HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/22/78 AGENDA
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1978
4:00 P.M.
Call Meeting to order
Roll Call - Board Members: ~Rogers, Chairm~n;_Bart0n,//Bergen, Hoagland,
1.~Approve minutes of regular meeting of February 1, 1978.
2.~ Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District Service Agreement. - BOARD
TO REVIEW
3J Examples of Municipal Water Rates for Inside City and Outside
jCity services submitted by Tom Stetson. - FOR DISCUSSION
5. Board Comments
6. Adjournment
M I'N U,T E S
WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1,' 1978
4: 00 P .M.
The :neeting was called to order by Chairman Rogers in the City
Hall Caucus Room.
TheSecretary~ ' called the roll as follows:
Present: Rogers, Hoagland, Ratty, (Bergen arrived at 4:04 P.M.)
Absent: Barton
Bill Balch, Executive Vice-President, Tenneco West, Inc. and
Bob Bellue, District Engineer, Kern County Water Agency; also,
attended the meeting.
The minutes for 'the meeting of December 14, 1977, were presented
for approval. The minutes were corrected as to Mr. Bergen's
comments regarding the City's adoption of a policy regarding
the public use of the City's property in and adjacent to the
Kern River bed. Relative to this matter Mro Bergen stated
that he felt it was extremely important that the City make
contacts with interested and effected parties. Along with
requests for other uses he feels that specific recommendations
should be put together by the staff, working with Mro Stetson,
the Public Works Department, and the Parks Department so,that
the Board will have something to evaluate. Mro Bergen stated
that We need a map indicating the property the City owns with
the access to it so that we could start delineating areas for'
certain activities. Mro Bergen feels that. if we do not accom-
plish this soon we are going to have a problem in the future.
Operations and Maintenance Service Agreements between the City
of Bakersfield and Tenneco West, Inc. and between the City of
Bakersfield and Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District were
presen'ted to the Board. After discussion Mro Hoagland made a
motion that the Board approve the agreements and authorize the
Chairman to sign. The motion was carried.
A Quitclaim Deed from the City of Bakersfield to Tenneco West,
Inc. for portions of redefined right-of-way on the Calloway
Canal south of Rosedale Highway was presented to the Board°
After a brief description of the Quitclaim Deed waS given by
Gene Bogart, Mr. Hoagland made a motion to approve the Quit-
claim Deed and authorize the Chairman to sign subject to con-
firming that there is no material deviations from the exhibits
on the prime contract. The motion was carried.
An Agreement between the City of Bakersfield and Tenneco West,
Inc. for utilization of the River Canal was presented to the
Board. After discussion Dr. Ratty made a motion that tl%e Board
approve the agreement and authorize the Chairman ~o sign° The
motion was carried.
A letter dated December 22, 1977, to '~he City Council from Central
Valley Region, State Water Quality Control Board regarding pro-
posed "Water Well Standards for Kern County", was brought before
the Board. After discussion Mr. Hoagland made a motion which
was Carried that John Chafin research this matter relative to
deadlines and so forth and report back to the Board.
Staff, Comments
Kim Combs, Accountant for the Department of Water, informed the
Board that we are having a financial problem operating our
Domestic Water System. The City is being hurt by several things,
including our debt service fund, Domestic Water is obligated to
pick up a portion of the bond interest expense and, also, the
bond principal payments. Another of our major expenses is a
pump tax charged by the Kern County Water Agency which is going
to go .up to $20.00 per acre foot next July let. After discussion
Mr. B~rgen made a motion that the staff meet with Mr. Stetson as
quickly as possible and report back to the Board with a specific
recommendation that would include a differential rate on a rea-
sonable basis. The motion was passed.
Board. Comments
Mr. Bergen informed the Board that it had been brought to his
attention that the Kern County Water Agency has suggested an
amendment to their act which would delete the budget hearing
that is presently required before the Kern County Board of
Supervisors. Mr. Bergen has talked with several supervisors
and the City Attorney and he feels that this is moving in the
wrong direction. Dr. Ratty made a motion that the City Attorney
get together with the Chairman and prepare a written statement
of our feelings on the proposed State legislation to repeal
Section 7.3 of the Kern County Water Agency Act and submit it
to the Board of Supervisors, the Kern County Water Agency as
well as our legislators. The motion was carried.
Mr. Bergen asked about the status of the Agreement between the
City and Chevron U.S.A. and asked that the staff bring him up
to date on this matter at the next meeting.
Mr. Bellue ~ddressed the Board stating that the Kern County
Water Agency had sent a letter to the City Council in answer
to the City's comments to their water conditioning
report.
Including two agreements which were started with Tenneco, one
for the Calloway Canal and one for the Kern River, the agree-
ments were in use by the Kern County Water Agency for spread-
ing purposes. They would like at this time the City's response
to these draft agreements. Mr. Bergen made a motion that the
staff get together with our consultant Tom Stetson and make a
recommendation to the Board working with a representative of
the Kern County Water Agency and, also, make sure that Tenneco
West, Inc. and other entities are aware of these agreements.
The motion was carried.
Mr. Belch, Executive Vice-President, Tenneco West, Inc., informed
the Board that he knew of several farmers within ID-4 that would
like to buy surface water this year and there is an opportunity
for revenue for the City's transportation as well as the Kern
County Water Agency of actually selling the water within ID-4
on a surface basis rather than dumping it into the river. Mr.
Belch ~pes that the City does not overlook this opportunity.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the
Chairman adjourned the meeting at 4:50 PoM.
~ }-tO-stmyer, S~-~tary
City of Bakersfield Water Board
-2-
MEMORANDUM
~, ........ .0:. ~. 3a~..~.r.x~....2..7.,....~ .9..7. ~ .............
TO .... '..~'...W..A...T..E..,R....B...O..A....R~......M..E....M~,..E....R~.....:'- ...... ::..." · '., , ' ' . ' ,
F~OM .... ..a..o.g..tx!....~.,...g~.z..~ ................ '...,.....: .., '.
..... ; "'.':."7 ...... :". .... 7 ...... : ............. 7 .... ' ....... :'":'7:; .... i ...............................
.~.~......_~__......... ~__....._~..... _....... _ _......._~,,~,~c-r..o~..~.~o~s...&..?L~.~.~-~c~...s~.~wcs.~c.~.~s ' "-
Tenneco West,' Inc. and Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District
have requested the City of Bakersfield to operate and maintain
surface water facilities owned by them. Attached are copies of
service agreements by which the City would operate and maintain
the James and Pioneer canals~ for Tenneco and the Rosedale Channel
for Rosedale-Rio Bravo W.S.D. Both Tenneco and Rosedale concur
with the terms of the respective agreements and are ready ~o~
sign and execute. ,
Entering into these service agreements would augment the City's
position in the long-range operation of the Kern River. It
enables the City to operate all diversion points on the Kern
River within the First Point canal system. These service agree-
ments would give the Water Department flexibility to make effi-
cient use of existing personnel and equipment.
The rate and cost.Schedules (attached) allows the City to re-
capture all costs for labor, benefits, equipment, materials, etc.
plus an override'percentage for providing such service to Tenneco
West and Rosedale~Rio Bravo W.S.D.
TETSON ENGINEERS INC, J
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS
3104 East Garvey Avenue 550 Kearny Street; Suite 650
West Covina, California 91791
(213) 967-6202 Feb ruary 9 , 19 7 8 san Francisco, California 94108
(415) 781-4297
REPLY TO:
Mr. Harold Bergen ~8 1 4 1918
City Manager
City of Bakersfield CITY MANAGER,S OFFiCE
Bakers field, CA 93301
Re: Inside-Outside Municipal Water Rates
Dear Harold:
As I discussed with you last night by telephone, I am enclosing
some information on our survey of Inside-Outside Municipal Watbr
Rates.
~ttachment A shows typical water rates charged for inside and
outside municipal water service by various cities, mainly in southern
California and the surcharge, in percent, for outside service.
Those are rates which were in effect in September of 1977.
Attachment B shows similar data for San Joaquin Valley municipal-
ities based on data which John Blakemore collected and are generally
rates which were in effect in late 1977 and early 1978.
Attachment C shows similar data for coastal (beach) communities
as of January 1978. There are some investor-owned utilities on that
list which, of course, do not have outside service rates.
Attachment D is a reprint of an article in the May 1975 Journal of
the American Water Works Association representing rates in late 1974.
It is the tables on the last three pages of that article that are of
the most interest. Of the 62 municipalities surveyed in the Dallas
Rate Survey, only 16 indicated that there was no surcharge :for outside
service plus the City of Yonkers, New York indicated that no outside
service was provided. It is also interesting to note that most of the
utilities providing outside service derive virtually 100% of their
revenue from the users.
I hope this information will be of use to you in preparation for
the Water Board meeting February 23, 1978.
Sincerely,
Thomas M. Stetson
cc: John Blakemore
SOME EXAMPLES OF MUNICIPAL WATER RATES FOR INSIDE CITY AND OUTSIDE CITY SERVICES
September, 1977
SURCHARGE
FOR OUTSIDE
WITHIN CIT'Y OUTSIDE CITY SERVICE
City of Azusa
3/4" meter 3/4" meter 100%
$3.50/ month (600 CU. Ft.~ $7.00/m6nth (600 Cu. Ft.)
31¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 31¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter
City of Covina
$5.20/1,000 Cu. Ft. $8.90/1,000 Cu. Ft. 71.15%
(Minimum bill) (Minimum bill)
City of Monterey Park
$3.75/800 Cu. Ft./month $5.61/800 Cu. ~t./month 49.6%
(Minimum bill) (Minimum bill)
32¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 48¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 50%
City of 'Los Angeles
29.8¢/100 Cu. Ft. 44.7¢/100 Cu. Ft. 50%
City'of Glendora
$6/1,000 Cu. Ft./2 months $9/1,000 Cu. Ft./ 2 months 50%
26~/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 36¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 38.5%
City of Pomona
$4.85/ 2 months (base unknown) $7.30/ 2 months (same) 50.5%
14¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 24¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 71.4%
City of Orange
$8/2,000 Cu. Ft. $10.67/2,000 Cu. Ft. 33.4%
38¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 51.67¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 36%
Page Tw6
SURCHARGE
FOR OUTSIDE
WITHIN CITY OUTSIDE CITY SE/'WICE
City of Garden Grove
$5/500 Cu. Ft. $7.50/500 Cu. Ft. 50%
27¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 40.5¢/100 Cu. Ft. thereafter 50%
City of Glendale
$2.70/month meter charge $4.80/month meter charge 77.7%
plus 27¢/100 Cu. Ft. plus 43.8¢/100 Cu. Ft. 62.2%
If annexed after 1/1/50:
$2.70/month meter charge $4.00/month meter charge 77.7%
plus 36¢/100 Cu. Ft. plus 43.8¢/100 Cu. Ft. 21.7%
City of San Francisco
3/4" meter 3/4".meter 21.9%
$1.60/month service charge $1.95/month service charge 24.5%
'45.3¢/100 Cu. Ft. 1st 3,300 Cu. Ft. 56.4¢/100 Cu. Ft. 1st 3,300 Cu. Ft. 21.4%
41.2¢/loo Cu. Ft. next 30,000 Cu. Ft. 50¢/100 Cu. Ft. next 30,000 Cu. Ft.
SOME EXAMPLES OF MUNICIPAL WATER RATES FOR INSIDE AND OUTSIDE CITY SERVICES
SAN JOAqUIN VALLEY
February, 1978
SURCHARGE
FOR OUTSIDE
OUTS IDE SERVICE
WITHIN CITY CITY
City of Modesto
3/4" meter'
$5.20/2 months (3,335 c.f.) game as inside rate None
City of Fresno
3/4" meter $2.50/month meter charge
$1.65/month meter charge $0.21/100 c.f.
$0.14/100 c.f.; $0.125 next 100 c.f. $0.188 next 100 c.f.
$0.115 next 800 c.f. $0.172 next 800 c.f.
$0.105 next lQ00 c.f. $0.158 next 1000 c.f. 50%
Flat Rate: $3.80 (6,000 Sq. Ft. lot) $9.50. (6,000 Sq. Ft. lot) 150%
City of Delano -.
1" meter $11.25 monthly charge inc. 10,000 gal
$5.00 monthly charge inc. 10,000 gal. $0.54 per 1000 gal. for next 20,000 gal.
$0.15 per 1000 gal. for next 20,000 gal. $0.4S per 1000 gal. for next 30,000 gal.
$0.20 per 1000 gal. for next 30,000 gal. 12S%
City of Madera
$7.00/month minimum for 20,000 gal. $14.00/month minimum for 20,000 gal.
$0.15 per 1000 gal. thereafter $0.30 per 1000 gal. thereafter
(however no one at this time is using
water outside city) 100%
City of Merced
3/4" meter
$3.75/month/1500 c.f.
$0.21 per 100 c.f. for next 2500 c.f.
$0.17 per 100 c.f. for next 6000 c.f. Same as inside rate ~ne
City of Tualare
3/4" meter $12.00/month for first 10,000 gal.
$6.00/month for first 10,000 gal. $0.40 per 1000 gal.
$0.20 per 1000 gal. thereafter thereafter 100%
!
TI~OMA$ '~l. STETS;ON
~a~e T~o St~C£
FOR OUTS
OUTS I DE SERVI CE
WITHIN CITY CITY
City of Porterville
3/4" meter $11.00 monthly meter charge' 100%
$5.50 monthly ~eter charge $3.64 per 1000 c.f.
$1.82 per 1000 c.f.
($7.32 minimum monthly charge)
1/
BIMONTHLY WATER RATE COMPARISON OF 20 BEACH COMMUNITIES --
JANUARY, 1978
Inside Cost Outside Cost Percent Supplemental Water
Municipality Population Supplier 2--/ Dollars Dollars Difference Source And Cost $/A.F.
Buena Ventura 65,200 N.A. 24.99 42.48 70 Casitas
Carlsbad 23,300 N.A. 27.31 32:21 17.9 San Diego ~ll.56/A.F.
Coronado 22,900 Cal. American Water Co. 25.56 N.A. San Diego 103.67/A.F.
Costa Mesa 77,500 N.A. 17.45 Same N.A.
Daly City 67,000 N.A. 19.43 38.86 100 City of San Francisco
Del Mar 49,300 N.A. 29.82 34.52 15.8 MWD 69/A.F.
Huntington Beach 154,800 N.A. 18.43 Same ~54D 84/A.F.
Imperial Beach 20,250 Cal. American Water Co. 25.56 N.A. San Diego 103.67/A.F.
Laguna Beach 16,600 N.A. 17.77 Same N.A. '5
Monterey 26,000 Cal. American'Water Co. 24.87 N.A. '" N.A.
Newport Beach 63,800 ~. N.A. 27.56 Same N.A.
Oceanside 62,100 N.A. 24.32 S~me .~_".. N.A.
Oxnard 93,297 ~' N.A. 18.64 37.29 100 MWD 84/A.F.
Port Hueneme 19,597 N.A. 11.62 14.53 25 United Water Conservation
- - District 25.60/A.F.
Rancho Palos Verdes 59,925. Cal~.Water Service 41.04 N.A. il . N.A
Redondo Beach 64,400 Cal. Water Service 26.93 N.A. . -~ N.A.
San Clemente 23,200 N.A. 19.94 29.92 50 Tri City Water 84/A.F.
San Juan Capstrano 15,200 Orange Co. Water Dist. #4 23.05 N.A ..... N.A.
Santa Cruz 32,000 N.A. 19.89 39.78 100 .... N.A.
Santa Monica 93,000 N.A. 18.26 Same N.A.
Seal Beach 27,300 N.A. 18.12 Same N.A..
il_,/ U~ing an average monthly consumption of 22.8 ccf.
i2/ If other than city.
~" ~' ' "' ~ The Hartford survey reported data similar to that reported
During the time that the Water Rates Committee was giving
consideration to a water rates sutwe¥, another survey was
being conducted, by the Dallas Water Utilities of Dallas,
Tex.
.~gt~.=~l L~=~;t.~.'~;~,.~'~:'Av~~.~;.,~.~t~e~'~- This survey too was submitted to AWWA's Management ·
,~ ~..~ Division. The JOURNAL's editors became enlightened of
~-~'~ the existence of the Dallas survey and requested permission
to print it. "
~~,~"J The editors believed thai this material would fit well into
'~'~" ';'"~" this economics issue. Moreover, the Dallas utility agreed to.
. ' ~~'~~~ AWWA's acting as a clearing house for this survey and
~ each planned annual updating of it. The JOURNAL's
editors propose to publish these updates as they become
'* ' ':-' available.
The tables that appear on these pages include data for 62
utilities from cities in 28 states across the US, plus the .-
~~ ~~'~ ~V,~=~__ .. District of Columbia. All of the utilities service areas where
the urban populations are in excess of 325000.'1n addition
, many service, either directly or indirectly, areas beyond '
that of the inner city, for which the population is reported.. :~.
The Water R;tes Committee of the Management Division
has recently investigated the possibility of publishing a -These are two sets of tables. The first, beginning with the
water rates survey in the JOURNAL. next page, is concerned with billing procedure; the second
set, beginning with page 236, gives data about the charges.
The committee's action was promulgated by the release of
a survey f:onducted by the Hartford Water Co. of Connecti- AWWA thanks the Dallas Water Utilities for making the
cut in 1973 -- a survey that had been undertaken with a view statistics available. And thanks'to the Hartford Water Co.
to determining possible rate structure during 1975-76. for showing the way.
RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY DALLAS WATER UTILITIES
N(~VEMBER 19 f4
232 MANAGEMENT JOURNAL .AWWA
¢
RATE SURVEY
'* ' ~ ' ' CONDUCTED BY DALLAS wATER UTiLiTIES
NOVEMBER 1914
' ;. - RATE SURVEY
.:." CONDUCTED 8Y OALCAS WATER
,?.:. NOVEMBER 1974
'. :~.,
.~.:',~ ~' ~ "~" ., ~.
~'.:~:- MAY 1975 DALLAS RATE SURVEY 233
,~.~ ~.'~ '.'~.
RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY DALLAS WATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974
RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY DALLAS ~VATER UTiLiTIES
NOVEMBER 1974
' ,to.. ~30,83t (A:5 O}' 1-1-75)
~:~-~,,~,. ~ .,,.~. ~, ,
~ '~ · Z62,9~
' "~"MAY 1975 DALLAS RATE SURVEY 235
RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY OALLAS WATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974
METERING DATA '
RAIE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY OALLAS WATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974
' :",~",/'.. ., ,,' ~.., .,,/.~.,,"/ --/' ~,,,./ ' .~. ............................................. ' ' ' ' /'¢,'..,~. ,. ,~ / "..',;:;.
A¥~R£LLO. tL N $~.00 257 ALL ).~% User G ~.68 ~.0~ M.0~ S~J~.~:~ ~27.~ ~O.~].
AU%TIN, TI.. N S,2,00 26'/ 5/8 ~% U~er 0 $2.99 $5.~.9$].L69$2[,79$~9.?t, $~7.?og75.65
~LT[~. ~3. Q S).60/~100~ ~/e iCrC User C: %t.80 $~.60 $7.(1~$L1.~]$Z&.33 - S~i~.33
~I[~L~(I~t-~IAH. /~. [ (~S5.21~/~ )~(~)~/FJ 1~1~ User C $[.~ $~.96 99.90 ;tg.eoS39.~0$~.)o S7~,.80
CI~RLOI'~, X.C. X %1..(~O250 5/8 3.0Cr~ U~er C $2.Q0 ~..~0 $:O.oO$),8.81 $55.)L ~L9.85,
DALL*3. 1T.t~3 N $1.)& 13& )/8 ~00% b'eee 0 $3.L8 $~.27 $!.),.02 $20.);1 $]~9.O~$~7.72
236 MANAGEMENT JOURNAL AWWA
i . F(ATE SUF~VE Y
CONDUCTED bY' DALLAS WATER UTiLiTIES
[ ~ . ~o~, o~
.[~ RATE SURVEY
~' CONDUCTED BY DALLAS WATER UTILITIES
' NOVE~BEH 1~4 .
, ~_~ ,,~. ,.,'V -~~ ................................................. ~~ ,,.=
' ~ .~ .; ~"-.,~ ,~ / _~,: Z'L~ ........................ ~'~"1 ·
I:x~.- .... ..
~'~ "'.' '
F
. , M~Y 1975 D~LL~S R~TE SURVEY
" RA'fE SURVEY
..- , COI',10UCTEO BY DALLAS WATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974 ~-~
J RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED 8Y pALLAS WATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974.
.:'" .' ,,, " ,,, ............................................... /,,.,.-,,/ '
~# JC.~., CA ~ $~.]$ . $/8x]/~, 1.00~ L~,*r C $~,06 $~.76 StO.8.e $19.t.0 $]6.z.~ $~].~0
'
lO:a~,"~, ~ :51.il.70/2Sa5 100% User C ~,.2.6~ 1.5.10:$L1.53 S2),8]$LL.67¢.62.17 :.7~.67 )~7.17$359.67 'gO SL?IICl
233 MANAGEMENT ' JOURNAL AWWA
-~ RATE SURVEY
?
~ CONOUCTEO BY DALLAS ~VATER UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974
I~1 -
RATE SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY' DALLAS WATER 'UTILITIES
NOVEMBER 1974
///.// /.../ ....... - :::,'::o //:
~/.-"://,// o,
.... ~//~ ,:,,' 'Y",k" 2,' ' ' ' ' '"
)~oR;q:~. ~& "3 ~p L~. .:, '~t~: . LlOr~ ,,;;m:),~ I~o~.~I1o~ go,'~:$).o.oo $lo:oo ).;o~' - - - ~ 5/'J./?O ' ;~VE. ] a~,cr..~P
234 MANAGEMENT JOURNAL AWWA
t