Loading...
05-15-1974 - Public Hearing . it. o \.) .' PUBLIC HEARING WATER AND SEWER RATES ~1AY 15,1974 The Public Hearing on Water and Sewer Rates held May 15,1974 was called to order by Mayor David C. Severance, in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Mayor David C. Severance Councilman Jacob Lodico Councilman Edward K. Clinton Councilman Walter B. Sikes Councilman John G. Bevel City Attorney Joseph E. Weaver City Clerk Sue Blackwell Deputy Clerk Pam Bryant Police Chief George R. Katez Sgt. Norman Mc Call - Police Department Present Present Present . Present Present Present Present Absent Absent Present Also attending this Public Hearing was Ruth Sedgwick of the Water Department, Rick Fernandez from Briley, Wild & Assoc. and Cliff Cunningham from May, Zima & Co. Mayor Severance stated that before the hearing begins, he would like to bring a couple things to the public's attention. Each person that requests to be heard by the Council will come forward to the microphone, stating their name and address, and the statement or questions are to be limited to three minutes. If we don't enforce the ordinance that covers this, we will be here until very late tonight. We would like to give everybody a chance to speak that would like to. Mayor Severance stated that the first order of business would be the reading of the water and sewer rates proposal. He then introduced Mr. Cunningham from May, Zima & Co. to the public. Mr. Cunningham stated that the firm of May, Zima was engaged by the City of Edgewater to review their existing water and sewer rates, together with their revenues and expenditures for operating expenses and for debt service over the past five years. Mr. Cunningham went over the attached booklet on the water and sewer rates adjustments. Mr. Cunningham said that after their review, they have recommended to the City that they adjust their .water rates from a minimum of 3,000 aallons for $2.50 to a minimum of 2,000 gallons and be cha~ged $2.75. Each additional 1,000 gallons you are being charged 45~, we have recommended to the City that this be increased to 55~ per 1.000 gallons. Sewer charges had a multiple of methods of charging for sewers, our recommendation to the City was to eliminate all - 1 - ~ o o of these methods of charges for sewer service and make sewer service 100% of water. We have also recommended to the City that they increase the tap fee from $75.00 to $125.00. For a connection fee for which there has been no charge, that there would be a $250.00 per unit charge for each connection fee for water. For Sewer, the connection fee would be $150.00 Councilman Bevel stated that first of all he would like to thank everyone that wrote him a letter, whether he agreed with them or not he aprreciated hearing from them. At this time anyone in the City of Edgewater that wants to have water run to his property and there is not a water line running to his property, he must pay actual cost of water being installed to his property, sewer is the same way. Councilman Sikes stated that he also appreciated some of the letters that he has received. He stated that he has talked to some of the mobile home park residents. We are not trying to discriminate against anybody. There are various situations, and everybody is going to have to pay a little bit more. It is an advantaqe for mobile home park owners to be on City water and sewer even if he puts it in from the very point of construction. We understand that people are on a limited income, but we do feel that there should be an adjustment some way that everybody pays a fair share in development of the water system for the future. At the present rate a single family unit with a minimum of 3,000 gallons pays 6.00 a month, under the new rate under the minimum unit you pay $2.75 for 2,000 gallons, you pay a similar amount for your sewer, for a total of $5.50. Councilman Clinton stated that he would like for a park owner, someone that lives in a mobile home and some that lives in a house explain to him why and what their complaints are. Mayor Severance stated that we would let Councilman Lodico have the floor first, then the public could have their say. Councilman Lodico stated that he has received these letters and r~spects their opinions. These rates are proposed, they are not definate yet. According to the system that we have here, they want to cut us down from 3,000 gallons to 2,000 gallons and charge us 25i more. He stated that he is willing to pay more money, because our men working for the City are working for peanuts. We are the lowest by a $1.50 a month. Mayor Severance then turned the floor over to anyone in the audience that has a question or wishes to talk. Mr. Charles Hall, Attorney stated that he was representing the Mobile Home Park Owners Assoc. He said that he has gone over the May, Zima report and the recommendations. The Mobile Home Park Owners are very much concerned with this report. They feel that they should not be tlassified as a series of single family residents, but as business. There are several good reasons for this, for zoning purposes and for nearly every other purpose, a Mobile Home Park is classified as a business. You meter the park owner only, and not each person that occupies each space in the park. -2- , o o The system in the parks are maintained by the owner and not the City. He stated that the park owners do wish to corporate with the City and feel like there is a need to raise the rate, they would go along with that if it was a reasonable raise in the rate. He feels that the park owners would go along with your proposed rate of $2.75 for the first 2,000 gallons and 55~ for additional and sewer 100% of the water bill just so long as you treat the mobile home park owner as a business~and charge him on a basis of one meter and not on the basis of 60 different single family dwellings. Mr. Cunningham stated that he did not understand where the mobile home park owners got the variation from his report. Our report does not recommend that they be classified as a single family dwellings, and that they be billed separetly. He stated that their recommendation was that each meter pay for the water that goes through that meter, and bill that customer 100% of that water for the sewer charge. There is nothing in our report that reflects any discrimination. City Attorney Joseph E. Weaver stated that the proposal that was made is based strictly on useage. If you don't use it, you don't pay for it. There is notaa flat fee except for the first minimum that is charged on the water. The only justifi- cation for treating the mobile home parks different, is that he has one meter and will not charge him a multiple minimum on each lot. The way that he has got it set up, he is going to have to pay the excess amount at the rate above that. Mr. Cunningham stated that his f~elinga on this and recommend- ation of the firm of May Zima is that trailer parks that have one meter pay for the number of thousands of gallons that are run through that one meter at the same rate that anybody else pays for it with no multiple minimum, no side letters, no nothing. If you want to get into multiple minimums, we would recommend that multiple minimums be set on dwellings but not on trailer parks. Mr. Fernandez stated that the cost per thousand gallons for the home owner was $1.10 based on this 3,000 gallon figure versis 56~ per thousand gallons for mobile home park owners. Possibly the commission should abandon the minimum entirely and raise the cost per thousand gallons to 85~ that would be a good way of charging each person for the gallons that he used and it would definately equal out the cost differ of the mobile home parks and the single family residentail. Mayor Severance stated that if we have differentiations in rates we will be required to roll them either back or forward to make one rate. To adjust them to equal rates. As it currently stands the trailer parks are paying $2.50 for the first 3,000 gallons and 55t for each additional thousand. Residents are paying $2.50 for the first 3,000 gallons and 45~ for additional thousand. Mayor Severance stated that Friday night at the Workshop meeting we will touch briefly on this subject of water and sewer adjustments, then get into the finalization of it at the following workshop. This needs a little more discussion. Mayor Severance stated that if we go on the multiple minimum we would probably have to work out an agreement with the -3- ~ ~ o o trailer park owners, being that it is private property, to maintain their new line. Mayor Severance stated that we should have it set up that on 3/4 inch tap $15.00 or labor and material plus 20% which ever is greater. This way we won't have to change ordinances every month because of the cost. City Attorney Weaver stated that the Mayor and himself have been working on this new landfill project, the cost of handeling garbage and trash is going to go up in the City of Edgewater. We don't know how much. He stated that the Volusia County Staff is against this land fill. Councilman Lodico proposed that we increase the garbage rate from $2.00 to $2.50. This is for 3 cans and $lwOO each can after, for residential, to be changed to $1.25 for each additional can. For commercial proposed ~to $3.50 for 3 cans and $1.00 per additional can there after. Mayor Severance turned this over to Mr. Cunningham to make proposals on the garbage and trash rates. We will discuss these rates further at the next Workshop meeting. This Public Hearing was adjourned by Mayor David C. Severance. -4- , ~ . .. .f \ . o o , . CITY OF EDGEWAITR, FLORIDA WAlER.,ANI) SEWER RAlE ADJUS1TENTS -. o o ., . jvta}J. zima & CO. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTAI\iITS'- To the' Mayor and City Council City of Edgewater, Florida WATER AND SEWER REPORT Pursuant to your request, we have examined the ,customers' accounts, the revenues and expenditures, the rate structure, 'the ordinance governing the , , bonds issued, the amount of water produced and the amount of revenue which , , can be generated from revised rates for the Water and Sewer Department for the City of Edgewater" Flotida. Our review of the revenues and expenditures for the Water and Sewer System for the past five years reflect that the operating revenues have not been sufficient to meet operating expenses and debt service requirements. " I The following tabulation reflects the operating income from the system, the' ! ,j il il I ,I , operating expenses, the debt service requirements and the ,amount which must be supplemented ,by the utilities service taxes. FISCAL YEAR ENDING i969 'I \ Operating revenues Operating expenses Excess of operating revenues over operating expenses Debt service requirements Operating and debt service deficit " Income from utilities ser,vice taxes Deficit before other income Other income ~xcess of expenses over revenues $ 113,659 49,776 .$ 63,883 105,292 $ (41,409) 32,322 $ (9,087) 6,828 $ (2.259) I' Ii i ,j , II jJ II I o .' FISCAL YEAR ENDING 1970 Operating'revenues Operating expenses Excess,of operating revenues over operating expenses Debt service requirements Operating and debt service deficit Income from utilities service taxes Deficit before other income Other income Excess of revenues over expenses FISCAL YEAR ENDING 1971 Operating revenues Operating expenses Excess of operating revenues over operating expenses Debt service requirements Operating and debt service deficit Income from uti1itie~ service taxes Balance before other income Other income Excess'of revenues over expenses FISCAL YEAR ENDING 1972.' ,Operating revenues Operating expenses Excess of operating revenues over operating expenses Debt service requirements Operating and debt service deficit Income from utilities service taxes Balance before other income Othe.r income Excess of revenues over expenses o $ , 118,898 47,044 $ 71,854 111,947 $' (40,093) 35,984 $ (4,109) 8,927 $ 4 .818, ,$ 131,002 54,091 $ 76,911 112,535 $ (35,624) 40,469 $ 4,845 8,359 $ 13.204 '. I I I I , \ $ 136,829 53,100 $ 83,729 110,914' $ (27,185) 45,584 $ 18,399 8,750 ' $ 27.149 .:J- o o ,I ,. FISCAL YEAR ENDING 1973 'Operating revenues Operating expenses Excess of operating revenues over operating,expenses Debt service requirements Operating and debt service deficit Income from utilities service taxes $ 141,258 72,341 Balance before other income Other income $ 68,917 114,820 $ (45,903) 51,264 $ 5,361 5,679 $' 11.040 Excess of revenues over expenses It should be noted that the operating revenues have not been enough at any time to meet the bond ordinance requirements for additional'financing. I I . . ~ I r It should further be noted that no provision for depreciation has been applied to the above computations and good business dictates that provisions should be made for the wearing out and for the replacement of such equipment. The present rate for water service for a single unit is $2.50 for a minimum of 3,000 gallons, plus .$.45 for each additional 1,000 gallons, and for a multi-unit ,I , " the charge is $2.50 for a minimum of 3,000 gallons, plus $.55 for each additional 1,000 gallons. '. '\ Our examination reflected that the revenues for water service were derived as follows: From single unit services From multi-unit services 84.08 % 15.92 100.00 % From single unit services: PERCENTAGE OF I GALLONS CONSUMED REVENUE I I, For consumers using 3,000 gallons or less ,'30.46 % , For' consumers using 4,000/5,000 gallons ' 18.00 , For consumers using 6,000/7,000 gallons 13.16 For' consumers using 8,000/10,000 gallons 13.54 , " '" ~' o (,) '. For consumers using 11,000/15,000 gallons 9.85 For consumers using 16,000/25,000 gallons 6.39 .For .consumers using 26,000/34,000 gallons 2.19 For consumers using 35,000. gallons or. over 6.41 100.00 % From multi-unit services: PERCENTAGE OF GALLONS CONSUMED REVENUE For consumers using 3,000 gallons or less 4.67 % For consumers using 4,000/5,000 gallons' 5.04 For consumers using 6,000/7,000 gallons 3.88 For consumers using 8,000/10,000 gallons 5.71 For consumers using 11,000/15,000 gallons .7.76 For consumers using 16,000/25,000 gallons 11. 52 .1 For consumers using 26,000/34,000 gallons 7,76 For consumers using 35,000 gallons or over 53,66 I % I 100.00 I For total services: I PERCENTAGE OF I GALLONS CONSUMED REVENUE I For using 3,000 gallons or less 26.35 % I consumers For consumers using 4,000/5,000 gallons 15.93 For consumers using 6,000/7,000 gallons 11.68 For consumers using 8,000/10,000 gallons 12.29 For consumers using 11,000/15,000 gallons 9.52 For consumers using 16,000/25,000 gallons 7.21 For c:::onsumers using 26,000/34,000 gallons 3.08 For consumers using 35,000 gallons or over 13.94 100.00 % Our examination revealed that of the total single unit customers, the per- centage and gallons ~onsumed by number of customers is reflected below: PERCENTAGE OF. CUSTm1ERS 3,000 gallons or less 4,000/5,000 gallons 6,000/7,000 gallons 8,000/10,000 gallons 11,000/15,000 gallons 16,000/25,000 gallons 26,000/34,000 gallons 35,000 gallons or over 46.45 % 21.82 12.41 10.09 5.59 2.51 .58 .55 I I I I . I GALLONS CONSUMED 100.00 %' 4- Q <.) , .. The percentage and gallons consumed by number of customers for multi-unit' service is shown below: PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMERS GALLONS CONSUMED 3,000 gallons or less 4,000/5,000 gallons ' 6,000/7,000 gallons 8,000/10,000 gallons 11,000/15,000 gallons 16,000/25,000 gallons 26,000/34,000 gallons 35~000 gallons 'or over 21. 27 % 17.31 9.99 11.28 11.18 11 .08 5.24 12.65 100.00 % The percentage and gallons consumed by number of customers for all services, is shown below: PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMERS GALLONS CONSUMED 3,000 gallons or less 4,000/5,000 gallons ~,000/7,000 gallons , 8,000/10,000 gallons 11,000/15~000 ga11on~ 16,000/25,000 gallons 26,000/34,000 gallons 35,000 gallons o-r over 44.94 % 21.55 12.26 10.16 5.92 3.02 .86 1.29 100.00 % The above tabulations reflect that 84.08% of the City's revenue for water and , \ sewer service is derived from single unit service customers and 15.92% from I , I 'I , multi-unit service. Also, the above tabulations reflect that 66.25% of the City's total revenue from the sale of water is derived from customers using 10,000 gallons or less. The above tabulations reflect that 88.91% of the total customers use 10,000 or less gallons of water. Based upon our examination of the records and the rate currently in effect, it is our estimate that the City will derive approximately $72,000 from the sale of water for, the fiscal period October I, 1973 to September 30,1974. .~ ,- f.. I , " I , I I , I 11,1 I" : ! i I II I Il'i , I Ii : Ii I " I ~l ' I' I' I Ii ! 11 t I' I, Ii I II \ 'j " 'I ~I II " I III o u In order to generate additional revenues and to more evenly distribute the cost of service to the consumers, it is our recommendation that the water rates be adjusted as follows: 1. ,The minimum or base of 3,000 gallons be adjusted to 2,000 gallons. 2. The minimum charge for 2~000,gallons be $2.75, instead of $2.50 for the 3,000 gallons currently in effect. 3~ The charge for each additional 1,000 gallons consumed ~e $.55 per 1,000 gallons instead of the $.45 and $.55 in effect. I I The proposed rate structure would reflect the following consumption and charges: 2,000 gallon minimum ,$ 2.75 3,000 gallons $ 3.30 4,000 gallons ,$ 3.85' 5,000, gallons ,$ 4.40 6,000 gallons $ 4.95 7,000 gallons $ 5.50 8,000 gallons $ 6.05 9,000 gallons $ 6.60 10,000 gallons $ 7.15 etc. We further recommend that the City adopt a policy of connection fees to the 'I ,I system as has been done by most other municipalities in the State of Florida. It is our recommendation that the City charge a connection fee of $200 per unit 'I for each unit connected to the system. An example of what we are recommending , . \. . for connection fees would be: For a single dwelling unit Duplex Triplex 10-unit condominium ~telJl - In accordance with the description unit as provided in the Southern Building $ 200.00 $ 400.00 $ 600.00 $2,000.00 of a plumbing Code. . " In addition to the connection fee, we recommend that the City'adjust the current tap' fees as follows: For': 3/4" tap 1" tap 1 1/4" tap ,'1 1/2" tap 2" and up tap - Labor and material + $ $ $ $ 20% 125.00 200.00 245.00 350.00 .:' " ~ ' , I , : I II I ,t i I o o :' I . , Based upon our review of the records of the City of Edgewater, we estimate that ,the r~commended adjustments and new policies will generate additional water revenue in the approximate amount of $~1.000. , The City has several different methods of determining the charges for sewer service at the present time. It is our recommendation that this variety of ,I charges be eliminated and that the sewer charge be based upon the amount of water used by each consumer, and that the sewer charges be 100% of the water charges.' If a, consumer uses 5,000 gallons of water, his water charges would be $4.40; the consumer would pay the same amount for sewer service. Our, examination revealed that some customers were using several thousands of , gallons of water, however, the same customer was paying a very small sewer charge. Our recommendation is based on the theory that each customer pay a fair share for service required. 'We further recommend that the City adopt a policy, of a connection charge for sewer service and that the connection ~harge be $150 per unit~ Single' dwelling $ 150.00.j Duplex $ 300.00~' 10-uni t condominium $1,500.00 ' Motels - Charge in accordance with description of a plumbing unit per the Southern Plumbing Code~ , \ Based upon our examination of the records of the City, we estimate the revenues from sewer service ,at the current rates to be,approximately $67,000 for the .' " period 1973/1974. It is our estimate that the revised billing method and the adoption of the connection ch~rge policy will provide the City with approximately $20,000 ...-, - additional revenues. . ~\ " , " , '1 J , . ,I... ., ., . ; I I j' I I I I i' I I , II , I, Ii I Ii II II " ., b u The following tabulation re'flects the estimated annual revenues for water and sewer services with the revised rates and adopted policies: ,WATER SERVICES Water sales $ 91,600 Connection charges 12,600 Tap fees 7,500 Hydrant rental 5,200 $ 116.900 SEWER SERVICES Sewer charges $ 77 , 900 Connection charges 9,000 $ 86.900 It is our recommendation that the person charged with the responsibility of granting permission to connecting consumers determine that connection to the system is reasonable under the City's connection policies. By this We mean that the City will not have to. incur any unusual cO,st in providing the, service. Should such cost be necessary, it'is our recommendation that the consumer bear the cost. We further recommend that the City discontinue the policy, of refun~ables to consumers'who bear the cost of line extensions ~r any unusual cost incurred \ \ in connection with 'the furnishing of water and sewer service., 'd "1 ,J'. .: .- " , " , " " , ..' ",'. : / <;.