HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 204-07BUDGET
’07-’09
C ty of Palo Alto
C ty Manager’s Report
TO:
FROM:
ATTENTION:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
FINANCE COMMITTEE
DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES
APRIL 17, 2007 CMR: 204:07
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO
APPROVE A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A NATURAL GAS RATE
INCREASE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-08, AND STAFF
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE, IN CONCEPT, THE
ADOPTION OF A NATURAL GAS RATE INCREASE FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2008-09
RECOMMENDATION ’
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Council
adopt the attached resolution to:
(a)Approve a 9.5 percent increase to gas retail rates, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-08,
effective July 1, 2007, which will increase annual revenue by $4.9 million;
(b) Approve the changes to the Gas Utility Rate Schedules, as attached;
(c)Approve a monthly "Customer Charge" for all customer classes, irrespective of their
monthly gas consmnption, in order to collect a portion of the utility’s fixed operating
costs.
In addition, for biennial budgeting purposes, staff recommends:
(d)Approval, in concept, of a 9.1 percent system average gas rate increase for FY 2008-09,
which will increase annual revenue by an additional $4.5 million.
DISCUSSION
The City Council approved a 20 percent gas rate increase for FY 2006-07. Gas sales and revenue
forecasts were adjusted during the midyear budget process for FY 2006-07, with residential sales
CMR:204:07 Page 1 of 5
approximately 5 percent lower than forecast during the first half of the year. Gas sales for FY
2007-08 are projected to be flat, although consumption can be weather-dependent.
Staff is recolnmending a 9.5 percent gas rate increase effective July 1, 2007. This represents an
annual revenue increase of $4.9 million which will be applied to the distribution rates of all
customer classes. Another 9.1 percent revenue increase, or $4.5 million, is proposed for FY
2008-09 to cover projected increases in commodity costs and to fund the Gas Supply Rate
Stabilization Reserve (G-SRSR). Percentage increases for each customer class will be allocated
by consumption patterns based on the cost of service study.
The key driving factors for the rate increases are the increased costs of commodity and the
increased costs to operate maintain the gas distribution system as discussed in the attached
Utilities Advisory Commission report.
For the past three fiscal years, average winter residential bills for Palo Alto customers have been
between 26.9 to 31.5 percent lower than for PG&E customers, and mmual residential bills have
been lower by roughly 25 percent.
Distributiol~ Expenses
Operating expenses for Gas Distribution and the Capital improvement Program (CIP) continue to
increase while sales are projected to be flat.
Continuing to draw down the Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-DRSR) to fund the
increased expenses for FY 2007-08 would significantly reduce the G-DRSR level to a negative
(-) $1.4 million.
Staff proposes an increase of approximately $4.9 million in Gas Distribution Fund revenues for
FY 2007-08. This will fund the increased costs of operating and maintaining the gas distribution
system as well as funding the G-DRSR to raise its balance to an acceptable level. The "Annual
Risk Assessment for Reserves" was performed for the Gas Distribution Fund based on loss of
revenue due to reduced sales and unplmmed capital projects. The proposed increase is projected
to bring the FY 2007-08 ending balance for the G-DRSR above the Risk Assessment level of
$3.3 million by $100,000, but it will be $600,000 below the Minimum Guideline level. To bring
the G-DRSR balance to the Minilnum Guideline level would require an additional 1.9 percent
rate increase above the proposed rate increase. With the recommended two-year gas retail rate
increase, the G-DRSR level is expected to exceed the Minimum Guideline at the end of FY
2008-09 by $700,000.
Customer Cl~arge
In conjunction with the proposed revenue increase, staff is recommending the institution of a
fixed monthly "Customer Charge" to collect some of the allocated distribution costs not currently
being recovered from low consumption users. A natural gas fixed "Meter Charge" was
eliminated in the 1970’s to encourage conservation. As loads and sales continued to grow, fixed
CMR:204:07 Page 2 of 5
costs were spread across increasing sales volumes and full recovery was ensured. However, as
sales decline, or fluctuate due to unanticipated weather patterns, this "volumetric pricing"
methodology results in uneven revenue streams. It also results in artificial and unfair
subsidization of the distribution costs of low-volume gas users by higher-volume users. An
alternative to strict volumetric pricing is required to ensure the equitable capture of fixed
expenses, such as meter reading and customer accounting.
To avoid a sudden negative financial impact on the smaller gas user, staff recommends that the
customer charge initially be set at a level that does not fully collect all fixed costs, but rather a
portion of those costs. For example a $5.25 rnonthly charge is proposed for most of the
residential customers, which represents 45 percent of the fully allocated monthly cost-of-service
of $9.50. Incremental changes will be made over time in order to achieve the 100 percent fully
allocated level. For larger customers, the monthly charge, based on meter size, will immediately
collect the fnlly allocated customer costs. The expected revenue collected from the proposed
monthly fixed charges is approximately $2.3 million. The commercial Customer Charge will
range from $5.25 to $311.
Supply Expenses
Gas supply costs have generally stabilized. While the Gas Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-
SRSR) balance is projected to be below Minimum Guideline levels, it exceeds the target
established by the "Annual Risk Assessment for Reserves" for FY 2007-08, by $500,000 and a
gas supply revenue increase is not recommended at this time. For FY 2008-09, a projected $4.5
million revenue increase will be applied, in entirety, to the Gas Supply Fund to offset increased
supply costs and further fund the G-SRSR.
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On April 4, 2007, the UAC voted 4 to 0, with one absent, to recommend that the City Council:
(a)Approve a 9.5 percent increase to gas retail rates, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-08,
effective July 1, 2007, which will increase annual revenue by $4.9 million;
(b)Approve a monthly "Customer Charge" for all customer classes, irrespective of their
monthly gas consumption, in order to collect a portion of the utility’s fixed operating
costs.
The UAC voted to withhold recommending approval, in concept, of a 9.1 percent system average
gas rate increase, or $4.5 million revenue increase, for Fiscal Year 2008-09, feeling that future
costs were too uncertain at this time. The UAC also suggested that recommendation for approval
of the specific rate schedules be sought during the approval process.
ALTERNATIVES
Staff also evaluated the impact of alternative rate proposals to the proposed rate increase of 9.5
percent. Any smaller rate increase would require reducing some combination of the operating
CMR:204:07 Page 3 of 5
budget, Capital hnprovement Program (CIP), or the combined Gas Supply and Distribution Rate
Stabilization Reserves. Such a reduction to the operating budget would hinder the ability to
purchase adequate future gas supplies under the current laddering strategy. Reducing the CIP
would cancel a number of gas main replacement projects, where the infrastructure has exceeded
its system design life. Reducing the G-DRSR and the G-SRSR would leave them further below
the Minimum Guidelines and could necessitate an unplamaed rate increase request in the event of
an infrastructure failure or rise in market costs for gas supply.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Approval of this proposed rate increase will increase the Gas Fund sales revenues by $4.9
lnillion for FY 2007-08. This 9.5 percent revenue increase will be applied entirely to gas
distribution. This will result in a projected end-of-year balance for FY 2007-08 of $3.4 million
in the Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve, which is $5.8 million below the Minimum
Guideline Level of $9.2 million and slightly above the Risk Assessment target of $3.3 million.
The 9.1 percent rate increase, a $4.5 million revenue increase, proposed for FY 2008-09 will be
allocated to gas supply. This will result in a projected end-of-year balance of $6.4 million in the
Gas Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve, which will be above the Risk Assessment target of $3.8
million, but below the Minimum Guideline Level of $9.6 million.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This proposed rate increase meets the Utilities Strategic Plan objective of providing superior
financial performance to the City and competitive rates to customers. These recommendations do
not represent a change in current City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of the resolution does not constitute a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act. Therefore, no environmental assessment is required.
ATTACHMENTS
Do
Resolution
Gas Rate Schedules G-l, G-2, G-3, G-4, G-6, G-10, G-11, and G-12
Report to the UAC for its April 4, 2007 meeting: Proposed FY 2007-08 and FY 2008-09
Natural Gas Rate Increase
Minutes of the UAC meeting of April 4, 2007
PREPARED BY:LUCIE HIRMINA
Utilities Rates Manager
CMR:204:07 Page 4 of 5
REVIEWED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
TOMM MARSHALL
Assistant Director of Utilities, Resource Management
TOM AUZENNE
Assistant Director of Utilities, Administrative Services
VALERIE O. FONG
Director of Utilities
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
EMILY
Assistant City Manager
CMR:204:07 Page 5 of 5
NOT YET APPROVED ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULES G-l, G-2, G-3, G-4, G-6, G-10, G-11 AND G-12 OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES RATES AND CHARGES PERTAINING TO
GAS RATES
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-1 (Residential Gas Service) is hereby amended to read in
accordance with sheet G-l-l, attached hereto and incorporate herein. The foregoing
Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-2 (Commercial Gas Service) is hereby amended to read in
accordance with sheet G-2-1, attached hereto and incorporate herein. The foregoing
Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 3. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-3 (Large Commercial Gas Service) is hereby amended to read in
accordance with sheets G-3-1 and G-3-2, attached hereto and incorporate herein. The
foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 4. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-4 (Large Commercial Gas Transportation Service) is hereby
amended to read in accordance with sheets G-4-1 and G-4-2, attached hereto and
incorporate herein. The foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become
effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 5. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-6 (Municipal Gas Service) is hereby amended to read in
accordance with sheets G-6-1 and G-6-2, attached hereto and incorporate herein. The
foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 6. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-10 (Compressed Natural Gas Service) is hereby amended to read
in accordance with sheets G-10-1, attached hereto and incorporate herein. The foregoing
Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 7. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-11 (Large Commercial Fixed-Term Commodity Gas Service) is
hereby amended to read in accordance with sheets G-11-1 and G-11-2, attached hereto
and incorporate herein. The foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become
effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 8. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Utility Rate Schedule G-12 (Large Commercial Custom Commodity Gas Service) is
hereby amended to read in accordance with sheets G-12-1 and G-12-2, attached hereto
1
070405 jb 0072853
NOT YET APPROVED
and incorporate herein. The foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become
effective July 1, 2007.
SECTION 9. The Council finds that the revenue derived from the authorized
adoption enumerated herein shall be used only for the purpose set forth in Article VII,
Section 2, of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto.
SECTION 10. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not
constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public
Resources Code section 21080, subdivision (b)(8).
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor
APPROVED:
City Attorney City Manager
Director of Utilities
Director of Administrative Services
070405jb 0072853
ATTACHMENT B
RESIDENTIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-1
A. APPLICABILITY:
Co
This schedule applies to natural gas service to individually metered single familypremises, including
those separately metered in a multi-family Complex.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Do
Monthly Customer Charge:$5.25
Commodity Rate: (To be added to Customer Charge)
Tier 1 Rates:
Summer (0-20 therms); Winter (0-96 therms)
Per Therm
2.
3.
4.
Tier 2 Rates:
Commodity Charge ............................................................................$0.6560
Administrative Fee .............................................................................$0.0227
PG&E Local Transportation ......................................................... .....$0.0212
Palo Alto Local Distribution ..............................................................$0.7227
Tier 1 Rate Total ................................$1.4226
Sulmner (Over 20 therms); Winter (Over 96 thenns)
1.Commodity Charge ............................................................................$1.2720
2.Administrative Fee .............................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation ..............................................................$0.0212
4.Palo Alto Local Distribution .....: ........................................................$0.7227
Tier 2 Rate Total .............................$2.0386
SPECIAL NOTES:
Seasonal rate changes: The summer period is effective May 1 to October 31 and the winter
period is effective from November 1 to April 30. When the billing period is partly in the
summer period and partly in the winter period, the billing will be computed by prorating the
total therm usage and the applicable rates thereto between the two seasonal periods,
according to the ratio of the number of days in each seasonal period to the total number of
days in the billing period.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-1-1 dated 7-1-2006 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTIL TIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-l-1
RESIDENTIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G- 1
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver continuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interruption of service is caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
{End}
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2006
Original Sheet No. G-l-2
APPLICABILITY:
COMMERCIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-2
This schedule applies to non-residential customers who use less than 250,000 therms per year at a
single address. This schedule may include service to master-metered multi-family facilities.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Do
Monthly Customer Charge:$35.00
Commodi _ty Rate: (To be added to Customer Charge)
All year-round delivered commodity:Per Therm
Commodi~ Charge ....................................................................................................$0.7886
Administrative Fee .....................................................................................................$0.0227
PG&E Local Transportation .................................................................i ....................$0.0212
Paio Alto Local Distribution .......................................................................................$0.5495
Total per therm ..................................$1.3820
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver continuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interruption of service is caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-2-1 dated 7-1-2006 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-2-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-3
No APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to service for large commercial customers who use at least 250,000 therms per
year at one site and have retained gas direct access eligibility. This schedule also applies to City
owned generation facilities.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Do
Monthly Customer Charge:$311.00
Commodity Rate: (To be added to Customer Charge)
Monthly Market-based Power Supply Charge:
Per Therm
Supply Charges:
1.Commodity Charge ................................................................................$0.10-$2.00
2.Administrative Fee .......................................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation .........................................................................$0.0212
Distribution Charge:
1. Palo Alto Local Distribution ......................................................................... $0.3300
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Se~wice under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons, or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver continuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interrnption of service is caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-3-1 dated 7-1-2006
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-3-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-3
(Continued)
o
o
o
The commodity charge is equal to the City’s weighted average cost of gas calculated at the
PG&E City Gate for gas purchased by the City at first of the month and daily market prices
for that month. The commodity charge will fall within the minimum/maximum range set
forth in C. 1 .and include the cost of transporting the gas to the PG&E City Gate.
The Administrative fee is equal to the allocable administrative and overhead costs incurred
by the City in providing the gas service.
PG&E Local transportation charge is equal to the cost of transporting g~s from the PG&E’s
City Gate to the Palo Alto City Gate.
The total monthly charge = therms used during the month X (commodity charge +
administrative fee + PG&E local transportation charge + Palo Alto local distribution charge)
+ Monthly Customer Charge.
A qualifying customer may request service under this schedule for more than one account or
meter if the accounts are located on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more mility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of- ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
Customers may request a rate schedule change at any time to any applicable City of Palo Alto
full-service rate schedule. Custolners served under this. rate schedule may elect Gas Direct
Access at any time.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-3-2 dated 7-1-2002 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-3-2
LARGE COMMERCIAL GAS TRANSPORTATION SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-4
APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to gas transportation service for large commercial customers who use at least
250,000 therms per year and have retained gas direct access eligibility.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Monthly Customer Charge:$311.00
Per Therm Charges (To be added to Customer Charge Per Therm
Supply Charge:
PG&E Local Transportation .....................................................................................$0.0212
Distribution Charge:
Palo Alto Local Distribution .....................................................................................$0.3300
Do SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1.Qualifying custolners may request a rate schedule change at any time during the year to any
applicable full service rate schedule.
2.Specific terms and conditions shall be covered by separate agreement between the City and
Gas Service Provider.
o
o
PG&E local transportation charge is equal to the cost of transporting natural gas from the
PG&E City Gate to Palo Alto City Gate. Customers who elect this service must have the gas
delivered to PG&E City Gate.
Total monthly charge = thenns used x (PG&E local transportation charge + P.A. distribution
charge) + Monthly Customer Charge.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-4-1 dated 7-1-2006 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-4-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL GAS TRANSPORTATION SERVICE
o
°
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-4
(Continued)
Qualifying customers may request service under this schedule for more than one account or
meter if every account meets the minimum usage requirement of 250,000 therms per year.
Qualifying customers may request service under this schedule for more than one account or
meter if the accounts are located on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
{End}
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-4-2 dated 7-1-2002 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-4-2
MUNICIPAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-6
Ao APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to service buildings and facilities owned and/or operated by the City of Palo
Alto and not currently served under G-11 or G-12.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Monthly Customer Char,~e:$55.25
Per Therm Charges (To be added to Customer Charge Per Therm
Supply Charges:
1.Commodity Charge ........................................................................................$0.7886
2.Administrative Fee ...................................................................~ .....................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation ..........................................................................$0.0212
Total Supply Charges .....................................................................................$0.8325
Distribution Charge:
1. Palo Alto Local Distribution .......................................................................... $0.5629
SPECIAL CONDITION:
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver continuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interruption of service is caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
°The Administrative fee is equal to the allocable administrative and overhead costs incurred
by the City in providing the gas service.
o PG&E Local transportation charge is equal to the cost of transporting gas from the PG&E’s
City Gate to the Palo Alto City Gate.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-6-1 dated 7-1-2006
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UT LITIES
Effective 7-01-2007
Sheet No. G-6-1
MUNICIPAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-6
(Continued)
o The total monthly charge = therms used during the month X (commodity charge +
administrative fee + PG&E local transportation charge + Palo Alto local distribution charge)
+ Monthly Customer Charge.
Customers served under this rate schedule are not eligible for gas direct access and cannot
request a rate schedule change to any full-service rate applicable to customers who are
eligible for gas direct access (i.e. G-3, G-11, or G-12).
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-6-2 dated 3-1-2002 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-6-2
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-10
APPLICABILITY:
This Schedule applies to the sale of compressed natural gas (CNG) at the City-owned natt~al gas fueling
stations to customer who use CNG for fueling CNG vehicles.
B.TERRITORY:
Applies to locations within the service area of the City of Palo Alto.
C.RATES:
Per Therm
Per Gasoline
Gallon Equivalent
Commodity Charge $1.22 $1.42
For billing purposes, the number of gallons will be complied from a Summary of Transactions recorded
by the dispensing unit for the customer during the month.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part in case of actual or
anticipated shortage of natural gas resulting from insufficient supply, inadequate transmission or
delivery capacity of facilities.
Service under this schedule is provided only from a designated City fueling station which will
deliver CNG at approximately 3,000 pounds per square inch (PSI).
3.Individuals responsible for fueling a Natural Gas Vehicle shall be required to complete training
sessions to be certified to fuel a vehicle. Each individual must sign and date the Certificate of
Instruction for Fueling Natural Gas Vehicle.
4.Customers requesting to take service under this rate schedule are required to sign a Compressed
Natural Gas Agreement before commencing service.
5.If required by local or federal law, assessed applicable taxes shall be added to charges shown inthis
rate schedule.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-’iO-f dated 7-7-2006 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No.G-10-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL FIXED-TERM COMMODITY GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-11
No
Co
APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to large commercial customers who use at least 250,000 therms per year at one
site and have retained gas direct access eligibility.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Monthly Customer Charge:$311.00
Per Therm Charges (To be added to Custolner Charge Per Therm
Supply Charges:
1.Commodity Charge ................................................................................$0.20-$2.00
2.Administrative Fee .......................................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation .........................................................................$0.0212
Distribution Charge:
1. Palo Alto Local Distribution .................................... : .................................... $0.3300
D. TERM:12 Months or 24 Months
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons, or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver continuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interruption of service is~ caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
Qualifying customers who choose to be charged under this rate schedule are required to sign
a letter with CPAU committing to a price and term and to adhere to rules and regulations set
forth in CPAU Rule and Regulation No. 5 (Contracts). The letter shall indicate the estimated
gas consumption over the term of the contract rate. This consumption shall be served solely
by CPAU.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council .
Supersedes Sheet No. G-11-1 dated 7-1-2006 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-11-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL FIXED-TERM COMMODITY GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-11
(Continued)
The Commodity Charge shall be fixed for a 12 or 24-month term. The other components of
the rate: Administrative Fees, Transportation Charges, Distribution Charges and Monthly
Customer Charges may be modified periodically with the Council’s approval.
The Commodity Charge component of this rate and the term will be set at the time when the
customer signs a letter acknowledging the term and price agreed upon with CPAU. The
Commodity Charge shall be based upon the customer class average load shape, a risk
premimn, and market prices. The Commodity Charge will fall within the range set in Section
C, Part 1 of this Schedule and will be for gas delivered to PG&E City Gate.
The Administrative Fee is equal to the allocable administrative and overhead costs incurred
by the City in providing the gas service.
PG&E Local transportation charge is equal to the cost of transporting gas from PG&E City
Gate to the Pale Alto City Gate.
Total monthly charge = therms used during the month X (Commodity Charge +
Adlninistrative Fee + PG&E Local Transportation Charge + Pale Alto Local Distribution
Charge) + Monthly Customer Charge.
The customer must remain on this term rate for the term indicated on the Confirmation
Schedule, providing the customer continues to receive distribution services from the City.
The confirmation Schedule shall indicate the Customer’s approximate gas usage (load) over
the term of the contract. This load shall be served solely by CPAU.
Qualifying customers may request service under this schedule for more than one account or
meter if the accounts are located on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of- ways (e.g.
streets) and have a COlnmon billing address.
A customer may renew service under this rate schedule with a 30-day advance notice. The
Conamodity Charge for the renewed term of service will be based on the published fixed-
term commodity charge at the time service is renewed. Customers electing not to renew
service under this rate schedule will be returned to an applicable full-service gas rate
schedule of their choice. If no choice is made, the customer will be placed on G-3.
{End}
CITY OF PALe ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-11-2 dated 8-1-2001
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-11-2
LARGE COMMERCIAL CUSTOM COMMODITY GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G- 12
No
Bo
APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to large conmaercial customers who use at least 250,000 thenns per year at one
site and have retained gas direct access eligibility.
TERRITORY:
Within the service area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
C.RATES:Per Service
Do
Monthly Customer Charge:$311.00
Per Thenn Charges (To be added to Customer Charge Per Therm
Supply Charges:
1.Commodity Charge ................................................................................$0.20-$2.00
2.Administrative Fee .......................................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation ..........................................................................$0.0212
Distribution Charge:
1. Palo Alto Local Distribution ......................................................................... $0.3300
TERM: Up to 5 years
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part, for operational
reasons, or if the City experiences supply or capacity shortages. The City will exercise
reasonable diligence and care to furnish and deliver cominuous service and a sufficient
quantity of gas to customers, but does not guarantee continuity of service or sufficiency of
quantity. The City shall not be liable for any damage caused by interruption of service, if the
interruption of service is caused by an act of God, Fire, Strikes, riots, war, or any other cause
that is beyond the City’s control.
Qualifying customers who choose to be charged under this rate schedule are required to sign~
a contract and confirmation schedule with CPAU and adhere to rules and regulations set
forth in CPAU Rule and Regulation No. 5 (Contracts).
The Commodity Charge shall be based upon the customer load shape and size, term, and
market prices. The other components of the rate: Administrative Fees, Transportation
Charges, Distribution Charges and Monthly Customer Charge may be modified
periodically with the Council’s approval.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-12-1 dated 7-1-2006
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-12-1
LARGE COMMERCIAL CUSTOM COMMODITY GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-12
(Continued)
10.
The Commodity Charge component of this rate and the term will be set at the time when the
customer signs the Contract. Rate options available under Contract may include, but are not
limited to, commodity rate caps, collars, forward strips, and trigger rates. Pricing for such
products, including any necessary fees, will fall within the Commodity Charge range set forth
in Section C, Part 1 of this Schedule. A rate cap is defined as a floating rate with a
guaranteed maximum price. A rate collar is defined as a floating rate with maximum and
minimum rate levels. Forward strips are defined as a set rate for a set term calculated by
taking the average rate over a specified period of time. A rate trigger is a mechanism wherein
the customer could set a specific rate level and if the market rate reaches that level, the
customer rate is automatically set at that level.
The Administrative Fee is equal to the allocable administrative and overhead costs incurred
by the City in providing the gas service.
PG&E Local transportation charge is equal to the cost of transporting gas from PG&E City
Gate to the Palo Alto City Gate.
Total monthly charge = therms used during the month X (Commodity Charge +
Administrative Fee + PG&E Local Transportation Charge + Palo Alto Local Distribution
Charge) + Monthly Customer Charge.
The customer must remain on this term rate for the terln indicated on the Confirmation
Schedule, providing the customer continues to receive distribution services from the City.
The confirmation Schedule shall indicate the Customer’s approximate gas usage (load) over
the term of the contract. This load shall be served solely by CPAU.
Qualifying customers nlay request service under this schedule for more than one account or
lneter if the accounts are located on one site. A site shall be defined as one or more utility
accounts serving contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of- ways (e.g.
streets) and have a common billing address.
A customer may request a renewal of this rate with a 30-day advance written notice. The
commodity charge for the renewed period will be based on the lnarket prices and other
pricing factors that exist at the time the rate is renewed. Customers electing not to renew the
Contract will be returned to an applicable full-service gas rate schedule of their choice. If no
choice is made, the customer will be placed on G-3.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-12-2 dated 8-1-2001
CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Effective 7-1-2007
Sheet No. G-12-2
ATTACHMENT C
TO:
MEMORANDUM
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
5
FROM:UTIITIES DEPARTMENT
DATE:APRIL 4, 2007
SUBJECT:PROPOSED FY
INCREASES
2007-08 AND FY 2008-09 NATURAL GAS RATE
RECOMMENDATION
. This report requests the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recolm-nend that the City Council:
a) Approve a 9.5 percent natural gas retail rate, or $4.9 million revenue increase, for FY
2007-08, effective Ju!y 1, 2007;
b) Approve, in concept, another 9.1 percent natural gas retail rate, or $4.5 million revenue
increase, for FY 2008-09; and
c) Reinstate a monthly customer charge for all classes of customers, irrespective of their
monthly gas consumption, in order to collect a portion of fixed costs.
BACKGROUND
In June 2006, the City Council approved a 20 percent natural gas revenue increase for FY 2006-07
due to increased natural gas wholesale supply costs. In recent years, gas sales in Palo Alto have
declined or been flat due to reduced load growth, a continued soft economy, commercial customers
exiting the City, energy efficiency impacts and warmer-than-forecasted weather patterns. For the
first six months of FY 2006-07, residential consumption was approximately 5 percent lower than
budgeted.
Withdrawals of funds from the Gas Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-SRSR) have been made
over the last several years to offset increases in wholesale supply costs, and additional witl~drawals
Ibr unanticipated expenses, such as Workers’ Compensation and retiree medical liabilities, caused
the Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-DRSR) level to decline further.
DISCUSSION
~Revenues, Expenses and Reserves
Wholesale natural gas prices have generally stabilized, and the "laddering" strategy used to purchase
gas has resulted in relatively stable wholesale gas costs. While the laddering purchase strategy does
Page 1 of 6
¯not eliminate all supply risk, it has had a favorable impact on the G-SRSR. Gas supply costs for the
remainder of FY 2006-07 are projected to be stable tlirough FY 2007-08.
While the G-SRSR balance is projected to be below Minimum Guideline levels, it exceeds the target
established by the "Annual Risk Assessment for Reserves" for FY 2007-08, and a gas supply revenue
increase is not recommended at this time. For FY 2008-09, a projected $4.5 million revenue increase
will be applied to the gas supply fund to offset increased costs and further fund the G-SRSR.
Consumption levels for FY 2007-08 and beyond are projected to re~nain fiat, but may decline due to
continuing warmer winter weather patterns. While declining or fluctuating sales volumes cma result
in correspondingly lower purchase costs for gas wholesale supply, the negative impact on the G-
DRSR can also be significant. Operations, maintenance, infrastructure replacement, and internal
staff functions require funding on an ongoing basis.
Under current rate structures, distribution revenues are collected on a per thenn basis. As sales
volumes have declined, so have revenues, resulting in a pattern of reserve withdrawals to cover costs
over the last several years. Although many of these withdrawals were planned, additional
unexpected costs, such as the new regulations requiring greater Utilities funding of retiree medical
and Workers’ Compensation liabilities beginning in FY 2005-06, have resulted in larger withdrawals
from the G-DRSR than originally planned.
Staffproposes an increase ot’app[oXlmatcty $4.9 million in Gas D,~tt~o~t,o,
2007-08. The "Annum Risk Assessment for Reserves" was performed for the Gas Distribution Fund
based on loss of revenue due to reduced sales and unplanned capital projects. The proposed increase
is projected to bring the FY 2007-08 ending balance for the G-DRSR above the Risk Assessment
level of $3.3 million by $100,000, but it will be $600,000 below the Minimum Guideline level. To
bring the G-DRSRbalance to the Minimum Guideline level would require an additional 1.9 percent
rate increase. The G-DRSR level is expected to exceed the Minimmn Guideline at the end of FY
2008-09 by $700,000.
Customer Charg_q
In conjunction with the proPosed revenue increase, st.affis recommending the institution of a fixed
monthly "Customer Charge" to collect some of the allocated distribution costs hot currently being
recovered from low consulnption users. A natural gas fixed "Meter Charge" was eliminated in the
1970’s, to encourage conservation. As loads and sales continued to grow, fixed costs were spread’
across¯ increasing sales volumes and full recovery was ensured. However, as sales decline or
fluctuate due to unanticipated weather patterns, a more logical cost recovery mechanism is necessary
to ensure equitable capture of certain utility non demand-related expenses Such as meter reading and
customer accounting.
To avoid a suddennegative impact on the smaller gas User, staff recommends that the customer
charge initially be set at a level that does not fully collect all fixed costs, but rather a portion of those
costs. For example a $5.25 monthly charge is proposed for most of the residential customers, which
represents 45% of the fully allocated cost-of-service of $9.50. Incremental changes will be made
over time in order to achieve the !00% fully allocated level. For larger customers the monthly
charge, based on meter size, will immediately collect the fully allocated customer costs.
Page 2 of 6
Under the recommendation, an average customer using 100 thenns per month in the winter and 30
thenns per month in the summer will experience no negative bill impact from this change. A
customer whose gas consmnption is lower than average, or even zero in some months, will now be
required pay for a portion of fixed costs incurred to serve, which has not been billed in the past.
Allocation of Revenue Increase
Over time, gas loads and usage patterns change within and between customer classes. Based on a
recently performed cost-of-service study, customer load profiles were updated and analyzed
according to industry horn, s. The study identified the appropriate cost allocation method to achieve
equity between customer classes, and staff incorporated the results in its rate recommendation.
The customer charge will insure collection of some of the non-demand related costs, such as billing
and meter reading costs, as indicated by the cost-of-service study. The expected revenue which
would be collected from the proposed monthly fixed Charges from customer classes is approximately
$2.3 million.
Bill Comparison
A recent bill comparison with PG&E showed that, during the first three months of the winter of FY
2006-07, Palo Alto’s average residential customer (using 100 therms per month) had gas costs 7.2
percent above PG&E’s average customer’s gas costs for the same period ($407.35 vs. $379.94 total,
a $27.41 difference). The largest difference this past winter occurred ~n January 200-7, when Palo
Alto’s average residential customer paid $135.78, while a comparable PG&E custol-ner paid $125.32.
For the past three ~sea! years, bnwever, average winter residential bills for Palo Alto customers have
been between 26.9 to 31.5 percent lower than for PG&E customers, and annual residential bills have
been lower by roughly 25 percent.
As noted eallie~,, the Palo Alto laddered purchasing strategy provides stable rates to Palo Alto
customers. Incontrast, the PG&E strategy, based on 30-day market purchases, results in rates which
cal-~ fluctuate monthly. As a result, it is impossible to determine with any certainty whether Palo
Alto’s bills will be above or below PG&E’s at a given future date. However, over time, the Palo Alto
purchasing strategy compares positively against the PG&E purchasing strategy to the benefit of Palo
Alto gas custome~:s. Table 1 shows custolner gas bills Using Palo Alto’s and PG&E’s rates since FY
2003-04
Page 3 of 6
TABLE 1: Palo Alto Customer Gas Bill Comparison with PG&E
Historical Residential Gas Bills
PA average winter (1 O0 thenns/month)
PG&E average winter (100 thenns/month)
PA average summer (30 therms/month).
PG&E average smmner (30 themas/month)
PA Annual bills
PG&E Annual bills
* FY 06-07 data taken through January 2007
FY 03-04
$ 67.07
$ 94.79
$ 23.80
$ 28.14
$ 545.23
$ 737.63
FY 04-05
$ 83.27
$113.88
$ 27.59
$ 30.97
$ 665.16
$ 869.06
FY 05-06
$103.54
$151.07
$ 35.98
$ 38.91
$ 837.10
$ 1,139.84
FY 06-07 *
$135.78
$126.65
46.16
34.48
$ 591.98
$ 517.88
For large customers, distribution rates in Palo Alto are higher than the distribution rates in PG&E’s
teMtories due to a different customer mix and differences in budgeting and accounting of funding of
capital imProvement programs. In Palo Alto, the funding for the normal maintenance of the system
and for regular CIP work (not including major projects) is done primarily through rates on a "pay-as-
you-go" basis, rather than through issuance of long-term debt. Staff wilt work with other
departments to determine if the cmxent Utilities funding mechanisna should be.modified in the future
in order to stabilize rates and revenne requirements.
Table 2 shows the impact of the proposed rate increase on customer bills.
Customer
Residential/Winter
Residential/Summer
Commercial G-2
Industrial G-2 .
Coniract Customers - Distribution only
Usage
Therms
100
3O
5O0
10,000
60,000
Monthly
Bill
$ 149.97
54.09
726.00
13 855.00
73,625.00
Amount of
Increase
$14.19
7.93
’ 79.20
" 919.00
3,329.00
Percent
Increase/
(Decrease)
10.5
17.2
12.2
7.4
4.7
Risk Assessment
An annualized risk assessment has been performed by staffwhich compares projected reserve levels
to applicable risk factors. This assessment has determined that reserve balances are adequate for FY
2007-08. An updated risk assessment will be perfon-ned as part of the budget process for FY 2008-
09.
Page 4 of 6
TABLE 3: Gas Reserve Balance, Guidelines and Risk Assessment Levels
Reserve Balance and
Guidelines (Gas Supply)
End of Year Balance
(Forecast)
Risk Assessment Level
Reserve Minimum Level
Reserve Maximum Level
FY 2007-08
$4.3 million
$3.7 million
$9.2 million
$19.7 million
FY 2008-09
$6.4 million
$3.8 million
$9.6 million
$20.7 million
Reserve Balance and
Guidelines (Gas Distribution)
End of Year Balance
(Forecast)
Risk Assessment Level
Reserve Minimum Level
Reserve Maximuna Level
FY 2007-08
$3.4 million
$3.3 million
$4.0 million
$10 million
FY 2008-09
$4.7 million
$3.4 million
$4.0 million
$10.1 .million
Although the recommended revenue increase leaves the FY 2007-08 G-DRSR ending balance below
the Minimum Guidelines approved by the City Council, it exceeds the target established by the
"Annual Risk Assessment for Reserves" by $ !00,000. The total $4.5 mi!!ion h~.crease proposed for
FY 2008-09, will be applied to forecasted cost increases in natural gas wholesale supply. Staff will
evaluate Supply and Distribution Reserve balances on an ongoing basis and during the budget
process for FY 2008-09.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Approval of these recommended revenue increases will raise the Gas Fund sales revenues by:
a) $4.9 million for FY 2007-08; ~nd
b). $4.5 million for FY 2008-09 (to be approved-in-concept)
All revenue impacts related to the recomrnended customer charge have been included in the revenue
increases. ~
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
These recommendations do not represent.a change in current City policies. The proposed rate
increase is consistent with the Utilities Strategic Plan approved by the Council "to provide superior
financial pei-formance to the City and competitive rates to customers."
ATTACHMENTS
A:Gas Rate Schedules G-I, G-2, G-3, G-4, G-6, G-10, Gll, and G-12 ¯
Page 5 of 6
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Assistant Director, Customer Services
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
VALE~/~O. ~NG
Director of Utilities
Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
DRAFT
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
MINUTES OF APRIL 4, 2007
CALL TO ORDER
Melton called to order at 7:00 pm the regular scheduled meeting of the Utilities Advisory
Commission.
Present: Melton, Dawes, Bechtel, Rosenbaum
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mrs. Carlstead made comments before the Rates discussion (see below).
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Approval of the minutes of March 7 was made with the following change and comments:
Bechtel asked for clarification on page 3, paragraph 1 of the March 7 draft minutes. He asked
whether it was 11.4 percent cost per kWh or if it should be 11.4 cents cost per kWh. Tom
Auzenne, Assistant Director, said that it should be cents. Bechtel also requested there be more
specifics and details to the sense minutes rather than just saying there was "comments and
concerns" brought up in the meeting.
Dawes said he would like more explanation on the $40 million dollar cost of the Reservoir Project.
There was a similar project 4 years ago which cost around $15 or $16 million. He also wondered
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 1 of 11
why "including land" wasn’t explained further in the minutes. Melton said he did not think there had
been discussion of the term "including land" at the meeting and that is why there was nothing in the
minutes.
Chairman Melton: Moved approval, Dexter Dawes Seconded. Motion passed with four ayes and
one absent.
AGENDA REVIEW
Valerie Fong, Utilities Director, pointed out that Item 2 on the agenda (Ten-Year Energy Efficiency
Portfolio Plan) was an Action item, not an Informational item,
REPORT FROM COMMISSION MEETINGS/EVENTS
NONE
UTILITIES DIRECTOR REPORT
Fong presented the following report:
1) The Emergency Water Supply Project Notice of Determination was filed on March 9. The
CEQA process will be complete, if there are no protests, by April 11.
2) A CMR will go to Council next week to notify them that more time is needed for the FEIR
cost allocation schemes and will be brought forward in May. The 2nd reading of the Park
Ordinances will also take place in May.
3) Water system flushing notices will go in the Palo Alto Weekly and Palo Alto Daily. The
flushing will take place the week of Apr 22.
4) There will be a Federal Policy Conference in Washington D.C at the end of April. Val will
attend with Council member Bern Beecham and Resource Planner Debbie Lloyd.
5) The next UAC meeting will be a day meeting on May 2.
6) There is a conflict regarding the July 11 UAC meeting date as a Hetch Hetchy tour is
scheduled for the same date. Fong asked if July 19 might work as the Chambers are not
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 2 of 11
available on July 18. Staff was asked to see if a conference room, other than the Chambers,
might be available on July 18. Fong said we would look into that option.
7) The Mayor is sponsoring a session on Stanford University’s Green Transportation Program.
This will take place Apr 5, 4:00 - 5:30 pm in the Council Chambers.
8) There will be a Special Meeting of Council (study session) on April 11 at 2:00 pm in the
Council Chambers. Lt. Governor John Garamendi will speak on the issue of Climate Change.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Rosenbaum asked about the overhead for the Green Project and how it was calculated. Assistant
Director, Customer Services Tom Auzenne explained that based on the 11.5 cent cost for Palo Alto
Green, our overhead was 4%. Rosenbaum then asked what percentage of the $500,000 premium
represented. Auzenne said 33%. Auzenne also said that based on an Oct., 2006 publication from
the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the average marketing and administration expenses
for the top ten renewable programs in the country was 29%. Palo Alto Green is. the number one
program in the country and the marketing and administrative costs are in line with the average
noted in the study, so Auzenne concluded that our marketing works.
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 1: INFORMATION ITEM:
2006 Statewide and Palo Alto Residential Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
Senior Resource Planner Karl Knapp presented a summary of the main findings of a residential
customer survey conducted by RKS Consulting. The survey is conducted every other year for
CMUA and CPAU, and is used to compare CPAU customer attitudes and utility performance in a
number of areas, and enables CPAU to benchmark performance against California municipal and
investor-owned utilities.
The survey was conducted in October and November of 2006. CPAU’s overall Value Rating
remains high, which is a composite score of several different areas. CPAU continues to perform
well in the areas of overall customer satisfaction, price/value performance, power delivery, and
there is growth in users of the website and participation in the green energy option. There was a
slight decline in scores on trust, overall feelings, and to some extent, communication effectiveness.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 3 of 11
The consultant report indicates that these declines are not statistically significant, but may be
consistent with changes that take place after rate increases.
Palo Alto residents differ significantly from other California utility customers in three main areas:
high awareness of the seriousness of the California energy situation, global warming, and a strong
preference for using the internet to obtain information and pay bills. CPAU customers are more
aware and concerned about global warming, but are not sure about CPAU’s involvement, and
express a willingness to pay more to fund solutions.
Main areas for improvement noted by the consultant report were to enhance the website and web-
based services, and to embrace the global warming issue. Knapp pointed out that the entire City
web page is undergoing a major conversion to an entire new database structure and that no big
changes are being made until that effort is completed.
Melton asked whether the report indicated dissatisfaction with the website and whether RKS asked
about specific improvements that customers would like to see. Knapp/Auzenne replied that
customers did indicate dissatisfaction with the website and that a table listing responses for how to
make the website better is contained on page 14 of the consultant report.
Dawes asked whether customers were asked about bank drafting.
Knapp/Auzenne explained that while bank drafting was not specifically included in the survey, a
high percentage of customers use CPAU’s bank drafting program.
Rosenbaum asked why credit card payment options are not shown on web. Auzenne explained
that CPAU does do credit card payment in-house, is developing ability to pay using a credit card by
phone, and is also working on getting the technology and infrastructure in place to handle web-
based credit card payments. Additionally, Auzenne noted that information about all payment
options in marketing materials and as the web will be updated.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 4 of 11
Melton noted that it appears that more people apparently believe that they are green power
customers than actually are. Bechtel suggested a more direct question be included in the next
survey regarding incurred PAGreen costs. Staff agreed it would make such a suggestion.
ITEM 2: INFORMATION ITEM:
Ten-Year Enerqy Efficiency Portfolio Plan
Knapp presented a brief summary of the proposed ten-year energy efficiency plan. Adoption of a
10-year plan is required by AB2021 passed last year. The Plan includes all of the elements
required by the new statutory requirement. Energy efficiency is the highest priority resource for
CPAU, with renewable energy second and conventional supply last. The Plan sets energy
efficiency targets that are based on the technical and economic potential study conducted by the
Rocky Mountain Institute in 2005, seeking to achieve at least half of the estimated economic
potential. AB2021 also requires that utilities "treat energy efficiency as a supply investment". The
Plan proposes to fund the efforts needed to achieve the targets by including approximately $2.6
million over two years in the electric and gas supply budgets, which when added to the existing
Public Benefits efficiency budgets would bring the two-year efficiency programs total to $7 million.
The Plan will be staffed with existing positions. The estimated financial impacts are a potential rate
increase of 0.5-1.0% with an average bill decrease of 2.5-3%. Six of the main near-term efforts
were described, including revamping existing programs and establishing new programs that
address underserved segments such as new construction and remodeling.
Dawes asked whether the Plan costs are identified as a line item in financial reports and included
in the long-term financial forecasts and rate projections. Staff responded affirmatively and
explained that a new Fund Center has been created and all of the Plan costs are included in the
proposed budget.
Melton asked whether the Plan takes a stepped approach, going after the "low-hanging fruit" that is
on the cheaper end of the scale first. Staff replied that it will be emphasizing the "low-hanging fruit",
but that much of the proposed plan will be approaching things more holistically and not simply
more of the same prescription-style rebates. Staff noted that the law and our own policies require
that CPAU pursue all cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities, and not just the cheapest ones.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 5 of 11
Dawes noted that the rate of return of 1.6% described in the report is low and asked if there is a
mandated minimum spending threshold requirement. Staff explained that the very low IRR cited
reflects the added cost of the many required reporting and verification elements of the energy
efficiency program, so that while the incentives alone might have an estimated 10.6% return, the
other reporting requirements eat up nearly all of that benefit, dropping the payback to only 1.6%.
The cost effectiveness tests described in the plan state that energy efficiency that costs less than
energy from the market is a preferred investment, consistent with the higher priority of efficiency
over supply dictated by the resource loading order.
Dawes asked whether small customers will fail to benefit if they do not participate. Knapp explained
that one of the main tenets of the Plan is to ensure that there are programs available for all
customers to be able to participate. Staff feels that the rigorous and industry-standard cost-
effectiveness testing and criteria described in detail in the Plan along with follow-up using
independent verification of program results (as required by law) provides the necessary financial
controls to ensure that energy efficiency investments are selected judiciously.
Melton noted that the Plan does appear to offer opportunities for residential customers.
Bechtel asked for an explanation of the carbon adder methodology. Knapp explained the proxy
value of approximately $10/ton of carbon dioxide used by California’s investor-owned utilities when
making energy procurement decisions. A GHG adder is used in evaluation criteria for purchasing
decisions to encourage choosing the lowest cost resource, including the adder.
Dawes asked what staff will do next year that is not being done now. Staff explained that in the
near term, the main activities will be adding programs to target areas not currently addressed such
as new construction and remodeling, coordinating with the Green Building efforts in the Planning
Department, supporting both end-user efficiency and supply-side efficiency, third-party programs
like "Right Lights", and joint action with other agencies.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 6 of 11
Rosenbaum moved approval of staff recommendation that UAC recommends that Council approve
the ten-year energy efficiency portfolio plan. Bechtel seconded. Motion passed with three ayes,
one abstained, and one absent.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Prior to the discussion of utility rate increases, Mary Carlstead (resident) spoke regarding how
increases, especially those from bond measures, affect the senior/fixed/low income populations
adversely. Parcel taxes are increasing, and are not deductible. Her feelings were that Palo Alto
was creating a "perfect storm".
ITEM 3: ACTION ITEM:
Recommended FY 2007-08 Water Rate Increase
Auzenne stated that the Fiscal Year 2007-08 (FY07-08) water system average rate was $4.59 per
one hundred cubic feet (ccf), and presented a slide titled "Components of System Average rate FY
2007-08", which shows the breakdown of costs. For FY07-08, a 10 percent or $2.2 million increase
was proposed (Item A), as well as another 10 percent increase in Fiscal Year 2008-09 (FY08-09)
(Item B). Also included was the discontinuance of a price discount for irrigation customers on W-7
(Item C) and the introduction of the fixed charge "customer Charge" (Item D). Customer charges
will provide revenue stability, and reduce the need for rapid increases in the future due to fact that
sales volume depends on weather and economic factors. Charges for small customers are being
phased in, as to limit the overall impact to customers.
Bechtel commented on how he appreciated the charts, and would like to be emailed copies. The
concept of customer charges appeared rational, so he had no questions regarding these. He did
question whether supply/distribution breakdowns were displayed on the customer bills. Auzenne
stated that they were not, but it would be an option to be reviewed in the future.
Dawes stated that there does need to be an explanation of where costs come from, and the charts
showed this well, especially in light of customer questions (such as Ms. Carlstead). There was
some question as to how current costs would compare to costs five years ago, but it was not a
request to produce data. He stated he was ready to approve the issue.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 7 of 11
Rosenbaum stated that Item B related to FY08-09 rate approval had not been done by the UAC in
the past, and questioned whether it made sense. As costs are too variable, heconsidered striking
Item B from all proposals. Auzenne commented that as this represent a two-year budget process,
something regarding FY08-09 should be added. However, rate changes would be re-evaluated
during FY 08-09 budget process.
Rosenbaum countered that it is a question of emphasis. While the future increases are in the
budget, they are conceptual. He did not think that the UAC should add their imprimatur to items
beyond the immediate budget year in their recommendations to Finance/Council.
Dawes had a question as to the total bill, and wished to see how the proposed rates compare with
the current rates for water commodity. Auzenne explained the current vs. proposed bill effects.
Melton asked for staff’s anticipation of the length of the phase-in period for the customer charge to
go from roughly 50% to 100%. Auzenne indicated a 3 to 4 year time frame.
Dawes pointed out that rents, general fund transfers, and other transfers are a large portion of the
water budget, and that these are the items that the public needs to know about when rate
increases are proposed.
Melton mentioned that conceptual approval of the second year increases had been brought up
before in memoranda, although not as formally currently proposed by staff as an explicit item for
approval. Rosenbaum generally agreed that the "approve in concept" request was more explicit
than in the past.
Bechtel moved to recommend the water proposal as worded. Melton seconded.
Rosenbaum asked if a friendly amendment eliminating Item B (approving year two rate increase in
concept) would be entertained. Bechtel declined to accept the friendly amendment and instead
indicated a strong 3reference and obligation to advise the Council of potential increases in the
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 8 of 11
2008-09 budget year. However, Dawes indicated his concurrence with Rosenbaum on the removal
of Item B.
Rosenbaum proposed an amendment to strike Item B. Dawes seconded. Melton noted the
substitute motion. Three Commissioners voted in favor of the amendment (Melton, Dawes,
Rosenbaum), one voted against (Bechtel), with one absent (Keller). Motion passed.
Rosenbaum commented on how he understood the concerns raised by Carlstead, however, he
also noted the UAC’s obligation to look out for the utilities businesses on behalf of the City. He
acknowledged that it will be difficult for Palo Alto to go forward with bonds, but was unsure of what
else could be done.
A motion was made to approve the Water proposal with the removal of Item B. It passed
unanimously (Rosenbaum, Dawes, Bechtel, Melton), with one absent (Keller).
Dawes mentioned that while he understood that there was a two year budget process, the second
year was too much of an estimate. The UAC would reserve its judgment on such issues.
ITEM 4: ACTION ITEM:
Recommended FY 2007-08 Electric Rate Increase
Auzenne stated that with this proposal, every customer class receives the same 5 percent increase
in FY07-08, and no customer charges were proposed. He presented a slide titled "Components of
System Average Rate FY 2007-08". Melton questioned whether a "Customer Charge" would be
considered in the future. Auzenne said not at this time, as usage/weather variability was not as
much of an issue with electricity as with water and natural gas.
Dawes had concerns regarding future hydro projections, and asked for any update on the water
situation. Auzenne stated that the last data he had heard was 43 percent of normal snow-pack
levels. Dawes commented that this was very serious, and as such, Item B regarding FY08-09 rate
increases should also be removed in this case.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 9 of 11
Rosenbaum stated his agreement with the 5 percent increase at this time because of the hydro
situation, even though the reserves are large.
Bechtel moved approval for staff’s recommendation to increase Electric rates in FY 2007-08 with
the removal of Item B (approval in concept of an electric rate increase in FY 2008-09).
Rosenbaum seconded. Passage was unanimous (Rosenbaum, Dawes, Bechtel, Melton), with one
absent (Keller).
ITEM 5: ACTION ITEM:
Recommended FY 2007-08 Gas Rate Increase
Melton commented that the structure of the increase was similar to water. Auzenne concurred,
commenting how gas usage was quite variable based on weather effects. He presented a similar
slide titled "Components of Average System Rate FY 2007-08".
Fong mentioned that, because of the laddering of gas purchases, future costs were better known.
However, staff was still amenable to removal of Item B (approval in concept of gas rate increases
for FY 2008-09).
Melton question how long it would be before customer charges were up to cost of service
recommendations. Auzenne and Fong commented it was a function of reserve depletion.
Auzenne clarified that although 9.5 percent increase was an overall figure, the allocations to
individual customer classes would be different.
Dawes questioned whether, with increased efficiency measures; measures were made using
heating degree data. Auzenneconfirmed that such comparisons were made. Dawes felt we
should publish our efficiency metrics.
Bechtel questioned whether the wording regarding the increase should include a mention that it is
a 9.5 percent system average increase. Fong agreed.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 10 of 11
Melton commented that the UAC is in essence recommending the rate schedules. Auzenne stated
that this would be clarified in the transmittals to the Finance committee.
Rosenbaum moved to recommend the Gas increase with Item B removed. Dawes seconded.
Passage was unanimous (Rosenbaum, Dawes, Bechtel, Melton), with one absent (Keller).
Meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Melody Vega
City of Palo Alto Utilities
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes from: Approved on:Page 11 of 11