2013-10-22_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Miller noted two (2) additional and related memorandums for the attention of the PWETC: Attachment A dated October 4, 2013 entitled "Water Conservation Rates;" and Attachment B dated October 4, 2013 entitled, "Utility Bill Senior Discount Program." Mr. Miller sought discussion and review of both subjects for reference prior to City Council review. Water Conservation Rates Mr. Miller briefly summarized this tiered rate program and questioned if it was meeting the original goals or how those goals could be effectively measured. Mr. Miller noted that he and Mr. Schwartz continued discussions among themselves as to whether or not this made sense or how residents could be better incentivized to use less water; and how to implement a rate structure that would achieve that goal. Mr. Miller advised that his memorandum was intended as an introduction for policy discussions by the City Council, and invited the PWETC to weigh in to those discussions. Mr. Miller noted that the underlying premise was to address excessive water usage versus normal daily household use; and admitted the challenges in putting that into a rate structure that would incent people to use less water. Mr. Miller noted further challenges based on the number of people in a given household, as well as their use philosophy; and how to treat everyone equitably without penalizing them for good water use behavior. Mr. Schwartz noted that the PWETC had originally spent considerable time on this issue, and made a subsequent recommendation to the City Council; but due to the status of the service study with the St. Paul Regional Water Board, the City Council had chosen not to accept the PWETC recommendation at that time, which indicated some support for a single tiered water rate system. Mr. Schwartz noted that the results of that study had proven favorable to the City of Roseville for 2013; with recommended increases for 2014, as previously noted by Mr. Miller. From that staff perspective, Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was recommending retaining the same rate structure at this time. Member Stenlund suggested exploring the concept if someone wrote off dependents on their taxes; look at the value to reward their water usage based on that; with a recommendation to standardize rate values to reward conservation on a per person basis. Mr. Miller noted the challenge to create a system that didn't penalize for conservation but for higher usage; and noted the difficulty in doing so on a house- to-house basis or means tested based on household size. Mr. Miller noted that it was logistically challenging to do a household by household comparison; however, he admitted that he hadn't thought that scenario through at this point. Chair Vanderwall noted that usage wasn't necessarily based on the number of children alone, but could be parents or others living in a household; or a family doing multiple loads of laundry and higher water usage, but not significant usage Page 6 of 22