Laserfiche WebLink
262 Chair Stenlund asked staff how they adjusted numbers to reflect resale market and <br />263 exporting impacts. <br />264 <br />265 Mr. Miller responded that he didn't and when forecasting revenue sharing, they <br />266 based it on trending over the last 12 months or 3 quarters as the assumption moving <br />267 forward and adjusting rates accordingly. Due to those potential fluctuations, Mr. <br />268 Miller reported that this fund retained a sufficient cash reserve level to serve as a <br />269 buoy. <br />270 <br />271 For general information purposes, the remainder of Mr. Miller's report provided <br />272 comparison rates from 2015 to those projected for 2016 for various types of housing <br />273 units and/or meter sizes in the community and by utility as applicable. At the <br />274 request of Member Seigler, Mr. Miller clarified that the City of Roseville did not <br />275 profit from the Metropolitan Council's trunk sewer ystem running through <br />276 Roseville as it went into the Pig's E e Plant as St. Paul'„ ain plant, without any <br />277 cash benefit to the City of Rosevil r its residents. <br />278 <br />279 Member Wozniak asked if any thought had been given to the water rate structure <br />280 encouraging conservation and discouraging waste. <br />281 <br />282 Mr. Miller reported that there was nothing outside water rates themselves to <br />283 incentivize behavior, which would be shown in the next section of his report's data <br />284 analysis. Mr. Miller opined that the ability to change consumer behavior had <br />285 nuances to it, and he wasn't sure anything could be accomplished through changes <br />286 in the rate structure. Mr. Miller noted that similar discussions had been held with <br />287 the City Council over the last several years, and while the current system may not <br />288 be the best, obtaining any dramatic change may be equally difficult. Compared to <br />289 a lot of other metropolitan 16burbs, Mr. Miller reported that for the majority of <br />290 Roseville residents, their water rates are on the conservative side. <br />291 <br />292 For newer me of t ETC Chair Stenlund reported that the Commission <br />293 had explored m i -tiered and tried them in the past, but based on the <br />294 community's demographics concept never got too far. Chair Stenlund stated <br />295 he was willing to revisit it, but historically tier rates didn't impact water <br />296 consumptionSto any significant degree. <br />297 <br />298 Mr. Miller noted on page 6 of his staff report, he had included a graph showing <br />299 citywide water usage by gallon from 2007 through 2014, with that aggregate data <br />300 indicating a reduction in citywide consumption over those last eight years with an <br />301 overall reduction of 21% since 2007. Mr. Miller further reviewed aggregate water <br />302 usage in single-family homes during wintertime (November through March) as well <br />303 as summertime (April through September) with virtually no change seen over those <br />304 last eight periods, or seven years. Mr. Miller opined that on the surface this <br />305 suggested to him that rates didn't influence customer usage habits or consumption. <br />306 Mr. Miller suggested this may prompt a philosophical or policy discussion as to <br />307 whether customers are being penalized enough for higher consumption or if they've <br />Page 7 of 18 <br />