Comprehensive Rate Study & Cost Allocation Analysis. Public Workshop December 4, 2017

Similar documents
Study Workshops are designed to be both educational and to seek broad direction from the Board

PREFERRED FINANCIAL PLAN SCENARIO & WATER RATE DESIGN ALTERNATIVE

Unfunded Pension Liability Accelerated Funding Options

2016 Water and Recycled Water Rate Study PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 12, 2016

Temescal Valley Water District

MARINA COAST WATER DISTRICT FINANCIAL PLAN AND RATE AND FEE STUDY FINAL REPORT. September 2013

WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES RATE STUDY

Meeting & Outreach efforts

Santa Clarita Water Division

Final COST OF SERVICE STUDY SEPTEMBER City of San Clemente

The City of Sierra Madre

Notice of a public hearing

City of Benicia. Rate Study Update: Water & Wastewater Rates

FINANCIAL PLAN REVIEW AND FORECAST

WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY

2016 Water and Recycled Water Rate Study WEBINAR WITH DISTRICT STAFF JUNE 29, 2016

Squaw Valley PSD. Water & Sewer Rate and Connection Fee Study. Presented by: Shawn Koorn Associate Vice President HDR Engineering, Inc.

Table 2-2 Projected Water Production and Costs

Alameda County Water District. Financial Workshop Proposed Rates & Charges

SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM (SAWS) RATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: MEETING 3

Managing Financial Risk and Declining Demand. Presentation Outline

City of Riverbank. Water Rate Study FINAL 6/18/2015

LONG BEACH WATER DEPARTMENT COST OF SERVICE AND RATE STUDY

Public Hearing on Water and Sewer Rates. September 20, 2017

Water & Sewer Rate Study. Water & Sewer Cost of Service Rate Study. City of Norco, CA. Draft Report for

NALDRAFT SEPTEMBER2015 WASTEWATE

Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District, ID No. 1. Water Rates & Finances. December 13, 2016

Water Rates Rate Restructure and Rate Adjustments

YORBA LINDA WATER DISTRICT

FY 2019 Approved Budget Approved by the Board of Directors on March 1, 2018

CITY OF CITY OF SONOMA FULLERTON. Pricing Objectives Discussion Water Rate Study 2018 Water Rate Study

STAFF REPORT. ITEM NO. 4 MEETING DATE: March 7, 2017 MEETING: Board of Directors SUBJECT:

Water Rate Study Final Report

From: Lex Warmath and Elaine Conti, Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.

Water and Sewer Utility Rate Studies

Capital Finance Overview: Dealing with the New Normal

Water Rate Study for City of Lemoore

Administrative Draft COST ALLOCATION PLAN. Marina Coast Water District

Final Report COMPREHENSIVE WATER AND WASTEWATER COST OF SERVICE AND RATE STUDY

La Cañada Irrigation District

April 6, Katherine Godbey Director of Finance, Coachella Valley Water District Hovley Lane East Palm Desert, CA 92260

City of La Palma Agenda Item No. 5

CITY OF ANN ARBOR WATER & SEWER COST OF SERVICE STUDY

CITY OF. Dixon. Water Enterprise Financial Plan Overview. City Council Meeting - March 27, 2018

CREATING AND MANAGING RESERVES THAT ARE RIGHT FOR YOUR AGENCY AND RATEPAYERS

WATER UTILITY FINANCIAL PLAN AND RATE STUDY CITY OF WHITEFISH, MT MARCH 2016

CITY OF REDLANDS WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY. Prepared by:

Why Consider a Growth Charge?

City of Ann Arbor, MI Water and Sewer Cost of Service Study Final Draft Report

Through: Finance, Legal, and Administration Committee (3/11/15) Chief Financial Officer/Assistant General Manager

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY

Water and Sewer Rates

Water Rate Study FINAL January 31, 2018

Goleta Water District

Phase 1: Water Budget Based Rate Structure Feasibility Analysis

WATER USER RATES & FEE STUDY

Sewer Rate Study CRESCENT CITY CALIFORNIA

COST OF SERVICES STUDY

Comprehensive Water Rate Study

Rainbow Municipal Water District

Sonoma County Service Area #41(CSA #41) Water Rate Study

Focused Water Rate Study

Water Rates Adjustments Phase 2

WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORM DRAIN RATE STUDY

Utility Rates. October 13, 2015

Page 2 of 11. Operating Fund Current Plan Last Plan Target 25. Rev vs. Exp 50 CIP. Long-Term Borrowing Current Plan Last Plan

Long-Term Financial Stability Workshop #4. Capital Investment & Financing. Board of Directors September 23, 2014

ES.1 Findings and Recommendations... ES Overview Current Rates Rate Making Objectives

CITY OF CALISTOGA WATER RATE STUDY FINAL REPORT

Third Quarter Financial Report Fiscal Year and. Mid-Term Budget Update - Fiscal Year June 15, 2015

Maurice Kaufman, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Bartle Wells Associates DATE: September 7, 2016 MEMORANDUM

SANTA FE IRRIGATION DISTRICT

HELPING YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT: RATE SETTING & PROPOSITION 218

Marina Coast Water District Marina, California

Marina Coast Water District Marina, California

2017 UTILITY RATE STUDY WORK SESSION #2: BACKGROUND, EDUCATIONAL/INFORMATIONAL

Progressive Planning for Financially Robust Water Systems

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY

FUNDING SOURCES Restricted vs. Un-Restricted Funding Sources Fund Balances and Projected Funding Availability IBank Loan

FY 2013/14 Proposed Operating Budget

WATER VALIDATION, COST OF SERVICE & RATE DESIGN ANALYSIS WASTEWATER VALIDATION & RATE ANALYSIS MISCELLANEOUS FEES & OVERHEAD RATE ANALYSIS

WATER AND SEWER RATE STUDY

TEN YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST

Water Conservation Rates. January 26, 2010

City of San Carlos Sewer Financial Plan & Rate Update

Overview of the State Education Fund and K-12 Public School Funding

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ WATER DEPARTMENT LONG RANGE FINANCIAL PLAN

Lorie Tinfow, City Manager, City of Pacifica Lorenzo Hines Jr., Assistant City Manager, City of Pacifica


RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT

Water Bond Debt Fee and Water Rate Modification

City of Ann Arbor - Water Rate Study. Draft Results Workbook

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH. Water Rate Cost-of-Service Study

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

July 1, Tier Percent of Allocation Cost per ccf $0.91 $1.27 $2.86 $4.80 $ % % % % 201+%

COMPREHENSIVE COST OF SERVICE AND RATE DESIGN ANALYSIS

Town of Orange Park Water & Wastewater Rate Study. Town Council Meeting. March 19, 2019

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY

DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE COST OF SERVICE AND RATE DESIGN ANALYSIS. San Antonio Water System. San Antonio Water System 21 MAY 2015 PREPARED FOR

Sewer Rate Study July 2016

Transcription:

Comprehensive Rate Study & Cost Allocation Analysis Public Workshop December 4, 2017

Today s Workshop: Present findings and solicit Board input on rate design and fiscal policy considerations Financial Outlook and Challenges Financial Planning Scenarios Rate Structure Recommendations Filename.ppt/2 Next Steps / Q&A

Financial Outlook and Challenges

Financial Plan: Review uses three tests to assess the viability of the rates and corresponding revenues Do the rates fully fund operating expenditures? Is there sufficient revenue for bond coverage? Is the capital plan fully funded through rates, reserves, and/or debt? Filename.ppt/4

O&M expenses have kept pace with projected levels from the last rate study, and have even fallen below projections this year Millions $20 $15 Projected vs. Actual/Budgeted Expenses $10 $5 Filename.ppt/5 $0 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 FY 2017/18 MW Projected MS Projected OW Projected OS Projected Actual/Budgeted Expenses

Like most utilities in California, the financial plan is impacted by recent conservation, and ongoing capital funding needs Water Demand Trends 3,000 2,500 2,751 2,447 2,518 Acre-Feet 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Total demand last year was 11% below FY 2014/15 levels. - FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 Filename.ppt/6 Marina Ord

As a result of the conservation, water rate revenue was at least 10 percent below projected levels in FY 2015/16 Millions $6.0 $5.0 Marina Water Rate Revenue Millions $6.0 $5.0 Ord Water Rate Revenue $5.71 $5.73 $5.71 $5.71 $5.02 $5.85 $4.0 $4.12 $4.12 $4.12 $3.62 $3.36 $3.67 $4.0 $3.0 $3.0 $2.0 $2.0 $1.0-12% -18% -11% $1.0 0% -12% +2% $0.0 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 $0.0 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 Filename.ppt/7 Projected Actual Projected Actual

Previous forecast of gradual buildup of reserves didn t materialize Millions $12 $10 $8 Combined Balances $6 $4 $2 $- Filename.ppt/8 Combined Capital Reserve Combined Operating Reserve Required Capital Reserve Required Operating Reserve

All four systems have significant increases in capital funding needs forecasted in the next five years, a challenge with limited reserves for some cost centers R&R Capital Funding Needs Millions $9 $6 $3 $1.23 $1.78 $3.99 $4.67 $3.14 $7.72 $1.90 Filename.ppt/9 $- FYE 2017 FYE 2018 FYE 2019 FYE 2020 FYE 2021 FYE 2022 FYE 2023 Ord Water Ord Sewer Marina Water Marina Sewer CIP Projection from Last Rate Study

Financial Planning Scenarios

Adjusting to the New Normal: Key considerations and changes to system costs necessitate review of existing rates Water use reductions Future funding viability Revenue resiliency Customer impacts Expenditures exceed revenues Customer understanding Legal considerations Filename.ppt/11

Filename.ppt/12 Ord Water: Significant capital needs that are currently underfunded by rates or reserves over the next five years

Ord Water: Financial plan options offer a spectrum of capital funding scenarios Immediate Increases (%): 11 / 5 / 5 / 2 thereafter Debt $4.9m in FYE 2022 Reserves: O&M reserve $1.5m below target in FYE 2019; $300k in 2020 Meets target in all other years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $10 per month Balanced Increases (%): 5 / 5 / 2 thereafter Debt $1.5m in FYE 2019 $4.9m in FYE 2022 Reserves: O&M reserve $250k below target in FYE 2019 Meets target in all other years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $4 per month Extended Increases (%): 3 in all years Debt $1.5m in FYE 2019 $4.9m in FYE 2022 Reserves: O&M reserve $1.4m below target in FYE 2019; $1.0m in FYE 2020 Meets target in all other years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $2 per month Filename.ppt/13 *Typical customer assumes 9 CCF with a 3/4 meter

Filename.ppt/14 Ord Sewer: Significant capital needs that are currently underfunded by rates or reserves over the next five years

Ord Sewer: Options offer either no debt in FYE 2019 and high increases, or lower increases with immediate debt Immediate Increases (%): 25 / 3 thereafter Debt No debt in FYE 2019 $3.0m in FYE 2020 $1.4m in FYE 2021 Reserves: Allows only 38% of FYE 2019 CIP to be funded before reserves go negative Meets target in all other years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $9 per month Balanced Increases (%): 6 / 3 thereafter Debt $2.3m in FYE 2019 $3.0m in FYE 2020 $1.4m in FYE 2021 Reserves: Meets target in all years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $2 per month Extended Increases (%): 3 in all years Debt No additional debt Reserves: Falls short of O&M target in all years Allows only approx. 50% funding of total CIP over next 5 years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $1 per month Filename.ppt/15 *Typical customer assumes SFR with 1 EDU

Filename.ppt/16 Marina Water: Rates would need increases to fund O&M, but increases would be inflationary and modest (<4%)

Marina Water: Financial plan options balance how quickly to rebuild operating and capital reserves Balanced Increases (%): 3 in all years Debt No additional debt Reserves: O&M reserve meets target in all years Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $3 per month Filename.ppt/17 *Typical customer assumes 9 CCF with a 3/4 meter

Filename.ppt/18 Marina Sewer: Significant capital expenditures planning in FYE 2020-2022, necessitating additional funding

Marina Sewer: Financial plan balances debt in FYE 2022 with more modest rate increases (3% versus 5% without debt) Immediate Increases (%): 5 in all years Debt No additional debt Reserves: Meets target in all years Relies on reserve funding in FYE 2020 and 2022 Typical Customer Impact:* Approx. $1 per month Balanced Increases (%): 3 in all years Debt $1.3m in FYE 2022 Reserves: Meets target in all years Relies on reserve funding in FYE 2020 Typical Customer Impact:* < $1 per month Extended Increases (%): 3 in all years Debt No additional debt Reserves: Meets target in all years Relies on reserve funding in FYE 2020 through 2022 Typical Customer Impact:* < $1 per month Filename.ppt/19 *Typical customer assumes SFR with 1 EDU

Rate Structure Recommendations

Ord Water: Cost recovery continues to be stabilized by a high percentage of revenues from fixed charges Ord Water Cost Allocation Results Current 54% 18% 28% High fixed cost recovery helped smooth revenue collection during the drought However, percentage went up as volumetric usage went down in recent years Proposed 51% 19% 30% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Filename.ppt/21 Fixed Base Peak

While less than Ord, Marina Water fixed cost recovery is still high enough to help stabilize revenues Marina Water Cost Allocation Results Current 38% 25% 37% Proposed 37% 25% 38% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Filename.ppt/22 Fixed Base Peak

Three-Tiered rates have a firm cost of service foundation But have the underlying assumptions changed since these were developed? What changes could be made to the rates? More closely tailored to cost of service? More reflective customer demands? Greater mitigation of financial risk? Filename.ppt/23

With the exception of Institutional customers, MCWD customers have a relatively flat peak profile 250% Month vs. Average Peak Profile 200% 150% 100% 50% 0% Max month is only 22% higher compared to an average month for all customer classes Single Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Filename.ppt/24 Commcerial Institutional

Over 85 percent of all usage for both Marina and Ord occurs within tiers 1 or 3, questioning the need for a tier 2 Usage by Tier Marina 41% 12% 48% Ord 44% 12% 44% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Usage Filename.ppt/25 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3

Given the limited peaking of the District s customers, a twotiered approach may provide a better alternative Easier to understand and administer Simpler cost of service nexus Potentially less subject to revenue risk Filename.ppt/26

Two-Tier structure would expand the first tier, and consolidate the second and third tiers Tier 1 would be expanded to provide additional base capacity water Tier 2 would cover all usage above the tier 1 allowance Tier Three-Tier CCF Two-Tier CCF 1 8 10 2 16 All other usage 3 All other usage Eliminated Tier 3 would be eliminated Filename.ppt/27

Proposed Water Rates: Assuming the balanced funding scenario Ord Marina Tier Current Rates (Eff. 1/1/18) Three Tier (1/1/19) Two Tier (1/1/19) Tier Current Rates (Eff. 1/1/18) Three Tier (1/1/19) Two Tier (1/1/19) 1 $3.68 $4.15 $4.08 2 $5.65 $5.80 $8.33 3 $7.62 $8.57-1 $2.78 $3.29 $3.28 2 $3.19 $4.19 $4.99 3 $5.63 $5.02 - Filename.ppt/28

Balanced Financial Plan: Bill impacts for the typical customers Ord Monthly Bill Comparison (9 CCF) Marina Monthly Bill Comparison $90 $79.53 $81.57 $90 $60 $40.74 $38.00 $60 $54.99 $56.56 $30 $38.79 $43.57 $30 $32.63 $31.95 $22.36 $24.61 $0 Existing Proposed $0 Existing Proposed Filename.ppt/29 Fixed Variable Fixed Variable

Two-Tier structure would impact Marina water customers differently based on usage levels relative to old tier breakpoints 20% 15% 68% of all bills 17% MW Bill Impact at Each Usage Level 10% 5% New Tier 1 10 CCF New Tier 2 above 10 CCF Filename.ppt/30 0% Old Tier 1 8 CCF Old Tier 2 16 CCF Old Tier 3 above 16 CCF 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Monthly CCF

Next Steps

Schedule and Next Steps Introduction of Draft Results Consideration of Initiating Proposition 218 Process Rate Adoption December 4 (Board) December 18 (Board) January 2018 July 1, 2018 Filename.ppt/32