Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout#7 Proposed Water Rates Agenda Item # 7 TRUCKEE DONNER PUblic Utility District PUBLIC HEARING To: Board of Directors From: Mary Chapman Date: November 18, 2009 Subject: Conduct a Public Hearing on Proposed Water Rates 1. WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE BOARD This matter involves a public hearing prior to adopting an ordinance increasing water rates. The Board conducts this hearing. 2. HISTORY Proposition 218 was adopted in 1996 and became effective in 1997. It is also known as the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act." The adoption of new water rates is subject to the requirements of Proposition 218. Pursuant to Proposition 218, the District must: • Mail a notice to all ratepayers and property owners informing them of the proposed change in rates; Hold a public hearing at least 45 days after the mailing of the notices; and • Count written protests that were received from a majority of the affected property owners. If more than 50% of the total eligible property owners submit written protests, the proposed change in rates is considered rejected. Therefore, the following schedule was developed and followed for implementation of the new rate structure: Hold a workshop on proposed water rates and draft ordinance - workshop was held on September 2 Consider/approve the proposed new water rates - a "draft proposed water rate ordinance" was approved on September 16 by Board motion Schedule a public hearing - scheduled on September 16 for November 18 Print and mail notices for the public hearing - notices were mailed on September 23 Publish required notice in the Sierra Sun - notices were published in Moonshine Inc. on October 15th and in the Sierra Sun on October 21 and October 23 3. NEW INFORMATION The remaining steps to complete the requirements of Proposition 218 and the District's policies regarding adoption of an ordinance: • Hold the public hearing on increasing water rates on November 18th (tonight) • Consider the Public Comments; to date 9 written Public Comments have been received by the District. The comments are included in Attachment 1. • Consider adopting the water rate increase ordinance - November 18th (tonight) At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board is able to take action regarding an ordinance increasing the monthly water rates. 4. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact with this agenda item. 5. RECOMMENDATION Conduct the public hearing and receive comment from the public. Mary Ch a Michael D. Holley Administrative Services Manager General Manager Attachment 1 Public Comments/Protests October 7,2009 Deputy Clerk of the District Truckee Donner PUD PO Box 309-11570 Truckee, CA 96160 Re: Proposed Water Rate Increases Service Address: 12560 Bernese Lane His Honorable Deputy Clerk of the District We are writing to OBJECT to the proposed rate increases. Our property is a second home that is not rented out and used exclusively for our family use. We welcome your examination of our water usage to verify how little we use. We appreciate the rising costs of water in our state due to droughts of the past few years and it is understood that rates must be adjusted to reflect the costs that the district is required to pay. What we particularly object to is the idea of having such an UNREASONABLE BASE RATE CHARGE which would apply even with a substantially reduced usage. THE PROPOSAL IS TOTALLY UNREASONABLE TO THE SECOND HOME OWNERS IN THE DISTRICT. We would support a proposal that charges strictly on usage without a minimum base rate charge. With best regards, The 2003 Hamaguchi Family Trust Y By: i Robert E. H4yaguchi Carolyn 4941amaguchi Trustee Trustee Return Address: Robert E. Hamaguchi 9 Warwick Ct. Lafayette, CA 94549 October 2, 2009 Deputy Clerk PO Box 309 Truckee, Ca 96160 Re: Water Rate Increases To Whom It May Concern; I own the property at 10144 Columbine Rd. in Sierra Meadows - Parcel # 19-560-45 This is my second home until I can afford to retire. I'm in Truckee once maybe twice a month for a week-end --- a lot of months I'm not able to come up the hill at all. $47.00 a month is already a lot for the amount of water I use to increase that is unfair. I think there should be a rate for home that use 4,000 gallons or less a month. I hope you will consider everything carefully before adding another cost to our already stretched budget. Thank You Patricia Moore te,t2' 4--U� -,4-6 M/,W� 4r,�4 da ape, OWI -ZA" -k.A&ize, 0&/�, Alt, , U Q cJq n 0-k. NA) 3 r/Ay( ©7'l -�d div r Y A 1 ' ate. Charles Arrigo 14225 Donner Ave. Tnickee,CA 96161 10/03/09 TDPUD Deputy Clerk of the District P.O. Box 309 Truckee,CA 96160 Re:Water Meter Fee increases/objection Dear Deputy and Board, Thank you for the clear communication on the water meter installation process and rate increases. I, like many, am opposed to the increase in water rates. If it was fair' I would support it. I wouldn't mind paying more if my water use was above average but conversely, I would also expect to pay less if my water usage was less. In the letter you circulated it stated that some will pay more,others will pay less. Actually, everyone will pay more. By adding meters,you're now charging what you've always charged,calling it the'base' rate, PLUS there is now an additional commodity charge and pump charge. If I didn't use ANY water, my metered billing should be less than I'm currently accustomed to paying but in your scenario, I'll be paying MORE. And god forbid I actually use the water,then it really starts piling on. I know this letter will fall on deaf ears because that's how these agencies work. It's easier to enact a price increase that examine saving from within. You need more money,so the simple solution is to bill more. There is an alternative...SPEND LESS. Find the additional dollars you need by examining and implementing cost savings. Brian Rickauer 11851 Highland Ave Truckee,CA 96161 C. Ray Jackson 12856 Solvang Way Tahoe Donner Truckee, California 96161 October 27, 2009 Deputy Clerk Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 309 Truckee, California 96160 RE: Proposed Water Rates/Structure -- Protest Dear Sirs: Frankly, I was dismayed by the increase and SHOCKED by structure of the proposed metered water rates for 2010 and 2011. 1 wish to register a protest as a result. I believe having a large monthly base charge of$53 to $63 and very small usage fees of 0.150 to 0.220 cent per gallon is a terribly misguided approach to promoting water conservation. I know of other California communities that charge FOUR to FIVE times for water usage as what TDPUD is proposing for residential customers. I've biked around Tahoe Donner for years and years, and have always been amazed at the number of large lush gardens being watered mid-day with runoff streaming down the street. I wondered were the owners home? Did they care about the waste? Perhaps because water in Tahoe Donner has been essentially free, waste has not been punished. So, I wished for metered rates. However, it appears you do indeed need to be careful what you wish for... Something is. askew if you can fill a swimming pool for under$20. 1 recommend lowering the residential monthly base charge to $25-30 and charging 10 or more per gallon to promote conservation. Hey, 250 for a long hot shower seems pretty reasonable. Very truly yours, C. Ray Jackson def-k f°�aql a v�lj Ac I pro+ `C�vS2c� r'ncreaSeS / V ��7�e1� G� e �� U Co I L C re ct,3 to 3 qo oly�p,c, �IU3 -cam October 27, 2009 Deputy Clerk P.O. Box 309 11570 Donner Pass Road Truckee, Ca 96160 Re: Protest of Water Rate Increases Dear Board Members: For years now, our 5 unit condo complex has been paying outrageous rates for water we do not use. We have no outside watering& our units are 2 bedrooms with a bath and a half. I would say, on an average none of us use water in the condo more than 30 days out of the year as they are all second homes. For example, my 10/21/09 bill shows a usage of 212 gallons for$64.65 (3 l cents a gallon). I have suggested that one meter be installed for our 3 units and another for the two units which would reflect an actual picture and fair cost. $53.15 a month times our five units comes to a total of$3,189.00 a year(plus your commodity charge and a pump zone charge) which may be down from our$64.65 a month rate but not enough. If you will not allow us to have just two meters I suggest you add another monthly base charge below the 8,000 gallons for something like $26.58 a month for 0 gallons to 4,000 gallons. I request you consider this suggestion and that the board agrees with a possible solution for a fair result. Sincerely, John &Carol Suaning 12575 Northwoods Truckee, Ca. Ael t _, _ 30cr - - -------------- _- 1 5 70 C� h� r u. UCKEE Public Utility E ea DistrictI Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Barbara Cahill Subject: Water Rate Protests Date: November 18, 2009 The attached are water rate protests that came in since your board packets were delivered on Friday, November 13, 2009. 11/17/09 To the Board of the Truckee Donner PUD. I am writing in concern for the proposed rates for water for the coming year, specifically the proposed rates for unmetered residential customers. The published proposed rates seem to be based on a consumption of 10K gallons per month (gpm) per connection as checked in 3 zones, or 120K gallons per year. I believe that is an unreasonably high usage for the majority of your customers, especially since a significant number are part- time residents. My family usage in my full-time residence has only reached that rate once in the last 5 years, and that was during a summer and included full operation of an automatic sprinkler system plus maintaining a large in-ground swimming pool. This past summer we peaked at 8K gpm for one two month period and over the year averaged about 5.5K gpm. We are a family of two. A further benchmark is the published consumption in the City of Santa Cruz water district, residential and commercial, where the total normal usage in the summer was given as 12 million gallons per day over 24,000 customers: approximately 15K gpm over all users. The winter consumption is considerably lower (also this past summer's usage). To assume a rate of 10K gpm to all unmetered users in all months is biasing your charges to the unmetered customers in favor of metered customers in the district. At best, you are postponing a significant rate increase for metered customers until the meter installation program is completed, and at worst overcharging the average unmetered user. It would also indicate that you feel a significant amount of water is wasted in the district. Richard Clark 11788 Sitzmark 45-320-09 11764 Sitzmark 45-320-10 178 Montclair Dr Santa Cruz, Ca. 95060 Richard Clark [rjclarkjr@comcast.net] HEWE LlUEO )Aj TILL lq90 WIJEAJ I TRJPSFERGV ....... . ---------- _�Pb\,x -D ry - ------------&L AT 2�v ------------------- "T /-� - D L 4,1 dF AA a 0 ow d-� FOR cH Nr w ---- AA FOR IV WA i _ XC�� M y.< OF F 6.nn (qcy I,MLL f `mot u 1 an a7 - o I QN T_ 0 f �Cl ��- Ekr- tvhl i -- NR,Qs Neulei* in kHow _ t Jaw C. CI P k 1, - - 6 CKVIE co /77zlb -_ rti