The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/21/83 , - ~ \ i .¡ ., AGENDA ------ SPECIALMEEtCING WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD THURSDAY, APRIL 2l:~ 1983: 12:00 P.M. - NOON Call meeting to order. Roll call - Board Members: Barton, Chairman; Payne, Ratty, Kelmar, Oberho1zer 1. Approve minutes of meeting held March 2, 1983. 2. Correspondence: a) Letter from Henry Garnett, President, Kern Cò .Wa ter Agency to James J. Barton dated March 30, 1983 (response enclosed). 3. 1983-84 Agricultural Water Enterprise Budget. The budget this year consist of two (2) separate components as follows: a) "1983-84 Operations and Capital Outlay Budget." b) "1983-84 Water Price and Sand Sale Schedule." FOR BOARD ACTIONS and RECO~mENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. 4. 1983-84 Domestic Water Enterprise Operations and Capital Outlay Budget. FOR BOARD ACTION and RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. 5. Closed Session - water matters concerning potential litigation. 6. Adj ournment. I , -------,.- .~.._.- . ----' ,--- --..- -----. -,-. '----"'-' .-.-.. ,---..- -.-----.- _._~---_.-~_.._---.--.-_....----------,---. -.--. ----~-'--" --- --'- \ .. I I M I NUT E S ------- WATER BOARD - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2,1983 12:00 P.M. - NOON The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barton in the Department of Water Conference Room. I The secretary called the roll as follows: Present: Barton (Chairman), Ratty, Oberholzer Absent: Payne, Kelmar The minutes from the Meeting of February 16,1983, were approved as presented. No correspondence was received. Draft report evaluating potential for "MASTER PLAN" connection between Olcese Water District and Improvement District No.4. Mr. Clark presented this report, which was prepared by Mr. Gillick. There was no action taken on this report, it was for Board information only. Letter from Kern Tulare Water District dated February 8, 1983 requesting that a total of 17,000 acre-feet of 1983 "Basic Contract" water be re-assigned (re-sold) to North Kern W.S.D. and Cawelo W.D. It was recommended by Mr. Hatch that this item be held and brought before the Board in "Closed Session." Letter from Rag-Gulch Water District dated February 8, 1983 requesting that a total of 3,000 acre-feet of 1983 "Basic Contract" water be re-assigned (re-sold) to North Kern W.S.D. and Cawelo W.D. This item was also held for the "Closed Session." No public comments were brought before the Board. I No staff comments. No Board comments. The Board recessed to the Closed Session. The Board Meeting was reopened. Mr. Oberholzer made a motion to send a letter to Kern Tulare Water District denying their request to re-assign "Basic Contract" water to North Kern Water Storage District and Cawelo Water District. The motion passed. Mr. Oberholzer made a motion to send a letter to Rag-Gulch r-. Water District denying their request to re-assign "Basic : Contract" water to North Kern Water Storage District and Cawelo Water District. The motion passed. I J. ,~~ -.. --. '- .' ,~ There being no further business to come before the Board, I Chairman Barton adjourned the meeting at 12:32 p.m. I I Û 9 A~L ./ ~0<:1. I' I()tf'r./¿:;'Í<... ~~mes J. ~arton, Chairman -- City of Bakersfield Water Board ca~df~{, e~~ City of Bakersfield Water Board -2- , I. KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY I 4114 Arrow Street, P.O. Box 58 Bakersfield, California 93302-0058 Directors: Larry R. Wedel Division 1 Telephone: (805) 393-6200 J Elliott Fox Division 2 Stuart T. Pyle John L. Willis Division 3 Engineer-Manager Michael Radon Division 4 George E. Ribble Robert E. McCarthy Division 5 Assistant Engineer-Manager Henry C Garnett Division 6 President Lois Buchenberger Gene A. Lundquist Division 7 Secretary March 30, 1983 James J. Barton Chairman - Water Board City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Ave Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Barton: We have just learned that earth borrow operations now underway south of the Cross Valley Canal and west of Coffee Road are designed to alter the natural course of the Kern River in the vicinity of mile point 118.0. This change may increase channel slope and velocity. We understand that the change in course is intended to place the main channel much closer to the Cross Valley Canal than it is now. Protective elements of the Cross Valley Canal were designed by the Cross Valley Consultants and constructed based on a low water channel as delineated by the Corps of Engineers in their 1969 publication entitled "Flood Plain Information" together with information provided by a Corps special encroachment study. The location of this low water channel appears to be different from both the present channel and the intended channel. The designated floodway provisions of the State Reclamation Board were created to organize artifical floodplain activity without causing harm to adjacent property owners and this would include the Cross Valley Canal. However, the Reclamation Board has no knowledge of this borrow operation. Apparently, no designated floodway encroachment permit has been sought or issued for this activity. If this is so, you are not complying with the mandatory permit process. We are particularly concerned about river bank stabilization, velocity, and how the grading activity will affect the designated floodway. The Reclamation Board would expect a grading plan for review and approval and review by the Agency as an adjacent property owner. We need this information to advise Cross Valley Canal participants of the possible impact of this work on the canal. We have no immediate alternative to insure canal protection and so we request that operations cease until a Reclamation Board permit is obtained as required by law. I I I. James J. Barton March 30, 1983 Page Two We further request that you take steps so that existing works will not direct the river toward the Cross Valley Canal during the prolonged periods of high flow expected during spring and summer of this year. Of lesser concern is the contractors trespass across property owned by the Kern County Water Agency and his breach of an Improvement District No.1 levee between the Cross Valley Canal and the River. Very truly yours, ~ {Y."L-f# - Hen Ga rnett President xc: Paul Dow Ca 1 B i dwe 11 Gene Bogart Arvin-Edison Cawelo Kern-Tulare Rag-Gulch Rosedale-Rio Bravo Fresno-Tulare Group Eas t Nil es CSD North of the River WD California Water Service Co. The Reclamation Board Corps of Engineers Tenneco West, Inc. Bookman-Edmons ton: :Engi neeri ng, I nc. I I I I ~,.~~, ~. , " /." ~TY OF 1R^i[IErRSIFITlELIIJ) CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER April 12,1983 Henry C. Garnett, President Kern County Water Agency O~' 4014 Arrow Street " A þ..1\\'"\ P.O. Box 58 ~OR\~' Bakersfield, CA 93302 ~~()Vl \~~ RE: Flood Plain Remedial Work Dear Mr. Garnett: Your letter of March 30, 1983, was referred to me for response. I would like to assure you that the work currently being done west of Coffee Road in the river channel is not intended to in- crease any danger to the Cross Valley Canal. Quite to the con- trary, the purpose of the work is to remove an existing silt and gravel island between the low flow and high flow channels. There is no rechannelization of the high flow channel to move it closer to the Cross Valley Canal. Instead, the intent is to increa~e the capacity of this section of the river by the removal of the island to permit the channel to pass more flood water at a lower elevation. As you are aware, historically Jerry Slough acted as a "relief valve" of the river when flows exceeded approximately 3500 c.f.s. in that reach of the river channel. Jerry Slough was truncated by the Cross Valley Canal. As a consequence, the river requires ongoing enhancement to assure that the flood flows which would otherwise seek exit from the channel through what was originally Jerry Slough are passed through the channel. We have discussed this matter with Mr. Bellue. He suggested some modifications regarding the location of the northern boundary of the gravel removal. We are pleased to inform you that we have taken action in accordance with Mr. Bellue's requ~st. So that there will be no misunderstanding, the City has an agree- ment with the State Reclamation Board in which jurisdiction over the "Designated Floodway" within the City of Bakersfield is placed under the jurisdiction of the City. The type of channel maintenance 1501 TRUXTUN AVENua . BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA '3301 . (105) 1.,.Z7,S ~ 17 ..;-_â. , ;. ~- . I,. . I, Henry C. Garnett April 12, 1983 Page 2 program now in progress has been ongoing and has been administered continuously by the City since prior to October 1977 when the City entered into Agreement No. 77-153 with the Reclamation Board. This program has been coordinated locally with the Kern River Levy Dis- trict and the Kern County Mosquito Abatement District in those areas subject to the City's jurisdiction. We also feel it is important that your agency, as an adjacent pro- perty owner, be included in. such coordination and appreciate your bringing to our attention the importance of such cooperation at this time. We will appreciate receiving whatever input you can provide to us that will improve our ongoing program of streamlining this cross sectipn of the river to reduce the earth and vegetational obstructions found within the primary flood channel. It is the City's objective, within City limits, whenever possible, to remove obstructions to flood flow that could have adverse affects on adjacent property owners such as yourself in the event of high flows, such as are expected during the spring and summer. Please be assured that we are sensitive to this need for cooperation and we will be happy to work with you. Very truly yours, ý!J ~ £l-HU PAUL row Director of Water Resources PD: s r cc: James J. Barton Richard Oberholzer, Esq. Calvin Bidwell Cross Valley Canal Advisory Committee Reclamation Board Tenneco West, Inc. Bookman-Edmonston Engineering, Inc. Kern River Levee District Kern County Mosquito Abatement District Stanley C. Hatch, Esq. Thomas M. Stetson Tom Ashlock -------,-- . , , :J . FOAM P','" MEMORANDUM April 13, 1983 ---------- -- ------ -- ----- -- -- -- ---- ---------------------- TO Paul Dow, Director of Water Resources -----______n_____------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FRO Mar--~_~_-~~!~:~:_-~==~:_: an:- Di re c to:_-~~-~~::~!:=~~:~::._----------------------------------- SUBJECT 1983-84 Agricultural Water Enterprise Budget --- --- - - - - - - -- -- - - -- -- - -- - -- -- - ----- -- -- -- - - -- ---- --- - - --- -- -- --- -- --- --- - -- -- -- ----- -- - - --------- -- --- Attached for your information and review is the proposed 1983-84 Agricultural Enterprise Budget. This year, the budget consists of two (2) major components that will require two separate actions by the Water Board and confirmation by the City Council. These components are as follows: 1) 1983-84 "OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL OUTLAY BUDGET" - Attached to the operations budget is a schedule showing the source of estimated 1983-84 revenues and a summary explanation of the various cost centers found in this years budget. As you can see from the attached information, the 1983-84 fiscal year is estimated to yield $642,500 in "Net" income ( before acquisition and capital transfers) due primarily to the 314% of normal water supply expected in 1983. Due to this extreme above normal water year, the water price schedule (except for basic contract items) has been reduced by 50% during periods of mandatory flood release and/or encroachment at Isabella Reservoir. This should encourage maximum use of Kern River water while, due to its volume, produce competitive income to the City during this year of over-abundant supply to the basin. 2) 1983-84 "WATER PRICE AND SAND SALE SCHEDULE" - As recommended, the schedule will encourage maximum use of surface water supplies and (through sand sales) enhance river channel flow capacities within City limits and the designated flood way. These operations will add revenues to the City as part of its ongoing program to maintain the river channel within City limits. The proposed price schedules for all categories would remain in effect until conditions warranted adjustments to the items set forth in the current "WATER PRICE AND SAND SALE SCHEDULE." GB:ph attachments cc: Phil Kelmar W.O. Higginbotham I / " 1 Page One CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE Estimated Revenues and Expenses For the Period 07/01/83 to 06/30/84 Estimated Projected Budgeted Actual For Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year OPERATING BUDGET 1982-83 1982-83 1983-84 Revenues Fran Operations ................... $2,733,300 $3,316,800 $2,888,500 Operating Expenses Field Expenses: Wages and Employee Benefits ............. $ 588,860 $ 627,340 $ 646,000 U.S. Corps of Engineers 0 & M - Lake Isabella .............................. 30,250 30,250 30,250 Maintenance Expense ..................... 95,000 92,260 95,000 Weed Control..................... ....... 25,000 30,490 32,000 Charges Fran Vehicle Pool............... 162,240 168,910 178,500 Charges From General Services Dept. ..... 2,500 2,300 2,450 Expenses Reimbursed-Clearing Accounts ... ( 145,000) ( 142,400) ( 145,000) Total Field Expenses .. ,...... ...... $ 758,850 $ 809,150 $ 839,200 Administrative Expenses: Consultants ~ Engineering & Attorney.... $ lDO,OOO $ 148,370 $ 180,000 Department of Water Resources - Snow Survey..................,............. 6,200 7,110 7,900 U.S.B.R. - Contract Administration """ 550 550 550 Self Insurance - liability & Property I Damage Reserve ... """'" """""" 27,200 29,920 32,900 Charges from Administrative Depts ....... 8,500 8,580 9,450 Field Office - Rents & Related Expenses. 38,000 33,900 37,500 Property, In Li eu & Possessory Interest Taxes ... ........... .......... 56,800 48,100 49,000 I Cloud Seeding Participation """""'" 25,000 10,320 25,000 I Kern River Invest. (Water rights, etc.) 12,000 10,100 12,000 Misc. General Expense (Assoc. dues, Security, etc.) ....................... 38,000. 36,700 38,000 Total Administrative Expenses ...... $ 312,250 ~ 333,650 $ 39i,300 Net Operating Income Before Deprec. . ...... $1,662,200 $2,174,000 $1,657,000 Depreciation ............................ ( 153,000) ( 154,200) ( 176,000) Net Operating Income (Loss) ............... $1,509,200 $2,019,800 $1,481,000 Non-Operating Expenses I 1) 1976 Water Bonds - Interest ......,.... $ 638,890 $ 639,870 $ 626,330 1) 1976 Water Bonds - Principal.......... 219,000 219,420 231,840 1965 NKWSD - Isabella Bonds Int. & Fees 26,650 26,660 25,100 1965 NKWSD - Isabella Bonds - Principal 38,750 38,750 40,000 less: Amortization of Bond Premium .... ( 1,100) ( 1,100) ( 1,100) less: Rental of Isabella Stor. Space.. ( 70,200) ( 65,800) ( 83,670) Total Non-Operating Expenses ....... $ 851,990 $ 857,800 $ 838,500 Net Income (loss) Before Capital Transfers. $ 657,210 $1,162,000 $ 642,500 2) Repymt. of Qrgat'l. AcqÜ:is. Cost H""" 90,000 90,000 90,000 2) Transfer to Capital Improvement Budget. 567,210 3)1,072,000 552,500 NET INCOME (LOSS) ..........;.............. $ ø $ ø $ ø -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I) Beginning 1982-83 fiscal year, proportionate share of 111976 Water Bonds'! principal and interest payment assumed by Domestic Water Enterprise. I 2) Repayment of acquisition costs and transfer to capital improvement budget are predicated upon receipt of estimated revenues during fiscal year. 3) I nc \ udes fund 5 trans fer red to e stab 1 i sh the IIGENERAL F I NANC I AL RESERVE" account authorized by City Council on May 6, 1981. :/ ----- --- " ¡ I Page Two CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE Estimated Revenues ,For the Period 07/01/83 to 06/30/84 Budgeted Estimated Projected For Ac t ua 1 For Fi scal Year Fi scal Year Fiscal Year 1982-1983 1982-1983 1983-1984 Sales to Five (5) t1ajor Districts """"""" $1,418,900 $1,418,900 $1,419,000 Kern River Canal & Irrigating Co. Sales ........ 220,000 166,600 179,300 Lake Ming Agreement (County of Kern) .........., 4,700 4,700 4,700 Oi 1 fi eld OJ scharge (Getty Oi 1) ,...... .ç. . . . . . . .. 7,000 10,800 11,000 Annual Pumping Agreements .,.".... .,...,.. "'" 5,500 9,800 10,000 Temporary Pumping Agreements ""'" """ """ 1 ,200 400 400 Borrow-Payback Exchange Fee..".. .... ....,..... ø ø 83,600 Miscellaneous Irrigation Water Sales ... .., ..... 700,000 1,355,600 956,000 Non-Kern ~iver Water Sales ...,.,............... 52,000 38,200 52,000 Groundwater Sales ,....,.,...................... 109,000 109,000 ø Sand Sales """""""""""""""""'" 15,000 6,500 7,500 Interest Income """"""""'-""""""'" 200,000 1 96 ,300 165,000 - TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES """"""""" 52,733,300 $3,316,800 $2,888,500 ¡, ¡ Page Three CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE Capital Outlay Program For the Period 07/01/83 to 06/30/84 Fiscal Year I 1 982 - 1 983 Source of Funds Capital Improvement and Replacement Reserve ... .... ....... .........,.. $ 176,000 Net Operating Revenues ........................"....."............,. 552,500 (1) TOTAL SOURCE OF FUNDS ...........,.............................,. $ 728,500 Proposed Appl ¡cation of Funds 1) Final design and reconstruction costs for Calloway Ri ver wei r replacement (Ci ty share of replacement costs) ......... s 225,000 2) Design and replacement costs for reconstruction of box culvert @ Carrier Canal and 21st Street ...,.'...'......'..... 205,000 3) Permanent (weir and levee) improvements to 2800 acre spread ing bas in (in accordance to adopted plan of works) ,.,....., 50,000 4) Public Works storm drain construction projects .................,. 248,500 TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1983-84 . ..,......,. .., .... ....... .... $ 728,500 ( 1) Actual construction is predicated upon receipt of I!Net Operating Revenues" shown on page I. i' ¡ Page Four CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE Explanation of Operating Expenses For Current Fiscal Year , Wa~es & Employee .Benefits Based on present staff size with allowance for increment step raises, re-organization adjustment costs (effective January I, 1983) and temporary help as requi red for current water year operations. U.S. Corps of Engineers 0 & M - lake I sabe 11 a This expense is based on the actual operations and maintenance costs incurred by the Corps of Engineers for conservation and irrigation regulation - these costs are re- adjusted every five years. For the per i od 1979-1983 City.s share of the annual cha rge wi 11 be $30,250. Maintenance Expense Those expenses included are for specialized equipment such as; gradalls, draglines, dozers, etc., also includes steel, weir boards, fencing and other contract expenses and materials incurred for maintenance. Weed Control Annual charges made for herbicides and other chemicals, contract labor and equipment used to control weed growth on ditch banks and canal right-of-ways. Charges Froo General Services Department Charges incurred for metal fabrication, machine work and carpentry for various con- struction projects. I nc 1 ude s labor and materials. Expenses Reimbursed - Clearing Accounts (Joint Facilities) Monies collected from other Water Districts for thei r proportionate share of labor and equipment costs incurred for the operation and maintenance of jointly owned facilities and the Kern River Central Record and Watermaster reporting functions per- formed by the City of Bakersfield. Consultants - Engineering & Attorney Fees Expenses incurred for technical and professional assistance provided by water attorney and engineering fi rms. Department of Water Resources - Snow Survey Thi s expense covers City's share of the California Cooperative Snow Surveys Program in cooperation with other Kern River interests to provide forecast and runoff information pertaining to the Kern River watershed. 0' . Page Fi ve U. S, B. R, - Contract Ad-,inistration Under exi sting agreements, the City is responsible for 34Í'o of the annua 1 charge made by the Bureau for adm i n i s tr a t i ng the Is abe 1 1 a Reservoir contract. Self Insurance - L i ab i 1 i ty & Property Damage Reserve -- This cove r s Agricultural Wate r Enterprise pre~ium sha re for self-insured costs as quoted by Finance Depart~ent, Charges from Administrative Departments These are charges made by other departments, such as; Data Processing, Finance, Personne 1, etc, Field Office - Rents & Related Expenses Th is includes expenses for rents of office space and equipment, maintenance for communication equipment, office supplies, ut i 1 i ties, etc. Property, In Lieu and Possessory Interest Taxes T axe s for real property and facilities operated by the Agricultural Water Enterprise and those Possessory Interest Taxes associated \-lith Storage Rig ht s at Lake I sabe 11 a . Cloud Seeding Participation City s share of annual costs associated with cloud seeding operations on Kern R i v~,r Water Shed. Kern River Investigations (Power Fi 1 i ngs, Entitle;nents, etc.) Those specific items in ,..¡hi ch City has pu rs ued investigations to preserve and maintain it s Kern River ownership, operation and entitlement structure. Miscellaneous General Expenses Charges included are dues to organizations, literature, committee meetings, profes- sional security agencies, travel expenses for out-of-town meetings, training programs, etc, Depreciation A schedule of depreciation was est¿¡bl ished on December 22, 1976 based upon the esti- mated 1 i fe and replace'--ent value of those physical assets acqui red from Tenneco West, Inc. This depreciation schedule will change as ne\-I cap ita 1 assets are added and others are deleted from asset inventory. 1976 Water Bond s Genera 1 obligation bond s issued for purchase of Kern River Water Rights and physical assets. There are two payments due annually, a principal and interest payment due on December 15 and a single interest payment due' June 15. 1965 N.K.\.J,S.D. Bonds ----- C it y IS 50/. share of the 1965 bonds issued for purchase of conservation storage space at I sabe lla Reser\'0 í r, There is a principal and interest payment due in January and an i n t e re s t payment due in July, .. .' .;; AGRICULTURAL WATER ENTERPRISE 1983/84 WATER PRICE AND SAND SALE SCHEDULE The following recommended water prices reflect the current, above-normal water supply conditions of the lower San Joaquin Valley. Of the seven. (7) water price cate- gories shown below, items 1 and 2 are established by existing contracts, with item 2 escalated by the "All Commodities" Index annually. The prices for items 3.4,5 and 6 are dependent upon time of year and current water supply conditions ~;(see footnote below). The recommended water rates for categories 3 through 6 would remain in effect until water supply conditions warranted changes or adjustments to these prices. For information and reference, the 1981 and 1982 schedule for surface water sales is shown for comparison: EFFECTIVE ACTUAL 1981 ACTUAL 1982 1983/84 (55% of Normal (175% of Normal (314% of Normal TYPE OF WATER Water Year) Water Year) Water Year) 1) Basic Contract Water..... ........ $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 (price set by contract) 2) City I'Borrow/Payback" Water ...... 15.81 16.62 16.72 (price set by contract) 3) *Miscellaneous Kern River Water sold for surface irrigation ...... 25.00 25.00 25.00 March - September 4) *Miscel1aneous Kern River Water sold for surface irrigation """ 13.56 14.27 14.36 October - February 5) *Miscellaneous Water that would otherwise be used for ground- water replenishment. ............. 9.04 9.51 9.57 6) *City non-Kern River Water Sales .. 20.00 22.00 22.00 (oilfield discharge, etc.) 7) Kern River Canal & Irr. Co. ...... 14.40 16.30 16.30 *To encourage maximum use within the Kern River groundwater basin, water prices in categories number 3,4, 5 and 6 are reduced 50% during periods of mandatory release and/or encroachment at Isabella Reservoir. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For annual and/or temporary pumping agreements (from canal and river faci lities) and sand removal sales from the Kern River primary flood channel (owned by the City), the following rates are recommended and would remain in effect unti 1 conditions warranted changes: ITEM PRICE I) Temporary Pumping Agreements .. ,...,........ ..... $ 40.00 per day 2) Annual Pumping Agreements 5 truck units or less .................,.... $350.00 (minilllum charge) 6 truck units or more ...................... $550.00 (or greater proportionately, depending upon volume) 3) Sand Removal Sales (from primary river channel) . $ 1.00 per cubic yard (plus sales tax, where applicable) 4) Overburden Sales (canal bank overburden and remedial work in flood channel) ............ $ .50 per cubic yard (plus sales tax, where applicable) ._, -- n._____---- _._._---~_. ------ , '. J . I'ORM P'6",A MEMORANDUM --___~p.!:LL_l~J.- J ~§.:L_____-- ------- TO -- --- --- -- - -- - -~?~] -- _p'~ ~!_--p. j - !:~~!~!:_- ~i_- ~ ~!~-=--~~ ~~~!:~~~ -u- ------- ---- ---- --- ------ ---- ------------- ------------ FRO M -- --- -_._~] _?!".!'I.. _~?-!".~_L- A !;!!:L~~) -~-~!".~ _L?~9.__po"!~~!J _~2'_a t e -=-__tia_f!..~«:..r:..~-~-----------_._----------------- SU BJ E CT -----~~9-~~_?~~_!~_"!~~_!~_f--~~!~~--~!'!T ~~!'.~_I_?~_~~p_G ET-L.Fi>_fLf.!.J~§.;t:.t~H!!L______-------------------- Attached are the proposed budgets for the Domestic Water Enterprise of the Department of Water Resources. The budgets for the Ashe Water Division and the Fairhaven Division have been separated. Each D i vis i on has an liEs t imated Revenues and Expenses Budgetll and IIProposed Capital Outlay Program ". In addition, explanation of budget line items of the Ashe Water Division are included in the package as well as explanations on the capital outlay programs. The Fairhaven Division budget is still estimated based generally on anticipated customer revenue and fire protection service charges. The division is not yet fully metered, therefore, there is no consumption history to rely on. Expenditures on capital items will be contingent on revenues received. : s r õ .õ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DOMESTIC WATER EfJTERPRISE Þ.SHE DIVISION ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET . FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 Adopted 1982-1983 Est. Actual Proposed -~ d qe t_-- FY 1982 - 83 FY 1983-84 (w/5% Rate I nc rease REVE r--:UES: 7/1/83) Domestic Water Sales $1 ,954,000 $1,810,500 $2 , 1 36 ,000 Construction Water Sales 16,000 73,000 66,000 Interest Income 75,000 70,000 75,000 --- TOTAL REVENUES 52,045,000 $1,953,500 $2,277,000 OPERAT I í~G EX~ENSES: Field Expenses: 0 & M Charges from Cal ifornia Water $ 437,000 $ 439,980 $ 516,000 Power for Pumping & Delivery, Tele- phones & Telemetry 365 ,000 366,000 441 ,000 Other Maintenance 120,000 80,000 100,000 TOTAL FIELD EXPENSES $ 922 ,000 $ 885,980 $1,057,000 Administrative Expenses: Salaries and Fringe Benefits $ 72 ,000 $ 64,380 $ 83,500 C~arges from Other Ci ty Departments 24,000 20,780 18,000 Management Fee from California \Jater 35,000 45,700 49,500 Consultant Charge (Engineer, Attorney, etc.) 55,000 38,000 55,000 Insurance Expenses 17 ,000 16,000 17,500 Property and Pumping Taxes 175,500 192,000 190,000 Misc. General Expenses 16,500 15,000 18,ÖOG TOTAL ADM I~!I STRAT I VE EXPENS ES $ 395,000 $ 391,860 $ 431,500 NET OPERATING INCOME: Before Depreciation $ 728,000 $ 675,660 $ 788,500 Deprec i at i on ~J2,000) ( 1 97 , 000) (220,000) TOT AL $ 509,000 $ 478,660 $ 568,500 NON-OPERATING EXPENSE: Hainline Extension Refunds $ ( 83,000) 5 ( 86, 000) $ ( 95,000) Net Operating Income before Capital Outlay Program 426,000 392,660 473,500 BOND PAYMENT: S (178,500) S (178,500) $ (178,500) TRANSFER TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET: $ 247,500 $ 2 1 4, 1 00 $ 295,000 NET INCOME (lOSS): S -0- S -0- $ -0- --_on. - - ------ . - I I CITY OF BAKERSFIELD I DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE-ASHE DIVISION PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM FISCAL YEARS 1983-8~ and 1984-85 Projected Capital Proposed Outlay Needs SOURCE OF FUNDS FY 1983-84 FY 1984-85 Capital Improvement Reserves (Depr.) $ 220,000 Net Operating Income 295,000 Loan Repayment from Fai rhaven Div, -0- $ 515,000 PROPOSED APPLICATION OF FUNDS Two Mil] ion Gallon Storage System $ 120,000 $ 177,000 at Mohawk & Truxtun Avenue (Special Facility Payments) Water Meters & Appurtenances 50,000 55,000 Pumping Station Improvements 1. Building, paving & landscaping 25,000 at Station #10 on Gosford Rd. 2. Building, paving & landscaping 25,000 at Station #4 on Stine Rd, 3. Recording equipment and telemetry 20,000 for tank level pressure and flow at Station #12 at Stockdale and All en Rd. Additional Wel ls and Pumping Plants 1. Station #14 @ Pacheco Rd, and $ 170,000 $ 60,000 Progress Rd, Convert existing well to domestic standards, pump, motor, switchboard, land, landscaping, fences and water mains. Prior budget listed as Station =15. 2. Station #15 around Ming Ave, and 65,000 65,000 Old River Rd. ($220,000; 62.5% = 5137,500). Prior budget listed as Station #14. 3. Station #16 around Old River Rd, 40,000 146,000 and White Ln. Land, well, pump, mains, 2mg storage, booster station, & appurtenances. 51,250.000 x 62,5% = 5782,000. 4. Station #17 near Buena Vista Rd, and 30,000 White Ln, ($250,000 total), 5 515,000 ------- CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE - ASHE DIVISION EXPLANATION OF BUDGETED REVENUES AND EXPENSES REVENUES: Domestic Water Sales: Sales of metered \,¡ater to customers in Ashe Water Division. Estimated actual for fiscal 1982-1983 is based on actual revenue through March 31, 1983 with projection based on experience for the balance of 1983. The proposed 1983-1984 is projected from the expected increase in customers, average consumption for customer and the scheduled 5% rate increase effective July 1, 1983, as adopted by Counci 1 Resolution 36-82 on Apr ¡I 21, 1982. Construction Water Sales: Finished water sales to construction contractors, developers and builders for use in construction projects. These sales generally follow trends in cons t ruc t ion activity, that is, as activity i nc reases, so does construction water sales. The estimate for 1982-1983 reflects dramatic increase for the January-June period. Pro- jected for 1983-1984 will reflect a moderate amount of activity, Interest Income: This income is from interest earned on funds on account throughout the year. The amount of funds will vary throughout the year as revenue on a metered water system \'Ii 11 vary with the seasons. EXPENSES: Field Expenses: Under Agreement 80-36, the City contracts with Cal ifornia Water Service Company to operate and perform normal maintenance on the City's Ashe Water System. The charges are based on a yearly estimate of the pro-rata customer service cost for the combined distribution systems, The act ua 1 costs are determined at the end of each calendar year with adjustments for the difference between actual and estimated costs. The actual 1982-1983 costs are 5439,980. The proposed 1983-1984 costs are estimated at a growth rate of 12% plus inflation factor of 5%. Power for Pumping: This is for P.G.&E, and Southern Cal ifornia Gas for electricity and natural gas used for pumping groundwater from \'iells, and de 1 ¡very to the customer. The 1982-1983 charges are actual costs through r1arch 31, 1983 and estimated through June 30, 1983. The 1983-1984 budgeted figure \'iil J reflect an estimated electric rate increase of 20% effective January 1, 1983 (rate case is pending), More use of electricity and gas for the projected customer increase was also considered. -- . Other Maintenance Expense: These expenses are not covered by operating and maintenance expenses as ou~lined by the contract with Ca:ifornia Water Service, (i. e, replacement of burned out motors, mechanical fai lure of vi ate r vie 11 equipment, restoration charges of customers meters, and water main breaks), Eq u i pment has become old and it is considered by staff that this account will be uti 1 i zed to serve as a contingency for repai rs, maintenance, and etc. beyond the normal function of operating and maintenance expenses of California Water Service. Fiscal year 1982-1983's actual charges wi 11 be $80,000. Staff feels wit h the increase in the size of the system and prudent factor for inflation this item should be moved up to 5100,000 for 1983~1984. ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES: Salaries and Fringe Benefits: These expenses reflect a % share of the time of the Di rector of Water Resources (30%), Assistant Director of Water Resources (40~), Ag. and Domestic Water Manager (60%), Clerk-Typist I (50%), and one Temporary Helper (50%). Charges and Other City Department Expenses: These charges consist of expenses incurred by support divisions with the City of Bakersfield (i. e. Finance, Engineering, etc.). Managemen t Fee to California Water Service: - This fee is based on the contract with Cal ¡fornia Water Service and ¡ s estab1 ¡shed as 2 1/4~ of the gross revenues, Whi le domestic water revenues Increase the management fee to California Water increases proportionately. This year's ca1cu1acion is based upon revenues derived from Domestic Water Sales and Construction Water Sales, These charg:=s are paid monthly based on yearly estimates, then actual costs are determined at calendar year's end and adjusted accordingly. The actual 1982-1983 fee will be $45,700, the 1983-1984 estimate i nc 1 ude s an i nc rease in the number of customers and a 5~; rate I nc rease to show an I nc rease in revenues. Consultant Charges: The nature of these expenses are due to professional and technical assistance provided by water attorney and engineering services, to aid in long-range planning, studying revenue and rates and to help assure the orderly and complete expansion of the system. The budgeted figures reflect an i nc rease in use of these services) because of the relatively rapid expansion of the system, plus a 5% inflation factor. Insurance Expense: This expense ref 1 ec t s Domestic Water Enterprise premium share for self-insured costs as quoted by the Finance Department, Property and Pumping Taxes: P rope rty taxes relate to well equipment and pipelines located within unincorporated 2 ---- . ~ I areas of the Ashe 'Water Service area, Pumping taxes of $20.00 per acre-foot are imposed by the Kern County 'Water Agency Improvement District #4. Thi s year's ex- pense is derived as fo 11 ows: Estimated pumpage for 1982-1983: 9400 A-F x 520.00 = $188,000 property taxes 4,000 $192,000 For 1983-1984 the estimate has been lowered to show 1) less property tax be- cause of incorporation of Kern City and Park Stockdale area and; 2) groundwater pumping in areas outside of pump tax areas. Miscellaneous General Expenses: Charges relate to organizational dues, 1 i terature, professional meet i ng s, trans- portation expenses, training programs, office supplies and uncollectable expenses. Depreciation: The calculated value loss of the equipment, water mains, meters, and appurtenances. This amount will increase as the system expands, The 1983-1984 budget will show an estimated 15% Increase in the system value because of new expansion. NON-OPERAT I NG EXPENSES: Mainline Extension Refunds: These contractual agreements reimburse the developer for the costs of installing the water distribution system within thei r sub-division, In the past these agreements ca 11 for a 22% refund of the Domestic Water Sales generated within said sub-divisions for a period of 20 years or until the cost of the installation of the water distribution sys tem has been rei~bursed, New rulings will change the method of payback to developers. The payback will be 2 1/2% per year for 40 years on the cost of installation of the dis- tribution system. The increases predicted for 1983-1984 are estimated based on fi led but undeveloped tract maps and parcels in the service area. BOND PAYMENT: This is the Ashe 'Water Division's share of the 1976 Water Bonds that \oJere used to purchase the Kern River Water Rights and Lands and the Kern Island 'Water Company. At the time of acquisition in 1976, it was determined the Ashe Water assets were 17.2% of the total Kern River purchase, Thi s budgeted amount represents a 17. n s ha re of the annual bond payment. NOTES: The budgeted figures in this section are exclusive of the revenue and expenses involved wit~ the Fairhaven Division. I 3 . I CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE-ASHE DIVISION EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM SOURCE OF FUNDS: Capital Improvement Reserves (Depreciation): These funds are derived th~ough a calculated loss of value on the assets of the system. The transfer to the capital outlay program allows this depreciation to be used to upgrade the system or to replace major items. .Estimated actual for 1982- 1983 is 197,000, estimated to be $220,000 for 1983-1984. Net Operat i ng Income: The difference between Total Revenues less field expenses, administrative ex- penses, depreciation, mainline extension refunds, and 1976 Water Board payment. Es t ¡mated for 1983-1984 is $296,000. Loan Repayment from Fairhaven Division: This was scheduled to be 540,000 in 1983-1984, but revenue for the Fairhaven Division has fallen short of expectations which will del ay the payback by at 1 east one year. PROPOSED APPLICATION OF FUNDS: Two Mill ion Ga lIon Storage (Station =13): The developer has constructed this station and under a Special Facil ities Agreement, the developer will be repaid the cost of the station as parcels in the area are connected to the system. Maximum payback is 62.5~ of the station costs. Fu 11 payout is expected over the next 4 years. Water Meters: Thi s is the estimated cost to purchase water meters for installation in the system. Estimates based on actual with anticipated system growth. Pumping Station Improvements: 1. Station #10 on Gosford Road is ,..,ithout protection from the elements and vandal ism. Entrance from Gosford Road is not paved and the station needs landscaping to be compatible with the area. 2. Station #4 on Stine Road is exposed to the elements, lacks paving and 1 and- scaping. Protection to the station by housing el iminates downtime from weather and protects equipment from ~ossib1e vandalism. . I 3. Station =12 near Allen Road and Stockdale Highway is hydraulically remote from the rest of the Ashe syste~. 'With the installation of recording equipment and telemetry to the California 'Water Service field office, any problems with this station can be checked much more rapidly, Add i t i ona 1 We 11 s and Pumping Plants: 1. The 1982-1983 budget 1 i s ted th is '.'Ie 11 as Station ~15 now designated as Station #14. This project will supply I'later to nevI areas nm" deve1 opi ng in the Go s ford Road/Old River Road/Pacheco Road areas. It is proposed to purchase land and an ex i s t i ng we 1 1 and casing and convert the '.'Ie 11 to meet domestic water standards; add pump, motor, s\'li tchboard, landscaping, fenc'es, and connecting water mains to connect to existing mains. This plant \-lill have the added value of not being subject to pumping taxes. 2. Station #15 around Hing Avenue and Old River Road. The Stetson Master Plan Report suggests 1 ocat i ng a well at this location, Present development plans will re- qui re this station to come on line sanet ¡me In the 1984-1985 year, Thi s wi I I be ac- cumulative budgeting. 3. Station #16 around Old River Road and 'Whi te Lane. The Stetson Master Plan Report suggests a high efficiency well 2 mi llion gallons of storage, and a booster plant capable of at least 4,000 gallons per minute. Present development plans wi 11 ca 11 for the we 11 and station in the 1984-1985 year, Th is vii 11 be accumulative funding. 4. Station F17 near Buena Vista Road and Whi te Lane. Present development plans are not finalized but the trend indicates the need for th is station probably in the 1985-1986 year. Th is wi 11 be accumulative funding, The need for and the exact location of each station proposed are subject to s 1 i ght changes because of changes in development plans and timing of developments. Trends are established by keeping watch on fi 1 ings of tract and parcel maps. I I 2 . CITY OF BAKERSFIELD I I DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE FAIR~AVEN DIVISION ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENSES BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 Adopted Estimated Proposed ESTIMATED REVENUES: FY 1982-83 FY 1982-83 FY 1983-84 Domestic Water Sales $ 200,025 $ 157,500 $ 189,000 Construction Water Sales 2,000 2,000 2,000 Interest Income -0- -0- -0- TOT AL REVENUES $ 202,025 $ 159,500 $ 191 ,000 ESTIMATED OPERATING EXPENSES: Field Expense: 0 & M Charge~ from California Water $ 7,830 $ 7,000 $ 8,900 Power for Pumping 4 1,275 35,000 44,000 Other Maintenance Estimated 17,600 17,600 20,000 TOTAL FIELD EXPENSES $ 66,705 $ 59,600 $ 72,900 Administrative Expenses: Salaries and Fringe Benefits $ 1,450 $ 1,100 $ 1,500 Charges from Other City Departments 290 200 300 Management Fee from California Water 4,545 3,500 4,300 Consultant Charge (Engineer, Attorney) Estimated 22,000 7,500 7,500 Insurance Expenses 290 200 300 Property and Pumping Taxes 42,700 18,000 20,000 Misc. General Expenses 290 200 300 TOTAL AD~1INISTRATIVE EXPENSES $ 71,565 $ 30,700 $ 34,200 NET OPERATING INCOME: Before Depreciation $ 63,755 $ 69,200 $ 83,900 Depreciation ( 75,000) ( 75,000) ( 76,000) TOTAL $( 11,245) $( 5,800) $ 7,900 NON-OPERATING EXPENSE: Mainline Extension Refunds $ -0- $ -0- $ -0- Net Operating Income before Capital Outlay Program -0- -0- 7,900 BOND PAYMENT $ -0- -0- -0- TRANSFER TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET $ -0- $ -0- 7,900 NET INCOME (LOSS) $( 11,245) $( 5,800) $ -0- . CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DOMESTIC WATER ENTERPRISE-FAIRHAVEN DIVISION PROPOSED CAPITAL OUTLAY PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 Est. Ac t ua 1 Proposed SOURCE OF FUNDS FY 1982-83 FY 1983-84 Capital Improvement Reserves (Depreciation) $ 75,000 $ 76,000 Net Operating Income (Loss) ( 5,800) 7,900 Developer Advances 38,000 20,000 Sale of Surplus Equipment (2 fi re pumps @ Truxtun/Mohawk Fac.) 40,000 -0- Capital Carryover -0- 18,500 TOTAL $ 147,200 $ 122,400 PROPOSED APPLICATION OF FUNDS Meters $ 25,000 $ 27,500 Pumping Station Improvement s 1. Connection of Hi ]ton Inn Well 21,200 -0- to System (Station FI02) and metering to Hilton Inn. 2. Street, driveway and landscaping 20,000 10,500 @ storage facil ities on Burr St. (Station F101). 3. Station F103 in northern area of 62,500 62,500 Fai rhaven. ($250,000 tot a ]) TOTAL $ 128,700 $ 100,500 CAPITAL CARRYOVER AVAILABLE $ 18,500 $ 21,900 NOTE: Receipt of "developers advances" under avai labi lity fees rule to be used for wells, storage, and water main construction. Accumulative in capital reserves fund. " ESTIMATED WATER CONSUMPTION WITHIN FAIRHAVEN DIVISION Est. Annual Water Consumption FY 1982-1983 Independent Valley Energy Co. 280 Ac re-feet Fairhaven Mutual 100 California Water Customers 75 New Customers 45 @ 1 AF/Cust. 45 Hi 1 ton Inn - not connected to system yet 0 - TOT AL 500 Acre-feet For 1983-1984 budget projections, 100 A-F is estimated as the increase in production/sales for the Fai rhaven system. ......... N ~ 0 0 0 000 ~OO 00 0 000 (!) I 0 '-0 ~ l.f'I 0 '-0 .¡...Jr'" ~ ~ - ~.. U 00 00 0 r-- 00 'Í) CT\ (!) CT\ '-0 CT\ r-- r-- CT\ ....., ~ ~ '-0 r-- - N 0 ~ ~ I.... >- N ~ CL l.L.. <.r>- ......... N CV"\ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 00 0 ~ '-0 00 CT\ ~I 0 - 00 l.f'I O:.J'"\ .tUN . ~ ~ ~ ~ . .¡...J~oo CV"\ ~ 00 00 N 00 iJ1.¡...JCT\ ~ l.f'I l.f'I r-- r-- I WU~ - ~ '-0 - N I <i: ~ ~ >- N - l.L.. <.r>- N 00 0 00 N l.f'I 00 0 00 l.f'I'-O ~ I CT\ l.f'I ~ I '-0 CV"\ tU~ ~ ~ ~ O. ~ ~ 00 CV"\ ~ CT\ I CT\ ....... .¡...J CT\ 00 CV"\ ~ ~ U ~ 'l.f'I N CV"\ ~ <:( ~ ~ >- - - l.L.. <.r>- ~ 0 0 0 0 CV"\ 00 00 0 0 l.f'I ~ I ~ 0 ~ I 0 \,D roo . ~ ~ O. ~ ~ 00 \,D 0 \,D I l.f'I \,D . .¡...JCT\ ~ l.f'I CT\ N iJ1 U~ ~ - N - .¡...J <:( ~. c:: >- ~ - ~ W l.L.. <.r>- 0 ~ U - U 0 ~ tU ~ CL >- 0 ~ 0 ~ l.f'I CT\ W ~ ~ 00 ~ - 0 l.f'I :.J'"\ (!) - W <:( - I ~ CT\ N I 00 0 > l.L.. I- ~ ru CT\ ~ ~ ~ O. ~ ,- ~ Z ~ ~r-- CV"\ ~ ~ I O'Í) .¡...J a::: w::> .¡...J CT\ I CT\ l.f'I CV"\ - U w ~ U~ N ~ ~ - ru ::.::: ~ <:( I . <:( w z >- ~ ~ m I- 0 l.L.. <.r>- tU <:( - .¡...J l.L.. 3 I- 0 0 <:( .¡...J u ~ CT\ CT\ ~ \,D N 00 >- - w r-- ~ N 00 - N ~ I- I- CL ~ I l.f'I CV"\ ~ I r-- - \,D - ~ 0 ruoo ~ ~ . 0.. CV"\ U w ~r-- 00 N - I ~ l.f'I ~ ~ .¡...JCT\ ~ ~ - CT\ CV"\ 0 I U- 0 \,D CV"\ 0 <:( ~ ..c:: >- - .¡...J l.L.. <.r>- .- 3 001 ~ ,..... 0"1 - I 00 \,D N N \,D 0 - rur-- ~ ~ 0 0 r-- 00 ~r-- l.f'I CV"\ N 0"1 r-- :.J'"\ ~ .¡...J~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ N u- '-0 CV"\ CV"\ l.f'I - ~ N <:( r-- \,D - \,D 00 >- \,D \,D I.... l.L.. <.r>- V r¡¡ ..Q <1J I.... - (!) <i: \,Dr-- ~ l.f'I N 0 CV"\ - U r--r-- CV"\ l.f'I N 00 '-0 ~ (!) <1J ......... ......... 00 CV"\ r-- 00 r-- 00 a U N 0 ~ ~ ~ ~., 0- NCV"\ 0 CV"\ 0"1 r-- 00 ~ c:: > ......... " r-- 0 N r-- CV"\ 0 I.... N\,D - CV"\ - V -0 <.r>- - - U') (!) .¡...J c:: ~ iJ1 (!) :f> <:.J ~ >- > <:.J = iJ1 r¡¡ -.I> :) ::J ..c: c:: U ~ I.... I (!) C >- ~ Q) .- c:: a.. - CJ ru "'¡ I.... ru 0 x 1....- <:: .- l.L.. zw ü,o~ :) ~ C'-~ ~ c :""""'" Ü iJ1 "" cr. .- C) 0 co>::: -I U (!) C ~ ..Q V ,- ,-:; ru ~ 01 .- r:¡ - ~ ~ ~ 0 :J iJ1 C...., - - ro >- r-., 'J.~ CV"\ >- - IV ,-r:; C)'./')...., ç ,- <>- ...., U :J ...., I.... ::l. 'f>'- CL U './) <:.J ,- c:: c:: rJQ.) Ooa.. CJ - C U - \ (!) I....::l. -JrJ -ç I.... ~=:J I > V 0 ~ - u C a.. ~.- -, I IV Co :; 0 <:.J :) ......... ......... ~ a :z cc a ;- -I C'J, Ii \,