HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 170-08TO:
City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
BUDGET
’08-’09
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES
ATTENTION:FINANCE COMMITTEE
DATE:MARCH 18, 2008 CMR: 170:08
SUBJECT:UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO
ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A NATURAL GAS RATE
INCREASE AND AMENDING UTILITY RATE SCHEDULES G-l,
G-2, G-6 AND G-10
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Counci! adopt the
attached resolution to:
(a)Approve a 7.1 percent increase to natural gas retail rates, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008-09,
effective July 1, 2008, which will increase annual revenues by $3.4 million; and,
(b)Approve the changes to the Gas Utility Rate Schedules (G-l, G-2, G-6 and G-10), as
attached.
BACKGROUND
In June 2006, the City Council approved a 9.5 percent natural gas revenue increase for FY 2007-
08 and also approved in-concept a rate increase of 9.1% for FY 2008-09. The FY 2007-08 rate
increase was allocated entirely to the Gas Distribution Fund, while the FY 2008-09 approved in-
concept rate increase was planned for the Gas Supply Fund.
DISCUSSION
Wholesale natura! gas prices have generally stabilized, and the laddering strategy used to
purchase gas has resulted in relatively stable wholesale gas coats. While the laddering purchase
strategy does not eliminate all supply cost uncertainties, it has had a favorable impact on the Gas
Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-SRSR). Gas supply costs for the remainder of FY 2007-08
are projected to be stable and this trend is expected to continue through FY 2008-09.
CMR: 170:08 Page 1 of 6
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.
Table 1 below shows the estimated revenues and expenses for the Gas Fund for FY 2008-09 as
well as the actual revenues and expenses for FY 2006-07 and the adjusted budget revenues and
expenses for FY 2007-08.
TABLE 1 - Gas Fund Sources and Uses of Funds ($000)
Fiscal Year
2 IPROJECTED TOTAL .:-YSTEM AVERAGE RATE (S,’Tnerm}
3 IPROJECTED COMMOD TY COST (S:Therm:,
SALES IN THCUSAN~ THERMS
5 PERCENTAGE OF SUFFLY JNDER CONTRACT
I~IPROJEC:ED CHANGE N RETAIL SALES REVENUE
i:I Utilities Retail Sales
P I S e~ice connection charges & cap acity fees
~!0 I Other Revenues
I~I Interest plus gain or toss on investment
I~:I
Totat Sources of Funds
ITM I Purchases
1!6 J Distribution Operating Budget
J17 ~Debt Service payments (Prin & Int)
J18 I Other Transfers Out
Jlg ~Capita~ Improvement programs
I=l Operating [ncumb~3nce, & reconciliation
I:/J2~ J Into, (Out o~ Rese~es
Actual
06-07
20.0%
$ 1.37
$ 0.70
31.342
5,870
41,338
0
886
710
42,934
22,250
784
6,915
958
3,444
6,787
!7
41,156
1,777
Adjusted
07-08
9.5%
$ 1.503
$ 0.822
30,942
89%
4,957
46.147
580
90
646
47.463
26,139
1,366
8.143
948
4,123
6,945
0
47,664
(202}
In-Concept
9.1%
$ 0:860
27%
Proposed
08-09
$ 1.610
S 0.861
31,365
72%
3,436
50,342
597
90
646
51,675
27,894
1,316
8.165
949
3.988
7,!82
0
49,493
2,183
Note that costs overall are projected to increase less than 4 percent between FY 2007-08 and FY
2008-09. However, as shown in the next section of this report, the rate increase is needed to fund
the G-SRSR, which is below the minimum guideline level.
Reserves and Risk Assessment
Table 2 below summarizes the end-of-year balances for the G-SRSR and the Gas Distribution
Rate Stabilization Reserve (G-DRSR), the risk assessment level and the Reserve Guidelines.
Staff presented the annual risk assessment of the Gas Fund to the UAC at its February 2008
meeting. Note that the risk assessment level is determined by assessing the short-term risks to
the Gas Fund. The Reserve Guidelines were established to manage risks over the longer term.
With the recommended revenue increase, the FY 2008-09 G-DRSR ending balance is forecast to
be over the risk assessment level and close to the minimum guideline level approved by the City
Council. The total $3.4 million revenue increase proposed for FY 2008-09, when applied to
CMR: 170:08 Page 2 of 6
forecasted cost increases in natural gas wholesale supply, will bring the G-SRSR ending balance
for FY 2008-09 up to the risk assessment level, but below the long-term minimum guideline
level approved by the City Council.
TABLE 2: Gas Reserve Balance, Guideline Levels and Risk Assessment Level ($M)
FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09
Gas Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve
End of Year Balance
Risk Assessment Level
Minimum Guideline Level
Maximum Guideline Level
Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve
End of Year Balance
Risk Assessment Level
Minimum Guideline Level
Maximum Guideline Level
(actual)
6.7
10.0
20.0
1.7
3.1
6.3
(estimated)
5.6
3.7
9.1
19.6
2.7
3.3
4.0
10.0
(forecast)
6.5
6.5
9.8
20.9
4.0
3.4
4.1
10.2
Allocation of Proposed Revenue Increase
The proposed gas supply revenue increase of 7.! percent, or $3.4 million, is to be applied to the
Gas Supply Fund to cover costs and to fund the G-SRSR. The allocation of the supply rate
increase is proposed to be applied equally to all customer classes and non-market based rate
schedules on an equal cents per therm basis.
In FY 2007-08, distribution revenues were increased so that each customer class would be
assessed its proper proportion of distribution charges. This was done partially through
volumetric (per therm) rates as well as the re-introduction of a fixed monthly customer charge.
However, introducing the customer charge at its fully allocated cost-of-service levels would have
created undue ’rate shock’ to customers. It was planned to slowly transition the customer
charges to cost of service levels. In years where there are no distribution revenue changes
planned, this can be done through simultaneously increasing the customer charge and lowering
the per therm distribution rate component, so that revenues on a customer class basis do not
change. Individual customer’s bills may see different percentage increases, however, depending
on their monthly usage patterns. It is the intention of staff not to adjust the customer charges at
this time.
Table 3 shows the impact of the proposed rate increase on customer bills.
CMR: 170:08 Page 3 of 6
TABLE 3: Impact of Proposed Rate Increase on Customer Bills
Usage Monthly Amount of Percent
Customer Therms per Bill ($)Monthly Increase/
Month Increase ($)(Decrease)
Residential/Winter 100 $ 163.32 $13.35 8.9
Residential!Summer 30 58.09 4.01 7.4
Commercial G-2 500 792.75 66.75 9.2
Industrial G-2 10,000 15,190.00 1,335.00 9.6
Contract Market rate
Customers 60,000 74,009.00 --
Bill Comparison
A recent bill comparison with PG&E showed that, during the first four months of the winter of
FY 2007-08, Pa!o Alto’s average residential customer (using 100 therms per month) had gas
costs 12.8 percent above PG&E’s average customer’s gas costs for the same period ($599.90 vs.
$531.70 total, a $68.19 difference). The largest difference this past winter occurred in January
2008, when Palo Alto’s average residential customer paid $149.97, while a comparable PG&E
customer paid $127.52. In prior years, however, 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 earlier, the Palo Alto laddered purchasing strategy provides stable rates to Palo Alto
customers. In contrast, the PG&E strategy, based mostly on shorter term market purchases,
results in rates which 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 any given date. However,
over time, the Palo Alto purchasing strategy compares positively against the PG&E purchasing
strategy to the benefit of Palo Alto gas customers. Table 4 shows residential customer gas bills
using Palo Alto’s and PG&E’s rates since FY 2003-04.
TABLE 4: Palo Alto Customer Gas Bill Comparison ~vith PG&E
Historical FY 03-04
Residential Gas Bills
Winter Usage (100 therms/month)
Palo Alto average $ 67.07
PG&E average $ 94.79
Summer Usage (30 therms/month)
Palo Alto average $ 23.80
PG&E average $ 28.14
PA Annual bills $ 545.23
PG&E Annual bills $ 737.63
FY 04-05
$ 83.27
$113.88
$ 27.59
$ 30.97
$ 665.16
$ 869.06
* FY 07-08 data taken through February 2008
FY 05-06
$103.54
$151.07
$ 35.98
$38.91
837.10
1,139.84
FY 06-07 FY 07-08*
$ 135.78
$128.17
$ 46.16
$37.12
$ 1,091.64
$ 991.71
$ 149.97
$127.52
$54.09
$40.42
$ 816.25
$ 693.37
For large customers, distribution rates in Palo Alto are higher than the distribution rates in
PG&E’s territories due to a different customer mix and differences in budgeting and accounting
for funding of capital improvement programs.
CMR: 170:08 Page 4 of 6
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On March 5, 2008, the UAC voted unanimously (4-0 with one Commissioner absent), to
recommend that the City Council:
(a)Approve a 7.1 percent increase to natural gas retail rates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008-09,
effective July 1, 2008, which will increase annual revenues by $3.4 million; and,
(b) Approve the changes to the Gas Utility Rate Schedules, as attached.
In its discussions, the UAC noted that the 5-year projections presented at the February 2008
meeting showed a 7.1 percent rate increase in FY 2008-09 and no increases in the subsequent
four years. Given these projections, the UAC discussed whether it was advisable to spread the
proposed rate increase over two years by lowering the rate increase for FY 2008-09 and plan
another rate increase for FY 2009-10. Staff and other commissioners, however, noted that gas
costs could increase over the 5-year planning horizon and that a rate increase lower than the
proposed 7.1 percent increase for FY 2008-09 would result in the Rate Stabilization Reserves
falling below the risk assessment value.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Approval of these recommended rate increases will raise Gas Fund sales revenues by $3.4
million for FY 2008-09.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This recommendation is consistent with current City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An increase in rates to meet operating expenses and financial reserve needs is not subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Public Resources Code
Sec. 21080(b)(8) and Title 14 of the California Code Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(!) and (3).
CMR: 170:08 Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Gas Rate Schedules: G-l, G-2, G-6 and G-10
C. Draft Minutes of the UAC meeting of March 5, 2008
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Eric Keniston, Utilities Rate Analyst
Ipek Connolly, Senior Resource Planner
Jane Ratchye, Assistant Director of Utilities, Resource Management
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
Er HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR: 170:08 Page 6 of 6
NOT YET APPROVED
ATTACHMEN
RESOLUTION NO
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
ADOPTING A NATURAL GAS RATE INCREASE AND
AMENDING UTILITY RATE SCHEDULES G-I, G-2, G-6 AND
G-10
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
the Council of the City of Palo Alto may by resolution adopt rules and regulations
governing utility services and the fees and charges therefore; and
WHEREAS, the Council has considered the need for an adjustment in natural
gas retail rates to maintain the Gas Supply and Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserves
above the annual risk assessment levels.
NOW, THEREFORE, 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 sheets G-l-1 and G-l-2, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The
foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2008.
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 incorporated herein. The foregoing
Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2008.
SECTION 3. 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 incorporated herein. The
foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2008.
SECTION 4. 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 sheet G-10-1, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The
foregoing Utility Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective July 1, 2008
SECTION 5. 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.
080311 syn 6050384
NOT YET APPROVED
SECTION 6. The Council finds that an increase in rates to meet operating
expenses and financial reserve needs is not subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sec. 21080(b)(8) and
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(1) and (3).
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor
APPROVED:
Deputy City Attorney City Manager
Director of Utilities
Director of Administrative
Services
080311 syn 6050384
ATTACHMENT
RESIDENTIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-!
A.APPLICABILITY:
This schedule applies to natural gas service to individually metered single family premises, including
those separately metered in a multi-family complex.
B.TERRITORY:
Co
Within the service area of the City, of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the CitT.
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 ............................................................................$0.7895
Administrative Fee .............................................................................$0.0227
PG&E Local Transportation ..............................................................$0.0212
Pa!o Alto Local Distribution ..............................................................$0.7227
Tier 1 Rate Total ................................$1.5561
Summer (Over 20 therms); Winter (Over 96 therms)
2.
3.
4.
SPECIAL NOTES:
Commodity Charge ............................................................................$1.4055
Administrative Fee .............................................................................$0.0227
PG&E Local Transportation ..............................................................$0.0212
Palo Alto Local Distribution ..............................................................$0.722__27
Tier 2 Rate Total .............................$2.1721
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 day_s in__e_a_c_h seasona! p@_gd to th_e_ tot_a_~_num_~.er_9__f_
days in the billing period.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-1-1 dated 7-1-2007 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-1-2008
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.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-1-2 dated 7-1-2006 CiTY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-1-2008
Sheet No. G-1-2
Ao
Bo
Co
Do
COMMERCIAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-2
APPLICABILITY:
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 Selwice area of the City of Palo Alto and on land owned or leased by the City.
RATES:Per Service
Monthly Customer Charge:$35.00
Commodity Rate: (To be added to Customer Charge)
All year-round delivered commodity:Per Therm
1.Commodity Charge ....................................................................................................$0.9221
2.Administrative Fee .....................................................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation ......................................................................................$0.0212
4.Palo Alto Local Distribution ......................................................................................$0.5495
Total per therm ..................................$1.5155
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
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.
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-2-1 dated 7-1-2007 CITY OF P?’LO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-1-2008
Sheet No. G-2-1
MU.~NICIPAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-6
A. APPLICABILITY:
No
Co
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 Charge:$55.25
Per Therm Char~es (To be added to Customer Charae Per Therm
Supply Charges:
1.Commodity- Charge ........................................................................................$0.9221
2.Administrative Fee .........................................................................................$0.0227
3.PG&E Local Transportation ..........................................................................$0.0212
Total Supply Charges .....................................................................................$0.9660
Distribution Charge:
1. Palo Alto Local Distribution .......................................................................... $0.5629
D.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.
3.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 -7-1-2007 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-01-2008
Sheet No. G-6-1
MUNICIPAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY tL~TE SCHEDULE G-6
(Continued
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 7-1-2007 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-1-2008
Sheet No. G-6-2
A. APPLICABILITY:
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS SERVICE
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-10
This schedule applies to the sale of compressed natural gas (CNG) at the City-owned natural 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:
Commodib7 Charge
Per Therm
Per Gasoline
Gallon Equivalent
$1.17 $1.36
For billing purposes, the number of gallons will be complied from a Summau of Transactions recorded
by the dispensing unit for the customer during the month.
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Service under this schedule is subject to discontinuance in whole or in part in case of actuat 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).
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.
Customers requesting to take service under this rate schedule are required to sign a Compressed
Natural Gas Agreement before commencing service.
If required by local or federal law, assessed applicable taxes shall be added to charges shown in this
rate schedule.
o
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Supersedes Sheet No. G-IO-’I dated 7-1-2007 CITY OF PALO ALTO
UTILITIES
Proposed Effective 7-1-2008
Sheet No.G-10-1
ATTACHMENT C
DRAFT
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MARCH 5, 2008
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Rosenbaum called to order at 7:00 P.M. the scheduled meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission
(UAC).
Present: Commissioners George Bechtel, Dexter Dawes, John Melton, Dick Rosenbaum, and Council Liaison
Yiaway Yeh
Absent: Commissioner Marilyn Keller
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
NONE
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Commissioner Bechtel expressed his approval as to the quality of the minutes for February. The minutes from
the February 6, 2008, were unanimously approved.
AGENDA REVIEW
No changes to the agenda were requested.
REPORT FROM COMMISSION MEETINGS/EVENTS
There were no reports.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 1 of 7
UTILITIES DIRECTOR REPORT
Utilities Director Valerie Fong gave the following updates:
Hydro Conditions: Northern Sierra precipitation is at 90% of average to date and reservoir levels are
about 80% of average. As a result, hydro electric generation is expected to be below average if
precipitation resumes median levels for the rest of the season.
Local Cogen: The project proponent, a key customer, has retained an energy consultant to assist
with project feasibility and development, however, neither firm is interested in owning the project and
ownership interest was proposed to the City. The preliminary project design is for a 20 MW plant, with
an initial capital cost of approximately $47M.
COTP Transmission Asset Lay-off: Staff will be sending a formal offer letter to other owners of
COTP transmission expressing the City’s interest to lay-off all 50 MW of City’s ownership share for 20
years at cost. Continuing updates will be provided to the UAC, and the offer and final contract wilt be
subject to final Council approval.
Western Geo Power: On 2/19 Council approved participation in an NCPA 3re phase agreement to
purchase up to 5 Average MW of a new Geysers area geothermal powerplant being developed by
Western GeoPower. The City’s share of output will range from 2 to 4% of the City’s electric load
depending on plant output and other member participation levels. Power flow is expected starting in
2010 and running through 2030.
ClP: In response to Vice Chair Dawes question at last month’s UAC meeting, an update on the gas
main replacement ClP was provided. The gas main replacement projects are an on-going expense of
running the gas utility. Over the last 15 years or so the gas mains have been replaced at an
accelerated rate due to the deterioration of ABS main pipelines. The replacement of the ABS mains is
expected to be completed in 2012-13 timeframe. Once this is completed the ABS services will be
replaced along with the on-going replacement of steel mains. Expenditures for pipeline replacement
are expected to begin decreasing after the all ABS mains are replaced and then level out at a level
that sustains the condition of the infrastructure.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 2 of 7
The following upcoming meetings were noted:
¯March 10, 2008 - Council Meeting (to establish UUD 45 and to approve the PPA with Ameresco for
the Keller Canyon landfill gas to energy)
¯March !7, 2008- Council Joint Meeting with Senator Simitian
¯March 18, 2008 - Finance Committee - Water, Gas and Electric Rate Increase
April 2, 2008 - Next UAC Meeting
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NONE
NEW BUSINESS
ITEIVI 1: ACTION ITEM: Proposed Water Rate Increase Effective July 1,2008
Valerie Fong, Utilities Director, stated that no presentation was prepared, but that staff was available to answer
questions on the report. As a prefatory comment, for residential customers, the 8 percent proposed increase
was geared more towards higher tier water users, primarily as a conservation signal.
Commissioner Melton questioned why the customer charge was not increasing at this time, and if it was staff’s
intention to bring this charge up to cost-of-service study levels for residential customers gradually. Fong stated
that all increases were on volumetric charges only this time for conservation reasons. Jane Ratchye, Assistant
Director for Resource Management, clarified that, with conservation goals growing in importance, widening the
price gap between residential tiers was a staff’s recommendation this year. This emphasis will be re-
evaluated on an ongoing basis.
Commissioner Dawes questioned the capital expenditures in Fiscal Year 2007-08 and the return of previously
encumbered Capital Improvement Program (ClP) funds to the Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR), and
specifically whether the Emergency Water Supply and Storage project would be worked on this fiscal year.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 3 of 7
Fong clarified that it would be, and that well rehabilitation and pump station upgrades could go forward
independent of reservoir siting issues. Commissioner Dawes asked if the FY 07-08 ClP figures were for funds
spent or funds committed, and Fong clarified they were committed funds.
Commissioner Rosenbaum questioned the first sentence on page four, which appears to give reasons as to
why water rates have been higher than surrounding areas. Commissioner Rosenbaum stated that the reasons
given imply that Palo Alto has higher relative costs than others cities, and questioned whether that has been
studied. Ratchye agreed that the sentence related more to cost drivers rather than cost comparisons with
other cities. Commissioner Rosenbaum asked specifically about the level of allocated charges and general
fund transfers in other cities. Ratchye posited that allocated charges were unknown, and transfers were
probably very low. Commissioner Rosenbaum posited whether rate-payers would enjoy paying for such
transfers, along with rents to the City, as they account for roughly $0.80 per one hundred cubic feet of water,
and were "significant." Commissioner Rosenbaum suggested the charges may be too high, and perhaps a
comparison study should be done to surrounding cities.
Commissioner Dawes stated that the Auditors report shows Palo Alto’s water department costs have
increased rapidly over the last few years and are now higher than the next highest city utility, which was
"worrisome." Asked whether charges by the city to the water utility could be reduced, Fong commented these
were not within her scope to modify or make recommendations on, and if the UAC wanted to not increase
rates due to these costs, staff’s only recourse would be to drop ClP projects. Commissioner Dawes
commented that perhaps the chair or vice-chair of the UAC should present to Council the problems they see
with costs.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 4 of 7
Commissioner Rosenbaum asked for a motion. Commissioner Dawes moved and Commissioner Bechtel
seconded the water rate proposal. No further discussions were presented. Commissioner Rosenbaum asked
for those in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 2: ACTION ITEM: Proposed Natural Gas Rate Increase Effective July 1, 2008
Fong again stated that no presentation was prepared, but that staff was available to answer questions on the
report. She noted that there were no proposed increases to the customer charge for gas.
Commissioner Dawes questioned whether, based on projections of stable gas supply costs over the next few
years, whether the proposed increase should be spread over multiple years. Commissioner Melton countered
that a lower increase would take the RSR below the risk assessment level. Commissioner Rosenbaum asked
if staff had comment, and Fong expressed staff’s agreement with Commissioner Melton, and added that there
were no additional reserves to "back-up" the gas funds, unlike the electric fund (Calaveras).
Commissioner Bechtel expressed concern for future projections showing no increases, and questioned
whether staff would look at debt financing more projects to spread costs over time and keep rates down,
perhaps having annual inflationary increases instead of large changes. Fong confirmed that staff was serious
about pursuing debt financing for large projects, and may finance gas projects along with larger projects
should the need arise. Commissioner Rosenbaum stated that normal maintenance operations should be
funded through rates, and that larger maintenance programs or CIP spending explains why Palo Alto’s
distribution costs were higher than Pacific Gas & Electric.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 5 of 7
Commissioner Rosenbaum asked for a motion. Commissioner Dawes moved and Commissioner Melton
seconded the gas rate proposal. No further discussions were presented. Commissioner Rosenbaum asked
for those in favor, and the motion passed unanimously.
ITEM 3: ACTION ITEM: Proposed Electric Rate Increase Effective July 1,2008
Fong again stated that no presentation was prepared, but that staff was available to answer questions on the
report. Commenting that, as the February UAC meeting regarding electric scenarios indicated that the "middle
of the road" option was what seemed to resonate with the UAC, this was what staff was proposing. Ratchye
added that, in order to ensure that reserves will end at the risk assessment value for FY 08-09, additional
funds are planned to be drawn from the Calaveras Reserve, but that the Calaveras Reserve fund balance
would still be within Council approved guideline levels.
Commissioner Dawes sought clarification as to whether staff could make such a transfer, and Commissioner
Melton confirmed that, within a particular fund, staff can move money between RSR’s.
Commissioner Melton commented that the discussion on this increase was really done last month, and the
current proposal was exactly what the UAC asked for the last time. Commissioner Melton moved and
Commissioner Bechtel seconded the electric rate proposal.
Commissioner Rosenbaum asked why the higher residential tiers would see larger increases than the lower
tiers, and what fraction of residential usage was in tier 3. Staff commented that it was quite a bit less than half,
but the exact figures were not immediately in front of them. Commissioner Rosenbaum commented that a two
tier pricing system may be more appropriate, and requested staff to look into that in the future. Fong
commented that, as shown on Table 3, the impact to larger users was not that dramatic.
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 6 of 7
Commissioner Bechtel asked if there were any instances of a neighborhood needing a service change on the
distribution side due to household consumption levels increasing, or whether there has been a significant
increase in residential usage in general. Fong stated that she would have to ask the engineering department
for confirmation, but generally that the system is sized to take growth into account. Ratchye stated that
average usage has not increased dramatically over the last few years.
Commissioner Rosenbaum, seeing no requests for further discussion, asked for those in favor, and the motion
passed unanimously.
Resident Lois Nisbet, at the conclusion of New Business, asked to address a question to the UAC: "is there
any ethical consideration for the fact that you charge for utilities when in fact you spend it on something else?"
Commissioner Dawes asked if this was in regard to transfers, and Ms. Nisbet stated, "1 guess so."
Commissioner Dawes stated that question should be brought before the City Council regarding this issue, as
they set the policy regarding transfers. Commissioner Rosenbaum clarified that the transfer has been going
on since the inception of the utility, although it was capped at a growth rate of 3 percent several years ago.
The next schedule meeting is April 2, with everyone present.
The May 7 meeting is set for a day meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Marites Ward
City of Palo Alto Utilities
Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on:Page 7 of 7