g w i n n e t t c o u n t y Strategic Business Plan Department of Water Resources Gwinnett County Department of Water Resources
A Message from the Director The Department of Water Resources Strategic Business Plan defines the vision, mission, values and goals for our organization and our overall business strategy Our fundamental role is to protect public health
S W O T S Strengths Triple AAA Rating Credibility with Regulatory Agencies Business Focused Organization Industry Leader Dedicated, Loyal Staff with Dependable Knowledge Capacity W Weaknesses Analysis Results Maturing Infrastructure / Funding Rehabilitation Needs Debt Service Limited Resources for Training and Skill Development Limited Resources for Public Outreach T Threats Increasing Cost of Operations and Maintenance Weather Extremes Loss of Revenue Water Wars Overall Economic Environment O Opportunities Improve Public Outreach Continue Developing Asset / Data Integration Sustainable Enterprise Environmental Mitigation Banking Continue to Reduce Costs and Improve Performance
S W O T WHAT WAS THE RULING On July 17, 2009, in U.S. District Court, Judge Magnuson ruled the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to comply with its statutory obligations and water supply is not an authorized purpose of Lake Lanier. Threat WHAT DOES IT MEAN The Court stayed Phase I of the litigation for 3 years to allow parties to obtain Congress s approval for the operational changes the water supply providers request.
S W O T WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO Act and support the Georgia 4-pronged strategy: Gwinnett Appeal Strongly lobby our Congressional Delegation Support negotiations between the 3 states Explore alternatives of contingency planning DOES IT IMPACT YOUR FINANCIAL PLANNING Threat The Court recognizes it will take time to secure the required Congressional authorization and that municipalities cannot suddenly end their reliance on that water.
S W O T Threat But what if We will intensify pressure on Congress We will seek relief through the courts at whatever level of appeal we need to We would file injunctions to continue to operate the water system for the sake of public health and fire protection
core services Water Resources WATER Core Services SEWER STORM WATER
unified plan Strategic Objectives Increase Conservation, Reuse and Efficiency DWR Provide Adequate Water Supply Unified Plan Economic Development and Fiscal Health Rehabilitation and Replacement Maximize Returns to River Basins Protect Water Quality Unified Plan Foster Redevelopment DWR Maintain Infrastructure Stability Lowest Life Cycle Costs Tolerable Risks and Level of Service
core services Water Core Services WATER Objectives Increase Service Reliability Improve Customer Service Ensure Financial Viability Operate the Dept Using Sound Business Practices Improve Asset Knowledge Ensure Water Adequacy Increase Knowledge and Skills
core services 2009 Scorecard
core services Sewer Core Services SEWER Objectives Increase Service Reliability Improve Customer Service Ensure Financial Viability Operate the Dept Using Sound Business Practices Improve Asset Knowledge Increase Knowledge and Skills
core services 2009 Scorecard
core services Sewer Improve Asset Knowledge Strategic Asset Management Plan The Collections SAMP Consistent in our overflow response Consistent in our procedures, including sampling and clean-up Conduct proper notification, reporting and documentation of SSO s.
core services Stormwater Core Services STORM WATER Objectives Provide Effective Customer Service Protect Water Quality Enhance Public Safety Operate the Dept Using Sound Business Practices Increase Service Reliability Improve Asset Knowledge Increase Knowledge and Skills
core services 2009 Scorecard
core services Stormwater Stormwater Assets County-Owned Pipe 1,313 Miles 79% Metal Pipe 1,006 Miles 19% RCP Pipe 242 Miles Metal Pipe Begins to Fail at 20 Yrs 300 Miles of Pipe Older than 20 Yrs Need $420M over next 20 Yrs Current Spending Level $10M / Yr Improve Asset Knowledge Prioritize Maintenance Research Alternative Pipe Materials and No-Dig Rehabilitation Technologies Develop Decision Tree to Guide Rehabilitation Decisions Implement New Data Management Software
core services 2010 Objectives Stakeholder Understanding and Support Product Quality Customer Satisfaction Water Resource Adequacy Community Sustainability Effective Utility Management Employee and Leadership Development Operational Optimization Operational Resiliency Infrastructure Stability Financial Viability The Ten Attributes of Effectively Managed Water and Wastewater Utilities Charting a course for wise management of water systems and precious water resources. Benjamin H. Grumbles, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
water resources 2010 Budget Summary
cost reductions DWR Initiatives 2010 Savings Electricity Costs Rate Adjustments $0.5 Off Peak Processing $0.7 Chemical Costs Alternative, less expensive Chemicals $0.1 Fleet Costs Parking Vehicles / Savings on Fuel $0.6 Total 2009 Savings $1.9 Fuel Cost Savings Initiatives: Backhoes Only when Needed Working in Zones / Service Areas Right Size Vehicle Reduced Fleet Size 10% * In millions
revenue enhancements DWR Initiatives 2010 Added Revenue Water Rate $8.5 Water Base Rate 0.7 Multi-Family Base Rate 0.1 Sewer Rate 8.0 Sewer Base Rate 8.7 Tiered Conservation Rate 1.2 Irrigation Rate 1.8 Leak Adjustment Elimination 1.0 Total 2010 Impact $30.0 * In millions
budget plan Water & Sewer 2010 2009 2008 2007 Budget Budget Actual Actual Revenue Water 139,189 130,175 122,839 127,256 Sewer 97,592 83,241 70,796 77,576 Other Fees/Charges 573 505 1,392 3,115 SDC's 9,000 2,800 9,111 20,745 Total Revenue 246,354 216,721 1 204,138 228,692 Operating Expenses Water Production 17,951 17,084 19,128 15,715 Water Reclamation 38,247 37,545 35,498 34,746 Field Operations 19,660 19,307 15,108 16,691 Eng/Constr/Infrastructure Support 6,547 7,819 7,304 6,941 Business Services 22,826 2 19,169 19,624 17,336 Total Operating Exp. 105,231 100,924 96,662 91,429 Debt Service 89,657 70,097 62,825 60,344 Transfer to R&E 51,466 45,700 25,799 45,000 Total Expenses 246,354 216,721 185,286 196,773 1 2009 Operating revenue does not include $19.2M additional transfer to R & E from 2008 2 Increase in Dept. Admin Op Ex is related to $2.1M additional OPEB contribution and legal fees now being paid out of operating instead of capital. * In thousands
budget plan Stormwater Revenue 2010 2009 2008 2007 Budget Budget Actual Actual Storm Water Fees 29,500 31,200 23,888 15,822 Other Fees/Charges 70 75 117 78 Total Revenue 29,570 31,275 24,005 15,900 Operating Expenses Programs 7,280 6,890 5,032 4,731 Maintenance 2,426 2,777 2,054 2,018 Planning/Permitting 645 759 924 627 Total Operating Exp. 10,351 10,426 8,010 7,376 Debt Service - GEFA 344 Transfer to R&E 18,691 21,004 13,946 8,257 Total Expenses 29,386 31,430 21,956 15,633 * In thousands
budget plan Staffing Water & Sewer 2010 2009 2008 2007 Budget Budget Actual Actual Water Production 90 89 86 86 Water Reclamation 157 157 174 173 Field Operations 135 154 136 147 Eng/Constr/Infrastructure Support 56 56 58 53 Business Services 101 96 109 95 Total Authorized 539 552 563 554 Stormwater 2010 2009 2008 2007 Budget Budget Actual Actual Operations 20 20 21 18 Programs 40 40 39 38 Total Authorized 60 60 60 56 DWR Total Authorized 599 612 623 610
water resources 2010 Capital Budget
capital budget 2010 Summary Water & Sewer 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Sources of Funds 2008 Bonds 2009 Bonds 76,185,591 GEFA/Stimulus 5,783,194 Internal Funding 44,621,527 84,560,738 78,174,635 87,714,065 97,983,601 115,000,324 Total Source 126,590,313 84,560,738 78,174,635 87,714,065 97,983,601 115,000,324 Use of Funds Water Treatment 1,100,000 4,800,000 5,450,000 3,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 Water Distribution 7,490,000 8,710,000 8,420,000 9,385,000 8,050,000 8,000,000 Wastewater Treatment 88,510,075 36,183,339 8,868,615 29,600,000 26,200,000 29,700,000 Wastewater Collection 10,204,771 11,902,310 15,685,000 12,250,000 23,300,000 9,225,000 General Plant 14,285,467 17,965,089 34,751,020 28,279,065 34,233,601 61,875,324 Utility Relocation 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 Total Use 126,590,313 84,560,738 78,174,635 87,714,065 97,983,601 115,000,324
CIP prioritization 2010 Regulatory Driven/Mandated 0 5 10 No Regulatory Driver Contributes to Compliance Required for Compliance Process SOG and Workflow All Areas Represented Presentations to CIP Committee Weighted Criteria Final Ranking Focus Resources to the Most Critical Needs Revenue Enhancement/Cost Containment 0 5 10 Cost/Benefit Ratio > 1 Cost/Benefit Ratio < 1 Cost /Benefit Ratio < 0.5 Reduced Performance Risks/Enhanced Reliability 0 5 10 Moderate risk reduction/enhanced reliability No relationship to reduced performance risk reduction Enhanced Public and Workforce Safety/Health Strong risk reduction/ enhanced reliability 0 5 10 No relationship to safety/health Enhances public/workforce health & safety Eliminates health & safety risk Customer Service Benefits 0 5 10 No Identified Benefits Addresses Occasional Complaint and Addresses Multiple Complaints/ Larger Limited # of Customers or Moderate # of Customers or Provides Significant Enhancement to Existing Service Enhancement to Service Improve Existing Asset Knowledge and Decision Making 0 5 10 Moderate improvement in asset knowledge/decision making No association w asset knowledge/decision making Greatly improves relevant asset knowledge/decision making Enhanced Stakeholder Confidence 0 5 10 No Improvement Moderate Enhancement Strong Improvement Environmental Sustainability/Stewardship 0 5 10 No net environmental benefit Moderately reduces waste, reduces greenhouse Significantly reduces greenhouse gas gas emissions or conserves energy emission or waste or conserves energy Supporting Growth and Economic Development in Conformance with Approved Master Plans 0 5 10 No support for economic development Related to economic development Essential to Economic Development
capital budget 2010 Trend Water & Sewer 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Total 2008 CIP Plan 298,008,334 206,675,001 161,842,136 143,695,696 160,711,039 153,674,351 1,124,606,557 2009 CIP Plan 199,784,411 126,589,806 84,561,071 78,174,968 90,714,065 112,983,601 692,807,922 2010 CIP Plan 126,590,313 84,560,738 78,174,635 87,714,065 97,983,601 115,000,324 590,023,676
capital budget 2010 Yellow River Improvements Project Construction Manager @ Risk with engineering by: JJ&G/CH2MHill/PPI and CM by: Pizzagalli Construction Company Project Description: Consolidate smaller WRF s with high unit costs and replace their capacity at Yellow River for economy of scale. Yellow River: 14.5 MGD to 22 MGD. The facility will maintained and under operation during the construction. The treatment process (BNR / MBR) is the latest technology in water reclamation. 2010 Budget: Total $57,656,591 June 2009
Yellow River WRF September 23, 2009
Yellow River WRF September 23, 2009
Yellow River WRF September 23, 2009
capital budget 2010 Crooked Creek WRF Improvements with engineering by: Metcalf & Eddy AECOM in association with Gresham Smith & Partners Project Description: Focus is on reliability and energy efficiency and preparation for a potential future expansion to 25 mgd. The Project includes improvements to the headworks, disinfection and solids handling facilities, and a new influent pump station. 2010 Budget: Total $23,225,000
capital budget 2010 Summary Stormwater 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Budget Sources of Funds GEFA Grants 4,646,011 Internal Funding 25,041,225 18,935,709 19,082,605 19,246,737 20,036,535 20,246,346 Total Source 29,687,236 18,935,709 19,082,605 19,246,737 20,036,535 20,246,346 Use of Funds Storm Drainage Improvements 14,083,537 14,844,889 15,094,786 17,846,334 18,649,465 18,904,108 Watershed Improvements 2,900,249 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 Dam Rehabilitation 4,750,373 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 General Plant 7,953,078 3,445,820 3,342,820 755,404 742,070 697,238 Total Use 29,687,236 18,935,709 19,082,605 19,246,737 20,036,535 20,246,346
capital budget 2010 Dam Upgrade and Rehabilitation 15 major watershed dams 11 completed 4 under design / construction Expect to be complete - 2011 Remaining Cost $5M
Collins Hill Park September 23, 2009
Channings Lake September 23, 2009
capital budget Debt Debt Service bonds plus GEFA 120000 100000 New, per proforma 80000 60000 Existing, including future GEFA 40000 20000 0 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 Rating Agencies October 2, 2009 Pricing October 7, 2009 Maintain debt coverage +1.5
trend Water Production 120.00 2007 2008 2009 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC In MGD, through September 21, 2009
summary The Transition Reduce CIP from $1.1B to $590M 51% reduction Shift from new construction to maintaining infrastructure Cost reduction initiatives in 2009 $1.9M
summary Wastewater Consolidation Continues Reduction of 20 positions The Transition Propose reducing another 10 positions by 2011 W & S Rate Resolution Approved March 2009 Commitment to Final Debt Offering Rating Agencies October 2, 2009 Competitive Pricing October 7, 2009
summary The Transition Supports our 2010 Budget Targets Supports Debt Service Supports Pay-As-You-Go Supports Operating Expense Levels
strategic business plan Questions? Department of Water Resources