HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - December 20, 2016 SSLODI CITY COUNCIL
SHIRTSLEEVE SESSION
CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2016
A. Roll call by City Clerk
A joint Informal Informational Meeting ("Shirtsleeve" Session) of the Lodi City Council and the
Planning Commission was held Tuesday, December 20, 2016, commencing at 7:01 a.m.
Present: Council Member Chandler, Council Member Johnson, and Mayor Kuehne
Absent: Council Member Mounce, and Mayor Pro Tempore Nakanishi
Also Present: City Manager Schwabauer, City Attorney Magdich, and City Clerk Ferraiolo
This agenda was posted as a special joint meeting for possible Brown Act application as a
quorum of the Planning Commission could have been present at this meeting.
B. Topic(s)
B-1 Receive Presentation on Nuisances from Lost or Stolen Shopping Carts in Lodi and
Provide Direction (CA/CD)
City Manager Schwabauer reported that staff held a community session in October regarding
shopping carts for feedback from the community on solutions for dealing with lost or stolen carts.
City Planner Craig Hoffman provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the October 25, 2016,
public meeting; comments provided during the meeting; potentially handling this issue with a
community response, i.e. retailers and citizens versus a government response; and what other
cities are doing with regard to legal retrieval of shopping carts.
City Attorney John Fukasawa provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding potential options and
solutions regarding lost, stolen, and abandoned shopping carts. Specific topics of discussion
included problems with lost, stolen, and abandoned shopping carts; photos provided by Code
Enforcement; existing laws that constrain collection of carts; storage of retrieved carts;
constitutional and statutory restraints that do not allow retrieval of carts; potential solutions;
municipal ordinance regulations in other communities; on-site cart retention systems; cart
retrieval program; and identification and warning signage.
Council Member Chandler questioned what the penalty is if one is found with a stolen cart.
Mr. Fukasawa responded that, under the California Business and Professions Code, the
individual would be subject to a misdemeanor if in possession of a properly -marked cart off
premises. City Attorney Magdich added that the Code limits the fine to no more than $50, and
Mr. Fukasawa explained there is an escalating penalty for business owners under the Code for a
number of carts found off site on other premises.
Mr. Fukasawa suggested a possible method of incentivizing private citizens to collect carts falls
under another California Code that regulates shopping cart collectors who are required to have a
contract with shopping cart owners and a vehicle that is properly marked as a cart retrieval
company.
Myrna Wetzel suggested that some citizens may be fearful of returning found shopping carts for
fear they may be accused of taking the carts in the first place. She stated she does not mind
taking on the responsibility of returning lost shopping carts, but not if it could result in blame or a
fine. Ms. Wetzel stated there should be something in place to protect private citizens when
returning found shopping carts.
1
Dave Kirsten, Planning Commissioner, stated that the California Business and Professions Code
restricts what cities can do in this matter. He expressed surprise that none of the retailers were in
attendance, particularly because shopping carts are so expensive, and that the Code requires
contracts and identifiable vehicles for cart retrieval. Mr. Kirsten stated he was unsure of how to
get retailers involved in this issue other than creating an economic incentive for them to comply.
Jeff Kirst stated he has picked up and returned shopping carts to retailers many times and
questioned if an authorized agent of a store can confront an individual who has one of its carts off
premises. Mr. Fukasawa responded that the law requires a peaceful resolution between the two
private parties if an individual is in possession of a cart filled with belongings. In further response,
Mr. Schwabauer stated that the Police Department can be alerted; however, this would not rank
as a high-priority call.
John Ledbetter expressed disappointment that this was the second meeting on the subject of
shopping carts and no retailers attended. He suggested the City move forward with an ordinance
requiring retailers to do something, which may prompt them to participate in the discussion.
Jeff Kirst questioned if staff contacted the League of California Cities to see which ordinances
statewide work the best. Mr. Hoffman stated he contacted several local cities, most of which are
letting economics and retailers address the situation. Most of the cities do not have ordinances in
place or the manpower to retrieve carts; however, those that are picking up carts are not following
the Business and Professions Code. Instead, staff collects carts from areas that present a safety
hazard. He pointed out that the Lodi Public Works Department will remove carts out of rights-of-
way and from dangerous areas. Mr. Kirst questioned is someone would contact the League
because he was certain there are successful ordinances the City can follow. Mr. Fukasawa stated
that he researched the Association of Grocers' list of 75 California cities' shopping cart
ordinances and that it is fairly common for cities to have some type of ordinance. He stated the
most common method of regulation is to require a retrieval plan and for carts to be marked per
the Business and Professions Code. Mr. Fukasawa stated the representative of the Association
indicated the group would not be opposed to a shopping cart retrieval plan and contract with
grocers, but they are opposed to requiring a physical retention system, such as locking wheels or
an invisible fence that would prohibit removal of carts from a premises, because such systems
are expensive to install and maintain. He further stated there is the question of the
effectiveness those systems. Mr. Fukasawa questioned whether such regulations should apply to
smaller retailers or across the board.
Mr. Schwabauer stated that staff did not contact the League; however, it researched other
California cities on onsite retention systems, cart retrieval, filing of an annual plan for prevention
and retrieval, signs, cart removal warning signs, training, and cart security after business hours,
all while trying to regulate within the guidelines of the Code. He stated if Council would like to
move forward, staff is looking for feedback on options.
Council Member Johnson expressed concern that any regulations set forth would not have the
teeth to motivate retailers to secure and retrieve their carts, pointing out again that no retailers
attended either meeting on this matter. Mr. Schwabauer reminded that the City is constrained by
the Code within a $50 fine, so there is no economic incentive for retailers in that regard; however,
staff can come up with something if the direction is there from Council. He suggested an
ordinance that requires a cart retrieval program with a proven success rate; otherwise, the retailer
must install an onsite retention program. In response to Council Member Johnson, Mr. Hoffman
stated that Target and Safeway have onsite retention systems, while Ms. Magdich pointed out
that some retailers have indicated there are methods of getting around the systems, such as
lifting carts high enough over an invisible fence line.
Council Member Chandler stated the onus should be on the retailer to ensure their carts are not
littering the City.
Mayor Kuehne concurred with the recommendation that the City should mandate a retention and
retrieval program with all of the components listed in the PowerPoint, along with a fine subject to
State law for those taking carts. In response to Mayor Kuehne, Ms. Magdich stated there has
2
been discussion about whether or not to require shopping cart locking mechanisms or retrieval
plans at the Use Permit level for new retail; however, most of the lost or stolen carts are coming
from the established retailers in the Four Corners. She suggested a stair -step ordinance that
would require a retrieval plan and, if that does not work, the requirement to install a barrier
system. Mr. Schwabauer stated that Wal-Mart has the potential for such a system in its Use
Permit because there is a provision that states, if it is unsuccessful retaining its carts on site, a
locking mechanism may be required. Mayor Kuehne agreed that, moving forward, locking
mechanisms and an annual inventory be required and, if too many carts are lost, a shopping cart
locking mechanism be required.
In response to Council Member Chandler, Mr. Fukasawa stated the Code requires an
identification number on the carts, but not a serial number. Ms. Magdich stated staff can look into
that, but pointed out that retailers are required to have their carts marked. Mayor Kuehne stated
that may be a lot to ask for the smaller retailers. Council Member Chandler countered that any
retailer that has carts should be required to mark them accordingly.
Richard Mahoney stated he believed smaller retailers are more apt to keep track of their carts
because of the high cost per cart while the larger retailers have less to lose and will likely not
track as closely. He believed that identification on carts will help track the carts and suggested the
most time and effort be spent on getting the larger retailers to comply.
Mayor Kuehne stated every retailer that has shopping carts should be required to post signage
about removing carts from the premises.
C. Comments by public on non -agenda items
None.
D. Adjournment
No action was taken by the City Council. The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 a.m.
ATTEST:
Jennifer M. Ferraiolo
City Clerk
3
TM
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA TITLE: First Quarter Fiscal Year 2016/17 Water, Wastewater and Electric Utility
Department Financial Reports
MEETING DATE: December 13, 2016
PREPARED BY: City Manager
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive utility financial reports for the first quarter of Fiscal Year
2016/17.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In accordance with the Lodi Municipal Code, quarterly financial
reports are to be prepared for the Water, Wastewater, and Electric
Utilities. Highlights of the operations and financial performance of
each utility will be presented at the meeting of December 13, 2016. Note that the data contained in these
reports is prior to our annual audit and is subject to change.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None directly related to the preparation of the report. However, the
presentation is intended to keep the Council apprised of the financial
conditions of the major municipal utilities.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
Steve Schwabauer
City Manager
APPROVED:
tephen Schwabguer, City Manager
Public Works Department
Water/Wastewater
FY 17 Quarterly Update
(Ending September 30, 2016)
City Council Shirtsleeve Session
December 13, 2016
1
Wastewater Fund
Cash Flow Summary
(Ending September 30, 2016)
2
Budget
Actuals
% of Budget
Revenue
Sales
15,428,650
3,608,456
23%
Development Impact Mitigation Fees (wastewater & storm)
827,570
200,137
24%
Other (interest, septic, misc.)
2,611,760
155,387
6%
Total Revenues
18,867,980
3,963,980
21%
Expenses
Operating
7,415,960
1,602,090
22%
Capital
10,062,731
507,290
5%
Debt Service
3,122,930
1,760,839
56%
Cost of Services Payment To General Fund
1,068,000
267,000
25%
Total Expenses
21,669,621
4,137,219
19%
Beginning Cash (Operations Only)
9,661,155
Ending Cash (Operations Only)
10,477,904
Days Cash (Excluding Capital)
260
of Target
289%
2
Wastewater
Operating Results
(Ending September 30, 2016)
3
Budget
Actuals
% of Budget
Personnel
$ 3,173,900
$ 891,313
28%
Supplies, Materials, Services
$ 2,634,150
$ 378,554
14%
Equipment, Land, Structures
$ 525,000
$ 3,196
1%
Other Payments
$ 354,200
$ 154,370
44%
Utilities
$ 700,400
$ 174,657
25%
Work for Others
$ 28,310
$ -
0%
Total Operating Expenses
$ 7,415,960
$ 1,602,090
22%
3
Wastewater Funds
Cash Balances
(Ending September 30, 2016)
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$o
Actual Reserves vs. Target
122%
IF
326%
206%
ii -
289%
13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
Ta rget
Actual
Amounts above
reserve target are
held for scheduled
capital maintenance
4
Operating (530)
10,477,904
Utility Capital / Infrastructure Replacement (531)
3,671,678
Capital Reserve (532) (Fund used to pay White Slough COP Debt Service)
(1,576,191)
Wastewater IMF (533)
327,983
Rate Stabilization Reserve (534)
500,000
Storm Drain IMF (535)
885,972
Total
14,287,346
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$o
Actual Reserves vs. Target
122%
IF
326%
206%
ii -
289%
13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
Ta rget
Actual
Amounts above
reserve target are
held for scheduled
capital maintenance
4
Water Fund
Cash Flow Summary
(Ending September 30, 2016)
5
Budget
Actuals
% of Budget
Revenue
Sales
13,236,620
3,746,908
28%
Development Impact Mitigation Fees
303,940
36,191
12%
Other (interest, tap fees, water meters, misc.)
963,550
51,386
5%
Total Revenues
14,504,110
3,834,485
26%
Expenses
Operating
6,733,980
1,793,687
27%
Capital
6,287,530
995,382
16%
Debt Service
2,970,100
171,259
6%
Cost of Services Payment To General Fund
780,000
195,000
25%
Total Expenses
16,771,610
3,155,328
19%
Beginning Cash (Operations Only)
5,709,634
Ending Cash (Operations Only)
7,363,867
Days Cash (Excluding Capital)
307
% of Target
341%
5
Water
Operating Results
(Ending September 30, 2016)
6
Budget
Actuals
% of Budget
Personnel
$ 2,859,290
$ 622,498
22%
Supplies, Materials, Services
$ 1,557,480
$ 303,203
19%
Equipment, Land, Structures
$ 110,000
$ 12,473
11%
Other Payments
$ 1,518,260
$ 693,526
46%
Utilities
$ 588,950
$ 161,987
28%
Work for Others
$ 100,000
$ -
0%
Total Operating Expenses
$ 6,733,980
$ 1,793,687
27%
6
Water Funds
Cash Balances
(Ending September 30, 2016)
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Actual Reserves vs. Target
277%
341%
264%
P
13/14 14/15
238%
213% • Target
1
15/16 16/17
Actual
After Tranfer to
Capital Fund for
1st Q Expense
Amounts above
reserve target are
held for scheduled
capital maintenance
7
Operating (560)
7,363,867
Utility Capital / Infrastructure Replacement (561)
(2,765,840)
IMF (562)
434,181
PCE/TCE Settlements
10,065,653
PCE/TCE Rates (565)
4,149,147
Total
19,247,008
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Actual Reserves vs. Target
277%
341%
264%
P
13/14 14/15
238%
213% • Target
1
15/16 16/17
Actual
After Tranfer to
Capital Fund for
1st Q Expense
Amounts above
reserve target are
held for scheduled
capital maintenance
7
Bad Debt Write Off
(Through September 30, 2016)
8
# Of Accounts
Amount
% of Sales
Wastewater
128
$9,151
0.3%
Water
128
$6,730
0.2%
8
Water / Wastewater Utility
Activities
Operational
• Water Distribution
• Water Production
• Collection System
• Wastewater Treatment
Regulatory
• SSO's
• Discharge Violations
• Monitoring and Reporting
9
Electric Utility Department
FY 17 Quarterly Update
(Ending September 30, 2016)
City Council Shirtsleeve Session
December 13, 2016
1
Electric Utility Fund
Cash Flow Summary
(Ending September 30, 2016)
Net Increase (Decrease)
Beginning Local Cash Balance
Budget
Actuals
% of Budget
Revenue
17,581,352
GOR Balance
Sales Revenues
68,526,450
20,602,669
30%
Development Impact Fees
111,980
17,900
16%
Other Revenues (interest, misc)
3,642,810
853,441
23%
Total Revenues
72,281,240
21,474,010
30%
Expenses
Purchase Power
40,434,980
9,447,244
23%
Non Power
13,919,070
2,465,934
18%
Capital Projects
5,411,663
886,756
16%
Debt Service
5,528,520
3,872,898
70%
Cost of Service/Capital Xfer
2,354,000
588,500
25%
In -lieu Transfer to General Fund
7,131,330
1,782,833
25%
Total Expenses
74,779,563
19,044,165
25%
Net Chg in Bal Sheet Accts
1,510,435
Net Increase (Decrease)
Beginning Local Cash Balance
(2,498,323)
16,139,395
2,429,845
16,139,395
Ending Local Cash Balance
13,641,072
17,581,352
GOR Balance
10,799,081
Total Reserve Balance
28,380,433
Reserve Policy Target
22,776,000
% of Target
125%
2
Electric Utility Reserve Policy
(Ending September 30, 2016)
Purpose
Basis
Target
Actual
Operating Reserve
90 Days Cash
$ 17,350,000
$ 17,268,852
Capital Reserve
Largest Distribution System Contingency
$ 1,000,000
$ 312,500
NCPA General Operating Reserve
NCPA Identified Items
$ 4,426,000
$ 7,831,745
NCPA MPP/GPP Balance
MPP/GPP Security Commitments
$ 2,967,336
Total Target
$ 22,776,000
$ 28,380,433
$30,000
$25,000
$20,000
8 $15,000
$1o,000
$5,000
Actual Reserves vs. Target
116
90%
5%
0
125%
FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17
❑ Actual
❑Target
Cash balances
support Council
approved reserve
requirements and
provide funds for pay
as you go capital
improvement
projects
3
Electric Utility Funds
Cash Balances
(Ending September 30, 2016)
4
Operating (500)
$ 7,894,030
Utility Outlay Reserve Fund (501)
$ 312,500
Public Benefits Fund (504)
$ 1,385,887
IMF EU Substation and Transmission (505)
$ 917,352
Solar Surcharge Fund (506)
$ 289,757
Environmental Compliance (508)
$ 6,781,826
NCPA— General Operating Reserve (GOR)
$ 10,799,081
Total
$ 28,380,433
4
Power Sales
(Ending September 30, 2016)
Power Sales (kWh)
Customer Class
Budget
Actual
Residential
151,108,765
49,779,981
Small Commercial
165,114,668
47,802,649
Large Commercial/Small Industrial
48,152,911
12,851,244
Industrial
64,722,006
21,974,039
TOTAL
429,098,350
132,407,913
Revenue ($)
Customer Class
Budget
Actual
Average Rate
Residential
$ 27,621,347
$ 8,601,563
$ 0.1728
Small Commercial
$ 27,986,175
$ 7,843,127
$ 0.1641
Large Commercial/Small Industrial
$ 6,674,998
$ 1,871,349
$ 0.1456
Industrial
$ 6,243,930
$ 2,286,630
$ 0.1041
TOTAL
$ 68,526,450
$ 20,602,669
$0.1556
5
ECA Revenue
(Ending September 30, 2016)
Customer Class
Q1
Total
Residential
$ (402,398)
$ (402,398)
Small Commercial
$ (390,564)
$ (390,564)
Large Commercial /
Small Industrial
$ (115,376)
$ (115,376)
Industrial
$ ( 68,739)
$ ( 68,739)
Total ECA Revenue
$ (977,077)
$ (977,077)
6
Electric Utility Fund
Operating Results
(Ending September 30, 2016)
7
FY16 Budget
FY16 Actual
% of Budget
Personnel
$ 8,576,220
$ 1,660,781
19%
Supplies, Materials, Services
$ 3,423,710
$ 386,630
11%
Equipment, Land, Structures
$ 5,000
$ 22
<1%
Other Payments
$ 1,837,840
$ 405,626
22%
Utilities
$ 76,300
$ 12,875
17%
Total Operating Expenses
$ 13,919,070
$ 2,465,934
18%
7
Power Supply Costs
(Ending September 30, 2016)
8
Budgeted
Year to Date
% of Budget
Generation
$ 29,873,610
$ 6,329,286
21%
Transmission
$ 9,125,930
$ 2,756,938
30%
Management Services
$ 1,435,440
$ 361,020
25%
Total Power Supply Costs
$ 40,434,980
$ 9,447,244
23%
8
Bad Debt Write Off
(Ending September 30, 2016)
9
# of Accounts
Amount
% of Sales
Electric
128
$13,395
0.065%
9
Load Coverage
140,000
120,000
100,000
-c 80,000
2 60,000
40,000
20,000
1.1
or
Q1-2016 Q2-2017 Q3-2017 Q4-2017
Coverage
Target
Load
10
MWh Load
ROC Matrix
Target
Load Coverage
(Including Purchases)
Q1 — 2017
97,452
80%
86%
Q2 — 2017
107,518
77%
75%
Q3 — 2017
131,352
67%
71%
Q4 — 2017
102,220
60%
63%
140,000
120,000
100,000
-c 80,000
2 60,000
40,000
20,000
1.1
or
Q1-2016 Q2-2017 Q3-2017 Q4-2017
Coverage
Target
Load
10
Electric Utility Activities
• Safety
• Staffing
• Reliability
• Capital Improvement Program
• New Development
• Legislative & Regulatory
• Fiscal Health
• Customer Programs