►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting December 13, 2011
10g. Water and Wastewater Rate Study
B
The
purpose
of
the
action
tonight
is
to
secure
approval
to
outer
right,
the
city
manager
to
execute
a
consultant
contract
with
the
bottle
was
for
the
financial
to
provide
us
with
financial
expertise
for
the
development
of
the
rate
structure
for
the
sewer
and
water
starts,
starting
this
upcoming
July
of
2012.
The
purpose
tonight
to
discuss
the
award
of
the
contract
to
discuss
the
policy
objective,
the
possible
alternative
for
the
rate
study
itself.
B
You
will
have
ample
opportunities
for
the
next
three
months
to
have
those
discussions,
as
you
know
very
well,
the
city
provide
water
and
sewer
services
for
our
residents
and
ills.
Our
obligation
to
manage
the
system
for
both
those
services
and
maintenance
and
operation
of
the
system
is
entirely
funded
by
the
revenue
generator
to
the
ratepayers
fees
through
enterpriseone,
sewer
and
water
and
through
Enterprise
Fund
in
2009,
based
on
a
tenured
financial
projection.
B
The
City
Council
approved
a
three-year
rate
schedule.
The
last
increase
of
this
three-year
rate
schedule
to
place
first
of
july
of
this
year.
As
you
recall,
that
last
rate
increase
was
ten
point.
Sixteen
percent
for
Seward
and
1175
for
water
was
always
the
city
council
policy
to
conduct
a
holistic
and
total
objective
analysis
of
the
proud
of
the
financial
projection
and
possible
alternative.
B
In
order
for
you
to
set
the
rate
structure
to
ensure
that,
for
the
public
benefit
will
be
implemented,
a
multi-year
rate,
a
yearly
leveled
rate
and
also
our
slowest
possible
rate,
in
the
same
time,
Mearing
the
objective
of
the
system
for
the
long-term
maintenance
of
the
system.
In
order
for
us
to
be
able
to
meet
these
set
objectives
and
objectives.
From
for
the
concert,
the
department
went
out
for
a
request
for
proposal
and
received
three
proposal
and
based
on
our
conducted
interview,
was
our
conclusion.
B
B
If
you
will
support
this
action
tonight-
and
you
will
authorize
the
city
manager
to
have
to
award
the
contract
to
bottle
wells,
then
we'll
be
over
intent
to
start
the
discussion
with
the
council
to
set
those
to
reduce
cus
those
policy
objectives
and
goals
and
to
schedule
men
subcommittee
meetings,
probably
study
session,
and
to
support
you
with
information
as
objective
available
information.
For
you
to
be
able
to
make
a
informed
decision
decision
by
mod
13
of
this
year
when
the
approval
of
of.
B
C
A
C
A
C
B
B
B
Really,
this
adjustment
of
that
financial
model
became
too
complex
and
all
of
us
are
so
sumers
in
this
issue
so
close
in
those
issue
right
now,
that
was
our
assessment,
that
having
a
objective
third
party,
really
with
a
fresh
look,
a
more
objective.
Look
to
update
that
financial
model,
making
sure
that
everything
is.
B
Included
in
that
model,
I'll
be
the
most
responsible
financial
intent
that
that
William,
but
made
to
change
our
plan
and
also
our
all-time
cost
money.
Also,
this
would
mean
that
this
consultant
could
provide
us
with
more
support
and
would
require
less
still
would
require
our
time
investment,
but
certainly
less
time.
Investment
on
our
part,
I.
B
Didn't
make
to
specifically
answer
your
question:
I
didn't
have
made
a
awesome
calculation.
How
much
would
cost
F
would
be
done
in
house,
but
it
would
be
my
assessment
that
the
cost
would
be
very
close
if
you
are
doing
in-house,
with
the
difference
that
you
are
using
your
own
resources
versus
having
this
support
provided
through
outside
expertise.
C
C
But
at
the
same
time,
yeah
I
feel
you
know.
One
of
the
difficulties
of
sitting
appears
that
you
do
have
to
balance
an
understanding
of
the
technical
requirements
and
needs
with
the
needs
and
the
requirements
of
the
rate
payers
and
in
this
case
I
don't
feel
that
the
the
Delta
in
what
we're
and
what
you're
proposing
is
really
justified
in
in
the
end
result
for
the
ratepayers.
D
Can
I
ask
a
question
I
asked
I
call
it.
The
subcommittee
was
this
discussed
as
far
as
a
option
of
you
know
these
to
the
this
added
direction.
This
option
of
you
know
having
it
in
house,
because
I
mean
it
makes
a
good
point
and
I
think,
as
long
as
we've
got
it
looks
like
we
have
six
months.
It
looks
like
we
have
some
time
and
if
you
know
possibly,
we
we
delve
into
it
a
little
closer
and
see
you
know.
Maybe
we
save
ten
thousand
dollars,
maybe
let
me
say:
fifteen
thousand
there.
E
Has
been
no
sub
committee
review
of
this,
the
directors
reference
to
sub
committee
review
was,
as
we
get
further
down
into
the
process,
and
we
have
some
content
in
which
to
brief
a
subcommittee
in
advance
of
bringing
this
to
the
city
council,
and
I
would
I
would
just
make
sure
that
the
council
understands
that
our
timeline
is
actually
very
short.
There
is
all
of
this.
Work
needs
to
be
done
prior
to
march,
at
which
time
I
me
wash
do
it
no
later
than
March
thirteenth.
E
According
to
the
it
needs
to
be
at
the
City
Council
by
March
thirteenth.
In
order
that
we
can
meet
the
noticing
requirements
under
proposition
218
in
order
to
bring
you
back
a
an
action
item,
to
put
it
right
into
effect,
that
would
be
implemented
as
of
july.
So
it
just
want
make
sure
you
under
that.
There's
no
confusion
about
the
schedule
and
the
time
that
we
have
in
order
to
accomplish
the
work.
F
B
B
Updating
those
and
building
that
those
long-term
financial
models,
they
are
more
expedient
doing
this
on
ongoing
basis.
That
is
their
business.
That's
what
they
do.
That
means
takes
them
less
time
and
they
are
more
efficient
doing
at
versus
us
doing
this,
just
not
as
daily
course
of
business,
but
take
us
more
time
to
be
able
to
update
the
model,
to
work
with
the
model,
to
make
the
model
to
work,
and
certainly
the
quality
of
the
final
product.
What
you
will
see
is.
A
Comment
I
appreciate,
council
members
concern
because
I
have
the
same
concern.
I
mean
you
know
you
do
it
in-house.
You
keep
subbing
it
out
and
I
get.
I
guess
the
issue
for
me
is
that
is
it
a
push?
In
other
words,
is
it
going
to
cost
us
twenty
or
thirty
thousand
bucks
internally
and
in
turn,
take
staff
away
from
other
things?
We
brought
this
up
a
little
earlier
on
the
glenview
issue.
A
So
while
I
understand
you
know,
there's
some
concern
and
why
can't
we
do
it
internally,
I
think
we're
fairly
well
strapped
and
to
to
sit
back
and
have
an
independent
firm
look
at
it
with
with
an
open
eye
that
maybe
we
wouldn't
have
completely
and
that
has
experienced
to
give
the
the
you
know
the
information
to
us
as
to
as
to
what
we're
doing
as
compared
to
other
cities
and
how
that
fits
into
our
rate
structure
to,
I
think,
is
valuable.
So
I
just
throw
that
out.
There.
C
Follow
up
questions
I
would
have
won
if
you
were
to
bring
in
this
consultant
how
much
of
your
staff
time
would
be
consumed
in
getting
this
consultant
up
to
speed
and
how
your
department
operates.
It
seems
to
me
that
that
you
and
your
engineers
would
have
the
best
knowledge
of
what
the
city
requires.
What
new
regulations
are
going
to
cause
to
our
capital
improvement
program
over
the
several
years,
how
we
need
to
accelerate
it?
You
guys
have
that
specific
knowledge.
C
I
know
the
setting
rates
is
not
a
typical
engineering
discipline
and
it's
probably
something
that's
outside
of
your
your
your
expertise,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
imagine
that
rates
across
the
country
are
set
on
very
limited,
a
very
limited
number
of
parameters.
What
we've
done
in
the
past.
Historically,
we
understand
how
we've
set
those
rates.
I,
don't
think
it
varies
that
much
there.
We
could
do
the
additional
analysis
and
still
get
this
done
efficiently
in
house
the
way
it
was
proposed.
Initially,
our.
B
Department
still
would
be
involved
and
would
take
time
on
our
part,
but
much
less
than
without
the
support
of
the
consultant
and
overall,
in
my
assessment
with
the
consultant
or
we
did
that
without
the
consultant,
the
cost
will
be
very
close
with
the
difference
than
having
the
consultant.
You
say
first
time
and
probably
believe
he
will
increase
the
quality
of
the
final
outcome.
D
A
F
F
F
I
stop
talking
I
with
these
people
also
look
at
how
we
determine
the
rates
and
let
me
give
an
example:
in
San
Francisco
increases
our
water
rates.
We
have
set
costs
with
our
well
rates.
We
also
have
set
costs
with
our
capital
improvements
that
we're
going
to
need.
Should
we
be
looking
at.
Everyone
pays
at
amount,
no
matter
regardless
of
how
much
water
you
use,
and
on
top
of
that,
have
a
flexible
rate
of
based
on
how
much
water
you
use,
because
you
shouldn't
be
penalized
in
some
ways
because
you
use
less
water.
F
B
F
I'll
introduce
the
resolution.
I
know
it's
touching
and
I
appreciate
what
you're
saying,
because
the
end
result,
as
I
say,
will
probably
say
we're
going
to
increase
it
by
X,
but
I
think
that
internal
information
and
the
other
information
will
gain
from
this
is
going
to
be
valuable,
so
I'll,
introduce
resolution
councilman.