Laserfiche WebLink
~, <br />Memo <br />To: Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Commission <br />From: Chris Miller, Finance Director <br />Date: October 15, 2010 <br />Re: Water Use Impact Resulting from the Water Conservation-Based Rate Structure <br />Background <br />In January, 2009 the City instituted a new water conservation-based rate structure designed to <br />encourage water conservation in conjunction with the goals and strategies outlined in the City's <br />Imagine Roseville 2025 initiative, as well as a new State Law that required water service providers to <br />encourage water conservation. <br />The new conservation-based rates were designed primarily to target excessive water usage. It is not <br />unusual to see a 4 or 5 person household use 20-30,000 gallons per quarter for general use such as <br />personal hygiene, cooking, and cleaning (as evidenced by the household's wintertime usage). In <br />recognition of this, the new rate structure was designed to encourage conservation without unduly <br />penalizing households for basic water use. <br />The new State Law did not mandate how each service provider should structure their rates, but it did <br />offer examples that are commonly in use, such as using increasing block rates (tiered rate structure) <br />and seasonal rates. The City's current rate structure employs both of these measures as shown in the <br />following table. <br />In analyzing customer usage behaviors prior to 2009, it was evident that Roseville residents were <br />already consuming less water than residents in many other communities. This is most likely due to the <br />fact that relatively few residential properties in Roseville have irrigation systems, which is in contrast <br />to some 2nd and 3rd ring suburbs. It may also stem from having a relatively smaller population per <br />household. <br />Given that Roseville residents already had some forms of water conservation methods in place, it was <br />projected that a new conservation-based rate structure was not likely to have a significant impact on <br />the amount of residential water use. <br />