
with a quicker recovery. Alternative 3 is superior to Alternative 1 if the full meter cost is charged to the
property owners and minimizing the size and duration of the deficit is important. Alternative 4 is not
recommended unless the construction timeframe was extended to seven years or longer. For all
alternatives, fund balance in other sub -funds is sufficient to cover the short-term deficit and the addition
of CDBG funds to the program has not been accounted for in the analyses. At this time, staff is not
recommending any further exploration of alternative scenarios.
City Council is requested to approve a plan setting water meter costs, the extended payment option and
payment deferral as recommended by staff or modified by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
F. Wally S delin
PublicWorks Director
FWS/pmf
Attachments
K:1WPIPROJECTSIWATER\Meters\CWaterMeterFinancing.doc 3/10/2010
Exhibit A
LUMP SUM OR PAYMENT INSTALLMENT ALTERNATIVES
Per Month Pavment
Class
Description
cost
Recommended
Charge
3 -Year
5 -Year
6 -Year
7 -Year
PaVMe'gts
y
1
Meter and ERT
$300
$300
$8.53
$5.19
$4.36
$3.76
$315.84
2
Noxstandard Meter
$450
$450
$12.79
$7.79
$6.54
$5.65
$474.60
3
Rich Box in Front Yard
$1,100
$1,100
$31.27
$19.04
$15.99
$13.80
$1,159.20
4
Rich Box in RearYard
$1,200
$1,200
$34.11
$20.77
$17.44
$15.06
$1,265.04
5
New Meter Service on
$2,000
$1,200
$34.11-7
$20.77
$17.44
$15.06
$1,265.04
New Main
Recommended
K:\WP\PROJECTS\WATER\Meters\C WaterMeterFi nancing_ExhibitA, doc
Installation
Edge of Street
Corp Stop Std. Meter Box Existing Service
Main in
StreetCD
��.
41)
CD
t-_
Install Water Meter w/ ERT f
Replace Non -Std. Meter Box _
--------wl Std. Meter Box e
CD
�83
Lr ------ -- Install Water Meter w/ ERT
Connect to Existing Curb Stop Install Std. Meter Box &
--- Water Meter w/ ERT t
I : ' Connect to �I" C
i Remove ll
`�j''- I____Existing
Rich Box II Service
Install New Service Line Replacement
Exhibit B
Class
Install Std. Meter Box & Property Line
4. Pre -1979
Connect to Existing
Service
Install Std. Meter Box &
Install Service from Water Meter w/ ERT
Main to Box Install Service from
Box to Residence
New Main in
Street Connect to Existing
Corp Hose Bib
Stop
Connect to Existing
YSitdrideAllay
Mast>n
Main in Rear
Yard/Alley
Curb Stop
Disconnect Existing Service 5 Pre -1979
Residence; ' i
\ Rich
Box
Abandon Main
Property Line
Exhibit C
CASH FLOW MODEL ALTERNATIVES
Alternative Construction Timeframe Meter Service Cost
Extended Payment Period
1
3 Years
I No Cap
5 Years
2
3 Years
$1,200 Cap
5 Years
3
5 Years
No Cap
5 Years
4
5 Years
$450 Cap
5 Years
5
5 Years
$1,200 Cap
7 Years
Exhibit D
Three -Year Construction, Five -Year Extended Payments, No Cost Cap
---sza,Ooo,Doo
sIs.ODo�ooO � — -
i
j
510.000:000
--
.
Fr 00-30 0-Y 1611 FV ZZ -12 5t FV 23-36 FV 1617 0-Y 17-1= FV 10-19 FV a9-20
i
S{S.DDgODO)
3{10.000.000)
Three -Year Construction, Five -Year Extended Payments, $1,200 Cost Cap
sz _OOKL000
SIs.00MOM — - -- -- ----
sia000 000
S%Ooo 000
S_ - �- - - -,- -, -- - -
0-Y 00-10 FY 7631 FV 11-12 F'S6 FV 3617 FY 17-10- FY 11-19 FV 19.20
3[5.000 000)
S(XG 000.000)
1
S(ISAMMO00)
Five -Year Construction, Five -Year Extended Payments, No Cost Cap
SISAMMOM
sza000 000
ssooD o00
s- _
f FV 00.30 FV 10-11 FV 11-12 r. -FV 12-13 FY 13-14 "2.0-:X7 FY 17-16 FV 1119 FV 1}Z0
.-
3
S(10.000600W
Five -Year Construction, Five -Year Extended Payments, $450 Cost Cap
Five -Year Construction, Seven Year Extended Payments, $1,200 Cost Cap
The City of Lodi
Public Works
Water Services
Water Meter Cost and Payment Plan
Item J2
March 17, 2010
Background
• 1979 to 1993 — Lodi began installing meter
ready residential services (2,500)
• 1992 — State law requires meters on all new
residential services (3,200)
• 2004 — State law (AB 2752) requires all
residential services to be metered (13,000 +)
1-0 1.. a;_- Recommendation
➢Five-year Construction (2011 through
2015)
➢ Fixed Cost for Five Classes of Installation
➢Lump Sum Payment for Seven Year
Payment Installments
➢Payment Installments Begin July 1, 2011
➢Payment Assistance Program for Very Low
and Low Income Property Owners
4
Meter Set Components
41
Installation
Edge of Street
Corp
Main in stop Std. Meter Box EAsting Service
Street
Install Water Meter w/ ERT
Restore Surface Improvements
Restore Surface I mprownents
Replace Nor�Std. Meter Box
w/ Std. Meter Box
Install Water Meter w/ ERT
Connect to asting Curb Stop
. MGM .
Install Std. Meter Box &
Water Meter w/ ERT
Install New Service Line REoacemmnt
Connect to
Bdsting
Service
Class
Installation Class
owl
Restore Surface
Irrprovernents
Install Std. Meter Box &
Water Meter w/ ERT
._MOM_.
Install New Ser\nce
Property Line
Connect to asting in in Rear
Service Connect to asting Yard/Alley
Curt) Stop
Install Std. Meter Box &
Install Service from Water Meter w/ ERT
Main to Box Install Service from
Box to Residence
New Main in
Street
c
. MOM .
Property tine
Rich
Box
Seven Year Payment Plan
Class
Description
Recommended
Monthly
Total All
Charge
Payment
Payments
1
Meter & ERT
$300
$3.76
$315.84
2
Nonstandard Meter
$450
$5.65
$474.60
Box
3
Rich Box Front Yard
$1,100
$13.80
$1,159.20
4
Rich Box Rear
$1,200
$15.06
$1,265.04
Yard/Alley
5
New Service on
$1,200
$15.06
$1,265.04
New Main
Seven Year Payment Plan
• Lump Sum Through June 30, 2011
• Monthly Billing Starts July 1, 2011
• No Penalty For Early Payoff
• Lump Sum Cannot Convert After July 1, 2011
• Payoff Required Upon Sale/Transfer
Payment Assistance
➢ Funding by CDBG
➢ Estimated Need $1.5 - $4.0 Million
➢ Application Period September through
December 2010
➢ Reconcile Need to Funding 1 St Quarter 2011
Program Cash Flow
Five -Year Construction, Seven Year Extended Payments, $1,200 Cost Cap
Lao
Questions?
0AMOOO
FF 09-20 FF IG-22 FY 11-32 IF PIF 15p--1G PF 26-17 FT 17-3d FF 1A-29 FY 19-2U
Three -Year Construction, Five -Year Extended Payments, $1,200 Cost Cap
SzouMaao
s1movowmxQuo
SM���odo
S -
$110.(MMM
FY MAU FF Ila] t FY 1012 FY 1 ,13 F 1-:111-14FIR5p 5 FY 2&47 FV 3F -3E FF 1S1S FY 19YOU
s aulatom
1Abou ME too ONO
�r�C��
11�r
Pro�� FT mit � n-32 FT U-13 Fr i � � � lis -05
� �z�
LODI WATER METER MANDATE
(MARCH 17TH, 2010, AGENDA ITEM J-2)
PERSPECTIVES AND CLARIFICATION REQUEST
1. The Intent and Spirit of installing water meters in Lodi (Thank You)
a, Shows a truly 'green' essence in our community
b. Shows commitment to a true capitalist conversion of city services
(e.g. People who own pools vs. those who just shower)
2. The Application Plan for the Water Meters could be Incompatible?,
a. Nothing in agenda that states how 'homeowners' will be charged
b. Do you mean charging City of Lodi account holders?
c. Account holders are not necessarily the owners of the home occupied
d. Does City of Lodi utility accounts indicate owner vs, renter?
e, Should Renters be held liable for'cty mandated' modifications?
3. Abandonment and Accoinintabi>;t_y issues:
a. Example 1: If 'homeowner' pays meter ill Ur "o years, sells
ho as L-, ind new owner i z : n : will I : ew homeowner be chargi d:?
Tracking histoYy of meter installat c)n payments" headache.
1. Example Z . , opex ty is abandoned AF ER meter is I but
not yet PAID OFF, who aghs up the Terence, C ity o Citi ; e 9
F 3: 'Homeowner' pays the amount 7 years, and tb a after
amount of time ells the a c t I i e. new owner reaps it. [ the benefits?
4. Water Raters and Comparison of Rates
a. Shouldn't proposed water rates be clearly indicated?
b. The WHOLE PACKAGE not just part of it (what we're getting into)
c. Justifiable Rate Comparison sample of Cities metering water NOW
- North, Central and especially Southern California recommended
d, What is the Average Estimate a household will be charged via rates?
e. Urban vs. Agricultural vs. Scholastic vs. City Building vs. Business.. .
- Hope this doesn't hurt Agricultural in any way (Wine Industry)
-- OVER --
5. City vs. Community ("Potential" Compromise Imbalance)
a. Proverbial 'give and take' is one-sided
b, Disparity of "Potential" Compromise Chart:
PROPERTY OWNER
I. Pays per Water USED
(e.g. Bottle of Water)
1L Pays for the Meter Installed
111 Pays for Taxes on Project
CITY OF LODI
I. Phases out Conservation Dept?
(Rules and Enforcement Removed)
11. ? (Lower Rates Perhaps?)
111. ? (Tax Credits/Breaks.?,)
6. Class l through 5 ore,—fir inirinn on a home Ina ro riate?
a. ar1. ula r ly,tb pre �I 7 section on classification P I .� 0 s. $l J00)
b,. Long standing hoirne owners, with properly x d, d and paid ur
homes: et the 'tong shaft )it this mandate,
C. es this go against any ii, housing/discriminati codes?
TFA.L
. « � e piping is no 1.^, g'WIr'up to code' but: has been until now. does
that infrinon pouety owners xigIEby "t." singled out?
rV
If you gi ahcad with chargi g owners for meter installation,, y will
hear a tremendous outcry especially ) n this part" ox the P 1..i
7. Consider the Questions and Resolution
a. Most likely more questions will arise from other folks
- If I am asking these questions now...
b. Research into possible FUNI?ING/STIMULUS/TAX CREDITS?
-A "RESPONSIBLE ACT OF CONSERVATION" is proposed
c. It would be understandable to withdraw, take this quickly back to
the drawing board and resubmit a new plan
d. There is a lot that needs to be CLARIFIED before any action taken
e. Success of a plan is not just in the application, but the execution
f. I am still in favor of metering, please get this right
g. Water is a very tricky issue for this community, tread carefully
Thank you for allowing me the time to submit this to your attention.
X Christopher B. Vigil Date: 03-17-2010,