HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-09-16 UtilitiesOFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
KAREEMAH FOWLER, CITY CLERK
T ITTLUTF,S
Committee Members Present:
Other Council Present:
Ferlic
Others Present:
Agenda:
NOVEMBER 9TH, 2016 5:00 P.M.
Dr. David Varner, Regina Williams- Preston, Randy
Kelly
Jo M. Broden, Tim Scott, John Voorde, Gavin
Bill No. 66 -16 – New Water Rates and Changes –
Update
Committee Chair Dr. David Varner called the meeting to order with one (1) item on the agenda.
Bill No. 66 -16 – New Water Rates and Changes – Update
Eric Horvath, Executive Director, Department of Public Works, with offices on the 13th Floor of
the County -City Building, stated, For the last part, we'll specifically go over the financials and
what we're looking at in terms of a rate increase and how that impacts what we're trying to do
here in taking care of an aging system. Mr. Horvath stated that because water mains have such
long useful lives, not much money has been invested in the updating of water programs. He
explained that the problem of having one - hundred and twenty (120) year -old water infrastructure
was one faced by many cities. He stated, The mains that we have aren't wooden, but they're cast
iron. Most of our mains are cast iron, which is a brittle metal. They are past their useful life, and
it's time to do some replacement. You'll see that we're not anywhere near replacing it at the rate
that we need to. The rates haven't been raised since 2006, and even then we didn't have a lot of
money for maintenance items of existing utilities and facilities. So, we've got a lot of
maintenance issues that are happening. We've got a lot of pumps that are fifty (50) years old —
and the useful life of a pump is nowhere near fifty (50) years. It's actually a testament to staff
keeping it up and keeping it running, but it comes to a point where reliability is going to become
an issue. The one thing that we're very blessed with is a good water quality source, here in South
Bend. We have a very abundant aquifer, so we're very blessed there. It's also very good quality.
We have nine (9) different places that we pump water from in the City, and we've got various
levels of treatment —five (5) of those have full water treatment facilities on them.
Councilmember John Voorde asked, Is that for iron, primarily?
455 County -City Building • 227 W. Jefferson Boulevard • South Bend, Indiana 46601
Phone 574- 235 -9221 • Fax 574- 235 -9173 • TDD 574- 235 -5567 • www.SouthBendIN.gov
JENNIFER M. COFFMAN ALKEYNA M. ALDRIDGE JOSEPH MOLNAR
CHIEF DEPUTY/ CHIEF OF STAFF DEPUTY/ DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK
Mr. Horvath responded, It depends on the wellfield. We even have JC filters because we've got
the problem with the contamination that came in the wellfield. With this abundant supply, the
number of wells we have —we have thirty (30) wells inground —if they are all running at the
capacity that they should be, it would be about 70,000,000 gallons a day, which is well more
than what we need. So, because of different maintenance over time, that number has gone down
in terms of what we can actually pump. So, we're somewhere around 40,000,000 gallons a day.
You'll see from this that the need here is really a capital need. It's getting back to a replacement
program for some of these pieces of equipment that are well beyond their useful life, and some of
these water mains that need to be replaced, too, that are one - hundred and twenty (120) years -old.
We have about six - hundred (600) miles of water main with which we deliver over 5.2 billion
gallons to homes every year. Mr. Horvath presented to the Committee a graphic depicting the
City's different wellfields and booster stations. Mr. Horvath offered to show any of the
Committee or Councilmembers around the facilities, suggesting that they set up a time
beforehand to meet with him onsite. He stated, It is pretty eye - popping when you see some of the
stuff that's in there. I imagine that it wouldn't take much for some of these things to be breaking
down.
Al Greek, Utilities Director of South Bend, with offices at Riverside Drive and at North Pumping
Station in South Bend, IN, stated that Erskine wellfield was impacted by nitrate. Mr. Greek
stated, Every time we turn it on, it's about eight (8) to ten (10) parts per million. The limit's ten
(10), so we're careful when we want to use it. There have been times we've had to use it in the
past, when things have been out -of- service, and we had to support that area of town. It needs
some other repairs, and we'd really like to get rid of it sometime in the future and do some other
construction work to get some supplies from somewhere else.
Councilmember Voorde asked, Are nitrates fertilizers?
Mr. Greek responded, It's normally a result of it, yes. Mr. Greek presented to the Committee
pictures of the system. He stated, It's got fifty (50) year -old high service pumps; it's got
ventilation system problems; deteriorating roofs and trusses; it's got piping maintenance issues;
it's got electrical system problems; interior corrosion; outdated equipment. He showed them
pictures of fifty (50) year -old pumps and motors, the outside of the building, the trusses inside of
the building, the piping on the inside that was nearly completely rusted, the ventilation system
which was outdated and difficult to keep running, the electrical system, a walkway in the
filtration plant to get to the filter and the rusted pipes in view while on it, and a chemical tank for
fluoride —which Mr. Greek pointed out was an OSHA violation. He explained, There should be
a storage facility put around it in case there's a spill —a prevention area.
Councilmember Tim Scott asked, Do you have room to do that? To put the containment area —or
does the tank have to move?
Mr. Greek responded, That's a good question. I think that we would at least have to put out some
kind of a concrete embankment around it. We'd have to determine the space needed.
2
Mr. Horvath added, I think it's one - hundred and ten percent (110 %) or one - hundred and fifty
percent (150 %) of the tank capacity.
Mr. Greek showed similar images of decay of the Cleveland South wellfield, as well as the
Fellows booster station and the North pumping station and the Northwest elevated tank. He
stated, If we continue to repair as we have been repairing them, it would take us six - hundred and
thirty-four (634) years to actually replace the water mains in town. I don't think they're designed
to last that long. The hydrants would take one - hundred and sixteen (116) years. He presented a
map to the Committee. Mr. Greek stated, We have veins that have been in place from probably
1875 all the way up to 2007. This gives you some idea of all the water mains that are on each
street - -every street has a water main or two (2) going up and down. He showed other images of
infrastructure. He stated, This was a pressure- reducing valve outside of Penn High. This actually
maintains the pressure in the system. You've got to maintain your pressure in the water system,
otherwise you get surges and you start breaking mains. He showed images of water gushing out
of broken water mains. Mr. Greek explained that the 40,000 -plus water meters in the City needed
maintenance, as well. He stated, They really only last for a fifteen (15) to twenty (20) year
period, so you've got to come up with some way of maintaining the meters. A water meter to us
is like a cash register to a grocery store. If you owned a grocery store and your cash register
wouldn't ring up the amount of money that you were trying to charge for something, you'd get
that thing fixed pretty quickly. That's what the meter is doing for us. And this pays for both
water and waste water. When a water meter gets older, they can start slowing down on you. One
two (2) inch meter running slow —if you've only lost five percent (5 %) of the readings, it can be
$10,000 in lost revenue pretty easily.
Councilmember Voorde asked, You still have your own test bench on Olive Street?
Mr. Greek responded, We are currently putting a new one in. The cost for a fifteen (15) year
meter change -up program is like $1,000,000 a year or more to keep that program up. Mr. Greek
showed the Committee more images of infrastructure. He stated, We have to buy equipment and
vehicles out of our capital money. Currently, if you stop to think about it, we have seventy (70)
employees, we have repair crews, construction crews, meter change -up crews, service -type
crews to do stops and starts —we're spending about $500,000 a year just to maintain the fleet and
all the vehicles and equipment that it takes to do excavations, valve - turning, and all those kinds
of things. That's another part of the budget that has to be maintained.
John Julien, Umbaugh and Associates, 112 Ironworks Avenue, Mishawaka, IN, passed around
copies of the five (5) year capital improvement plan to members of the Committee and Council.
Mr. Julien stated that his intended role is to look at the situation from a financial perspective and
help formulate a financial plan to allow the City to take on these repair and maintenance
challenges. He explained that the papers he passed out, coupled with the Powerpoint
presentation, represent the basis of their recommendation for a financial plan to address the
needs that the Department of Public Works faces. He stated, The first page here is a look at your
net income calculation for the last several years. A couple of things I would like to point out: the
first line item is your history of operating revenues on an annual basis. What I see there is not a
surprise. What you're seeing is, year- over -year, some slight declines. It's probably easy to say
that it's not a result of any major users leaving the system. It's a reflection of what we're seeing
in the industry, such as people investing in low -flow plumbing fixtures. That is great from an
environmental standpoint, but if you're in the business of selling water it's not so good. But it is
the world that we live in, so that is one of the things we have to contest with in dealing with the
operations. We've got some contraction in our revenues. At the same time, the next line item
there I think is relatively important. Those numbers reflect the day -to -day operating costs of the
business of running the water utility. You can see that there's been some cost controls that have
been implemented over the last several years. That's a reflection of a couple of things. One (1), I
think this department is always looking for better ways to deliver service, to do more with less.
But it also shows that as things are getting tight, you don't spend in areas like preventive
maintenance, predictive maintenance, which would return benefits in the long -run but in the
short-term cost you money. So, when I see those numbers contracted, that's the conclusion that
we're seeing. The bottom line is, on a net asset position, you've seen steady material decline
over the last three (3) years. That line is a little different than cash, because it includes
depreciation. I don't want to go too far in the accounting weeds with you, but depreciation is a
non -cash expenditure. But it is important to think of how you fund that.
Mr. Julien continued his breakdown, stating, The message there is that you are losing financial
strength. It's not a surprise. It's been ten (10) years since you've adjusted rates, and you can do
as much as you can in terms of controlling costs, but the business that you're running today is
more expensive than the business you were running ten (10) years ago. If you don't have
revenues to offset that through growth, then you're just going to have a declining financial
position.
Committeemember Dr. David Varner asked Mr. Julien to address the PILOT tax.
Mr. Julien responded, Oh yes. In this analysis is recognized a revenue requirement that is the
payment from the utility to the City in the form of payment in lieu of taxes. The utility itself is
not a tax- paying entity, obviously. It's owned by the City, so it doesn't pay a tax bill. The theory
is that although it doesn't pay a tax bill, it does receive benefit from the City's services that are
supported by property taxes. To provide service, they have to drive on City streets. Their assets
are protected by the Police Department and the Fire Department. So, there are benefits that are
being received, and this is a way of compensating the City for that. There are statutory guidelines
on how that can be calculated. It sets a ceiling. There's no statutory mandate that a payment be
made, but historically a payment has been part of the operating budget for the utility.
Committeemember Dr. Varner stated, Actually, that's recent history. It's probably less than ten
(10) years, Eric. Al, you would know it. The PILOT tax —it's been less than ten (10) years? Or
has it been longer than that? I know since I've been around, it's been established. I'm thinking
it's about ten (10) years. You say "historically," but it's recent history we're establishing.
Another thing: is this calculated based on net asset value of some sort?
Mr. Julien responded, Yes, book value.
Committeemember Dr. Varner stated, There's no ordinance. This is an assessment that's made
without any ordinance guidance. It's strictly done administratively, as I understand it. We ran
into this with the CSO issue —if you use that asset value and you embark on a huge asset project,
you are at the same time raising your tax.
Mr. Julien responded, You could, yes.
Committeemember Dr. Varner stated, If you don't have any guidelines. One of the things I want
the Council to understand is that this PILOT —yes, it's historical, it's new, there is no ordinance,
it is allowable. I just see that the PILOT transfers are growing, and as the asset value grows, I
expect them to get larger. Is this going to be a $4,000,000 or $5,000,000 project in a few years?
Have you looked at that?
Mr. Julien responded, I haven't projected it out. Your comments lead into the projection portion
of the report, but there are two (2) things that are going to happen to book values. One (1) is, as
you invest in new equipment, there's some in -flow and out -flow in that number. But your
comment is correct, in terms of if the net number grows and the City looks at adjusting that
annually, that payment would increase annually. One thing that I always caution municipalities,
in this area: most utilities don't adjust their rates each year. You don't set your water rates each
year like you set your tax rates each year. If you add more to the payment in lieu of taxes, and
you don't adjust your rates to accommodate that — you're stealing from Peter to pay Paul. All
your questions are on -point regarding payment in lieu of taxes. If you look at what's happened
with the cash position over the last several years, on Slide 3, you'll see that back in 2013 there
was a substantial drop in cash that was reduced to almost break -even in 2014, and it's up in
2015. What's driving that number is your investment in capital. To the extent that you can defer
discretionary investments and replacements of equipment and capital— that's how you're
controlling your cash position.
Committeemember Dr. Varner asked, As you have more assets and you make your depreciation
adjustments, your depreciation annually probably gets larger —and you said that's a non -cash
expense —so what's our annual depreciation number?
Mr. Julien responded, Annual depreciation is somewhere around $1,500,000.
Committeemember Dr. Varner asked, $1,500,000, $2,000,000?
Mr. Julien responded, Yeah. So, if you invest $1,500,000 and depreciate $1,500,000, your net
assets, and consequently your payment in lieu of taxes, would remain the same.
Committeemember Dr. Varner responded, I was following the line of the fact that you can have
more cash because you're expensing something that has no cash expense.
Mr. Julien responded, You have to compare your depreciation expense to your annual capital
pay -as- you -go plan. Mr. Julien moved on, stating that further analysis could be found on Page
10. He stated that the first obligation was to take care of day -to -day operation costs. He stated
that in 2015, day -to -day costs were just under $10,800,000. He explained the organization of
data in the analysis and how the data was intended to help identify what can be reasonably
projected in the next couple of years, regarding how the analyzed numbers will change. He
5
stated, We expect that in 2017 what cost us $10,800,000 will cost us $478,000 more. Our first
planning number for the financial plan is that we need to have enough money to take care of the
day -to -day operating costs, and the working number is just under $11,300,000. He explained that
after you've covered your day -to -day operating costs, you have to have enough money to pay off
your bonds. You also need to have enough money to reinvest in the utility to replace critical
equipment. He stated, The amount that you're going to pay on your bonds is fixed, it's not going
to change from year to year. We know that that is going to run about $2,000,000. We know that,
based upon the analysis, on a pay -as- you -go basis you've got about $30,000,000 worth of
investments that are needed. With that, if we plug those numbers in, we come up with a gap. To
get rid of the gap, you're going to reevaluate spending and see what you can do to control costs.
Once you've exhausted that solution, your only other option is to raise revenue, which is a rate
increase. Mr. Julien directed the members of the Committee and Council to Slide Six (6) of the
Powerpoint. He stated, We are talking about an adjustment of forty -three percent (43 %), which
would take the average residential bill up about $5.70. He then explained how that rate increase
was calculated. He stated, A forty -three percent (43 %) increase is going to generate an additional
$4,900,000. There are some miscellaneous revenues that bring $3,000,000 into the coffers.
Committeemember Dr. Varner asked, What were they?
Mr. Julien responded, The lion's share of that is a contribution for a management fee from the
Sewage Works, to recognize that in the $11,300,000 of day -to -day operating costs are the
expenses for the billing, meter - reading, collection —the business side of the business. It's all
reflected in the $11,300,000 budget number, and the Sewage Works then pays a management fee
so that they have a fair sharing of those costs. So, the majority of that $3,000,000 comes from
that. You do have other miscellaneous sources— interest income, connection fees, things of that
nature —that round out that $3,000,000.
Committeemember Dr. Varner asked, Is that $3,000,000 in any shape or form related to billing
dollars? If you have a bill of $11,400,000, how is that fee determined?
Mr. Julien responded, It's based upon a reasonable splitting -out of the actual business
department's expenses.
A discussion ensued between Committeemember Dr. Varner, Mr. Julien, and Mr. Greek,
breaking down the numbers even further.
Committeemember Dr. Varner stated, It just seems to me that if you keep using a formula which
is driven by something which is continually getting larger —and I'm not talking about the cost of
water, I'm talking about the net assets or the billings —it's like compound interest. You're
compounding the return of everything rather than letting it relate to cost. I think if this is how it's
driven, maybe there is a better way. I don't know what that is, but these expenses are getting
pretty large collectively for everybody.
Mr. Julien responded that he felt the points raised were good ones, and that he wanted to come
back to them.
on
Committeemember Regina Williams- Preston announced that she would soon have to excuse
herself from the meeting, but asked Mr. Julien first to clarify whether or not the forty -three
percent (43 %) rate increase affected only water. Mr. Julien confirmed that it only affected water.
COMMITTEEMEMBER REGINA WILLIAMS- PRESTON LEFT THE MEETING.
Mr. Julien explained how the budget would be allocated toward various expenditures, leaving
$4,100,000 for capital. He explained that this amount, which comes as a result of the forty -three
percent (43 %) rate increase, is less than the targeted pay -as- you -go capital accruement plan has
identified. He stated, There is already a recognition that we are going to defer those investments.
One thing about capital —it's not really a question of whether you need to. do it, it's more a
question of when you need to do it. What you can't afford today, you're pushing off to take care
of at some point in the future. He explained that the percentage increase was a very large one, but
that the dollar increase for the average rate -payer would not be too burdensome at just over $5.
He stated, It's a larger number than you would like to see, but it's also a reflection of the fact that
it has been quite a few years since the rates have been adjusted. It's our recommendation that you
move forward to try to generate this additional revenue with that forty -three percent (43 %) rate
increase. He explained that these rate increases would not put the City out -of- market —that other
communities have had to raise their rates, therefore South Bend residents would not find cheaper
rates by moving out of the City.
Councilmember Scott asked, I don't remember your budget off the top of my head, but what are
we putting aside for PM and for capital each year? I know that we outgrew the lowest rate within
the land, but what are we doing to do that?
Mr. Horvath responded, The 2006 rate increases were set to generate $2,000,000 a year in
capital. He explained that that number eventually dropped to less than $1,000,000.
Councilmember Jo M. Broden asked, If we put this rate in place, does IURC limit our ability to
restrict capital?
Mr. Julien responded, You're double - regulated. You're regulated at the local level because you
will make a decision as to what you go to the Commission for, and then the Commission will
conduct their own study. In this instance, when they look at this — because of the duration, they
will probably give you a pass —you haven't been spending $2,000,000 on capital because your
operating costs have caught up with you. When we ask for this rate case —and I expect them to
give us the forty -three percent (43 %)—I would not be surprised if they included in the order, "I
don't want to see you spend $4,000,000 a year on capital." And you'll be able to do that for the
first several years, but health costs are going to go up; as your assets wear out, the cost of
maintaining is going to go up. Besides the Commission, there are two (2) other things that can
come into play, as it deals with your cash. When you have bonds outstanding, you make
promises and minimum requirements to bondholders. You have never come close to violating
those. You've been conscientious about that. The other thing is an administrative policy decision
that you could make that says this is our policy. You control that. It would probably be
considered a good business practice to do that. But of the three (3) things, it has the least weight
because what you set today you can change tomorrow, and if you violate it you're just violating
7
your own rules. It's not a bad idea, though, to have best business practices implemented, for a
number of reasons.
Councilmember Broden asked, With the IURC, is there a requirement in terms of timing for
these requests, or are there best practices that you've seen?
Mr. Julien responded, Whether you're regulating utility or not regulating utility, you should be
looking at adjusting your rates probably every three (3) years.
Mr. Horvath stated, Private utilities do it much more often than public utilities, and that's why
their rates are $37 and ours is $11.
Councilmember Broden asked, So, these calculations are really three (3) years forward?
Mr. Julien responded, Excellent question. Because we're under the Commission, we're limited to
2017. Good business practices tell me: wouldn't it be better to do a three (3) year look forward,
so that in year two (2) and three (3) we're not stealing from that $4,100,000? But you have to
play by the rules that the Commission lays out.
Mr. Horvath stated, Because of those rules, too, you can't have a forty percent (40 %) increase
followed by a three percent (3 %) additional increase because it has to be in that one (1) year
timeframe.
Councilmember Broden asked, So, the billing system that we use — Navilineis that priced
within this, to update that, or not?
Mr. Horvath responded, It is part of our capital plan. We don't have that fully defined yet, but
we're working on that.
Councilmember Broden stated, I think my understanding with that is that it would give us some
flexibility in billing. Like, for different people in different areas of the City.
There was brief discussion regarding how an extra few days' time before shutoff could help
people like those on fixed income.
Councilmember Randy Kelly asked, If the increase doesn't quite cover the pay -as- you -go and we
bond out some of these bigger capital project, how do we pay for that?
Mr. Julien responded, First of all, if you are going to transition to a bonding program, we have to
ask the Commission again for approval, but if we left the revenues as they are, for every dollar
that you need for a bond payment, you would take out of the $4,100,000 for capital.
Mr. Horvath stated, We realize that this is not a fully funded capital plan. One of the things we
will be doing is going through and prioritizing for the most critical of these that have to be done,
and put together the plan.
N.
Councilmember Broden asked whether or not there had been a game plan in terms of capital
improvement in the past.
Ms. [Unidentified] stated, North station had a big update in 2000. There have certainly been
projects.
Councilmember Broden stated, Maybe just address redundancy and a need for that in our system,
because I think it's important for the public to understand that as we go forward. Even if a given
well goes down, that we can hop service and run it straight through an area —will this capital
course that we're looking at improve that ability?
Mr. Horvath responded, Yes. One of the first things we're doing is to connect to get more
pressure in the south zone so that we can get rid of the Erskine well, because the Erskine well
shouldn't be running. We're going to make a connection between two areas to get more pressure
to that zone. That will probably be the first priority that we push.
Councilmember Broden asked, And lots of pressure is a health issue?
Councilmember Voorde responded, A safety issue.
With no further items on the agenda, Committee Chair Dr. David Varner adjourned the meeting
at 6:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
r. David Varner, Committee Chair
E