CC_Minutes_2010_1122 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Meeting Monday, November 22, 2010 Page 12 ness use behavior, with no conclusive evidence to -date. Mr. Miller noted that, based on previous comparisons, Roseville residents appeared to reflect water con- servation measures before the revised rate structure; with the City's usage lower than many surrounding communities, particularly first and second ring suburbs. Mr. Miller advised that the City's Public Works, Environment and Transportation PWET) Commission had reviewed the data and trends to determine if any changes in household behavior was indicated, and had initially discussed and ex- pressed their strong enthusiasm for stronger incentives by increasing the rate structure by adding more tiers, with those high end water consumers to be charged a significantly higher fee than that recommended by staff, for an approximate 50% rate increase for the higher tier. Mr. Miller noted that staff's recommended rate increases were outlined on Page 4 of the staff report; and included resulting financial impacts for atypical single family home, as well as a typical commercial property; for an overall average in- crease of 4.7% for most single family homes. Mr. Miller noted that the charts included on Schedule A (pages 7 and 8 of the re- port), provided more detail of the various water and sewer rates, including base rates to address fixed costs, and user rates for variable costs; including a sug- gested increase for conservation -based rates at 10% to cover day -to -day opera- tions and replacement of the City's aging infrastructure, with a premium included for higher than average users. Mr. Miller advised that Roseville residents had fewer irrigation systems, as well as many smaller lots, impacting water use. Discussion among staff and Councilmembers included a past rate comparison with other communities based on household demographics and numbers, as well as weather- related water usage; conservation rate impacts for commercial users and how to verify aggregate data to determine commercial use patterns as well as residential use patterns, allowing for meter size, given higher commercial volume that average users, but recognizing the many variables in size of commercial us- ers. Mr. Miller advised that staff was not recommending a tiered rate structure, based on problematic comparison analyses for types of business or commercial uses; given the huge disparities apparent in some commercial buildings, and the inabili- ty to distinguish the type of business to determine tier rates for commercial build- ings; opining that a business's bottom line may provide a better incentive than could be achieved or encouraged by the City's rate structure. Councilmember Roe suggested a future review at providing additional incentives for changing behavior through considering bonuses or credits for reducing con- sumption by percentages for commercial users at certain levels of reduction evi- 411 denced, easily achieved through adjustments to irrigation systems, such as fre- quency of operation or addition of a rain gauge.