HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-21-2008 - 6eORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 21, 2008
Action Agenda
Item No. ' e.
SUBJECT: Efland Sewer Rate Study
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) NO
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Rate Study Summary from Raftelis
Financial
2. 9/5/08 Memo from Paul Thames,
County Engineer to the County
Manager Describing Progress on the
Rate Study
3. Resolution Establishing the Rules and
Regulations for Operation of the
Efland Sewer System (11/19/85)
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Lindley, Engineering Specialist,
245-2313
This item was delayed from the
Board's October 7, 2008 regular
meeting due to time constraints.
PURPOSE: To provide for BOCC review of the recently completed rate study and request
BOCC recommendations on implementation of a new rate schedule.
BACKGROUND: The Efland Sewer System was established by Resolution of the BOCC in
November 1985 as a remedy for failing septic systems in the Efland Community. The rates set
at the time were sufficient for the operation of the system. However, over the last twenty years
of operation the costs for operating and maintaining the system have increased steadily while
the rates have remained unchanged. At the present time, the revenue generated by the current
rate structure accounts for only 20-25% of the full cost of operating and maintaining the system.
The remainder of the system costs is paid from the Orange County General Fund.
With this in mind, the BOCC authorized Raftelis Financial to study the system and create a cost
model to based on system costs versus revenue, the impact of different rates on customer bills,
and County General Fund subsidy. This cost model, which is in the form of a multiple-page
spreadsheet, has been completed and is the basis for the scenarios outlined below.
In order to capture all system costs, including funding for future capital projects and maintaining
a fund balance, the rates would need to be increased by an average of 300%. The current rate
structure bills all customers for a minimum of 3,000 gallons of use per month. Raftelis has
suggested changing the rate structure to a base charge that would be the same regardless of
use plus a charge per 1000 gallons used. This accomplishes two objectives: the impact of the
2
rate increases on low water users (who typically are also low income users) is mitigated
somewhat and it creates a financial incentive to use less than 3,000 gallons per month.
Example 1. General Fund Subsidy eliminated this year
A customer who uses 2,000 gallons per month now pays $15.20 per month.
Given the increase above, that same customer's bill would have a base charge
of $20.73 and a usage charge of $18.00 per 1,000 gallons, for a total bill of
$56.73 per month (273% increase). A customer that typically uses 6,000 gallons
per month currently pays $28.70. Given the scenario above, this would increase
to $128.73 per month (a 348% increase).
If the rates are not changed at all, the expected General Fund contribution that would be
required this fiscal year would be approximately $142,000, without including any funding for
capital projects that are known to be required in the future. The capital project funding, which is
required as part of the state-issued collection system permit, would be approximately $50,000
per year for the next ten years. This makes the total General Fund Contribution about
$192,000 for the upcoming fiscal year. This total subsidy amount would increase as the
number of customers and the size of the system increases in future years.
This year, in anticipation of BOCC implementation of a new rate schedule, the General Fund
contribution to the system's budget was reduced by $40,000. To make up for this budget
reduction, the rates would need to be increased an average of 150% this year. This percentage
increase is derived from assuming the rates would not be raised until the January billing cycle at
the earliest, giving only six months remaining in the fiscal year to generate the necessary
revenue. If implementation of a new rate structure were to be delayed, the amount of general
fund subsidy budgeted would need to be increased.
In addition, the 150% increase would serve only to bridge the gap between the system's
requested operating budget and the approved budget. Capital needs funding and
establishment of a fund balance for the system are not included in calculation of the 150%
increase. In order to eliminate the General Fund subsidy entirely, the BOCC could establish a
schedule by which rates are increased steadily each subsequent year until the system is fully
funded.
Example 2. Rates increased to make up for reduction in operating budget.
With a 150% increase, the 2,000 gallon customer from the above example would have a
monthly bill of $35.46 (Base Charge: $12.96 + $11.25 per 1,000 gallons which results in
a 133% increase) and the 6,000 gallon per month customer would have a monthly bill of
$80.46 (Base Charge: $12.96 + $11.25 per 1,000 gallons which results in a 180%
increase).
None of the discussion thus far takes into account the impacts to low income residents who
may find the increased rates onerous. As has been mentioned before, and is included in the
attached memo from County Engineer Paul Thames to the County Manager, the BOCC may
elect to create a "safety net" fund that could be administered by one of the County's social
service agencies. This fund could be made available to customers after they meet some fixed
income related criteria as determined appropriate by the administering agency. The safety net
fund would pay into the Sewer Fund on behalf of qualified customers, thereby reducing their
sewer bill. The attached Raftelis report also includes some ideas on reducing the impact of the
higher rates on low income households. The costs and scenarios mentioned in the previous
paragraphs do not take the costs of such a fund into account. Additionally, there is no reliable
way to calculate the effect much higher sewer rates will have on consumption (and therefore,
revenue). The increased rates may tend to function as a "conservation rate" due to the financial
impact of the higher rates.
Working backwards from an implementation date of January 10, 2009 (the beginning of
Orange-Alamance's monthly billing cycle), staff has created a proposed timeline for the rate
changes. According to the County Attorney there is no public hearing requirement before a rate
change can be implemented. However, a public hearing has been included in the time line,
should the BOCC be inclined to hold one anyway.
October 21, 2008 BOCC considers the results of the rate study and provides direction
on the new rate schedule.
October 22, 2008 The new rate schedule is proposed based on BOCC comments.
October 23, 2008 Notice for Public Hearing (2 weeks) on new rate schedule is
published.
November 6, 2008 Public Hearing on new rate schedule is held as part of the regularly
scheduled BOCC meeting
November 18, 2008 BOCC approves the new rate schedule. This approval would be in
the form of an amendment to the Resolution which established the
Efland Sewer System.
November 19, 2008 Notice is sent to all current customers of the pending rate
increases.
January 10, 2009 New rate schedule is reflected for the first time in customer bills for
usage from December 10-January 10. Bills are mailed January 16-
20 and due on February 1.
This proposed schedule will allow customers to receive notice of the pending rate changes
before the "use period" (December 10t"-January 10th) of the January billing cycle.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Examples of financial impacts of the study are included in the
Background section of this agenda abstract. Approval of increased user fees equates to
potential reduction sin the amount of subsidy the County's General Fund has to contribute to
the Efland Sewer Enterprise Fund.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board give direction to staff on
implementation of a new rate schedule for the Efland sewer system based on the findings of the
Raftelis Financial rate study. Specifically the Board is requested to give guidance on the
following issues:
1. Should the rate structure change to a base charge plus usage or remain as a
3,000 gallon per month minimum charge plus usage above 3,000 gallons?
2. If a rate increase is desired, to what extent should the rates increase this year?
3. What is the desired minimum General Fund contribution to the Efland Sewer
System and within what timeframe should action occur to achieve this lowered
subsidy level?
4. If a rate increase is desired, should there be a public hearing on the proposed rate
changes and, if so, when should the public hearing be scheduled and how should
public notice occur?
^ 511 East. Boulevard
Charlotte • North Carolina • 28203
lupus ~
C4NSlJ1TANT5, ING.
September 24, 2008
Mr. R Kevin Lindley, PE, MCE
Engineering Specialist
Orange County
129 East King Street
Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Dear Kevin:
^ Phone 704.373.1199 ^ www.raftelis.com
Fax 704.373.1113 , ,-.
Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. ("RFC's is pleased to submit this letter report summarizing the
results of our wastewater rate study ("rate study' for Orange County, North Carolina ("County'.
The purpose of the rate study was to determine the financial and customer impacts of recovering the
annual revenue requirements of the Efland System which is owned and operated by the County. The
financial and customer impacts are determined based on three alternative rate scenarios. In addition,
this letter report recommends an alternative rate structure we believe is more equitable for low volume
customers. Finally, this letter report concludes by identifying alternative strategies the County may
want to consider in addressing rate affordability for low-income customers.
Since 1987, the County has owned and operated a wastewater collection system for a small utility
serving approximately 200 customers in Efland, North Carolina (the "Efland System'. Wastewater
collected in the Efland System is conveyed to the Town of Hillsborough, NC ("Town' for treatment
and disposal. The Efland System consists primarily of residential customers; however, service is
provided to a select number of commercial and industrial accounts. The Efland System generates
averages monthly wastewater flows of 1.5 million gallons, including inflow and infiltration ("I&I'~.
The County is in the regulatory review process of expanding the Efland System to provide the capacity
to serve add between 75 to 100 customers over then next few years.
Current Rate Structure
The Efland System's wastewater rates have remained unchanged since they were first established in
1987. All customers pay a monthly minimum charge of $15.20 which includes the first 3,000 gallons
based on metered water usage. Customers using above 3,000 gallons per month are then assessed a
volumetric rate of $4.50 per 1,000 gallons of water usage. The table on the following page presents the
monthly sewer bills for customers with water usage ranging from 0 to 8,000 gallons of water per
month.
Mr. Kevin Lindley September 24, 2008
Orange County page 2
Monthly Bills Under Current Efland Svstr em Rates
Monthly Metered Water Usage Interval Monthly Sewer Bill
0 to 3 legal (minimum charge) $15.20
3 to 4 legal $19.70
4 to 5 legal $24.20
5 to 6 legal $28.70
6 to 7 legal $33.20
7 to 8 legal $37.70
Based on the current wastewater rate structure and the typical water usage by the customers of the
Efland System, the County collected approximately $62,900 in sewer charge revenues for fiscal year
("FY's 2007. Although the customers of the Efland System are assessed sewer charges based on billed
water usage, the County is assessed a $10.35 wholesale sewer charge for every 1,000 gallons of metered
sewer discharged from the Efland System to Hillsborough for treatment. The Town meters the sewer
discharge through a sonic flow meter located approximately half a mile from the point of discharge
into the Town's system.
Based on the wholesale sewer charge and the metered discharges, which include substantial amounts
(30%) of I&I during wet weather periods, the annual wholesale wastewater charges exceed the annual
revenues collected from the Efland System customer base. In FY 2007, the Hillsborough treatment
costs were approximately $140,000 compared to the $62,900 in revenues collected from customers of
the Efland System. Ultimately, the current wastewater rate structure has required the County to
provide an annual financial subsidy ranging from $80,000 in FY 2005, to $106,800 in FY 2007.
Revenue Requirements Forecast and Revenue Sufficiency
Based on the estimated operating expenses and capital costs for the Efland System, the current
wastewater rates would need to be adjusted on January 1 to provide $142,000, or an additional 300% in
sewer charge revenues to achieve full revenue sufficienry for FY 2009 and eliminate the current
subsidy provided by the County. This estimated increase in sewer charge revenues was determined
based on our forecast of annual revenue requirements and billed water usage for the Efland System.
Due to substantial amounts of I&I during wet weather periods, the actual level of revenues required to
achieve revenue sufficienry can be significantly influenced by weather conditions and is therefore
uncertain.
As part of the rate study, RFC developed afifteen-year forecast of annual revenue requirements for the
Efland System. The forecast was based on a review and understanding of the historical revenue
requirements, escalation of operating and maintenance ("O&M'~ expenses budgeted for FY 2008, and
projected wholesale sewer costs based on anticipated annual discharges to the Town of Hillsborough
for treatment. The annual O&M expenses include equipment maintenance, telephone, utilities,
operations, and an allocation of Orange-Alamance expenses. The FY 2008 budgeted costs for these
line items are escalated annual by 3.0% to account for inflation and salary adjustments. The
Hillsborough treatment costs are forecast based on anticipated increases in metered sewer discharges
and the $10.35 per 1,000 gallons rate.
Mr. Kevin Lindley
Orange County
September 24, 2008
Pie 3 O
Additionally, annual capital costs were estimated based on planned capital project information provided
by Orange County which includes rehabilitations to three pump stations, a manhole seepage collar
program, and the $1.7 million expansion to the system to allow additional 75 to 100 customer
connections. For the purposes of this rate study, it is assumed the $1.7 million will be funded by a ten-
year loan with a 3.0% annual rate of interest. However, the actual method of funding the system
expansion and other capital costs may differ based on financing decisions of the County.
The table below presents the forecast of annual revenue requirements of the Efland System during the
first five years (FY 2008 through FY 2012) of the fi$een year forecast period. In addition, the table
demonstrates the annual revenue deficit or required subsidy from the County under the current
wastewater rates for the Efland System.
Revenue Requirements and Revenue Suffidency
Fiscal Year Endin June, 30
Revenue Sut~ciencv 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Revenue Requirements
O&M Expensed $60,831 $62,656 $77,905 $80,243 $82,650
Hillsborough Treatment Costs 144,031 144,031 154,608 189,867 196,918
Annual Capital ProjectsZ 1,200 0 35,000 220,000 0
Annual Debt Service; 0 0 0 51,000 213,889
Total $206,061 $206,686 $267,513 $541,109 • $493,457
Revenues
User Charges 63,500 63,468 68,129 83,666 86,773
Other Revenues° 1,500 1,545 1,591 1,639 1,688
Total $65,000 $65,013 $69,721 $85,305 $88,462
Surplus/Deficit (141,061) (141,673) (197,793) (455,804) (404,995)
' O&M includes all equipment, utilities, and other costs associated with the County's operating expenses.
z Annual capital projects include those capital projects not funded through debt financing.
s Represents debt service on the ten-year loan to finance the $1.7 million for expanding the Efland System
a Other revenues include all non user charge revenues, such as interest income etc.
Based on the forecast of revenue requirements and the anticipated annual revenue defidt, the County
would need to increase the current wastewater rates by approximately 300% to generate an additional
$142,000 in wastewater charge revenues and achieve financial sufficienry in FY 2009. This level of rate
increase represents a substantial impact on the customers of the Efland System and the anticipated
future capital improvements would require subsequent, although less substantial rate increases.t
~ Since the rate increases would on effect the final six months of the fiscal year, the rate increase is more significant than
would be required if the rate increases would have occurred on July 1, 2008.
Mr. Kevin Lindley
Orange County
September 24, 2008
page 4 ~Q
V
Rate Recommendations
Due to the small customer base and the large segment of the customer base that would qualify as low
income, the County should consider several alternatives to mitigate the substantial impact on
customers of achieving full revenue sufficiency. These alternatives should include the following.
1. Rate structure modifications that will provide rate relief to low water use customers while
providing greater consistency with customer equity and cost of service principles;
2. A phased program of rate adjustments designed to avoid rate shock by moving toward
revenue sufficienry during the forecast period; and
3. Alternative strategies to address rate affordability for low income customers.
Rate Structure Modifications
The current monthly minimum charge of $15.20 requires customers with monthly water usage of 3,000
gallons or less to pay for a level of sewer flows they do not discharge into the Efland System. In
general, such monthly minimum charges with minimum allowances were originally designed to ensure a
certain level predictable or fixed revenues. Although these monthly minimum charges are still used by
many utilities, the national trend is moving toward a more equitable and cost justified type of fixed
charge set to recover a level of fixed costs that should be recovered regardless of the level of water
usage or wastewater discharged.
Since the current monthly minimum charge of $15.20 is greater than the volumetric rate of $4.50 per
1,000 gallons of water usage applied to a customer using the minimum allowance of 3,000 gallons per
month (3 x $4.50 = $13.50), the current rate structure includes an "implied base charge" of $1.70. Any
customer with no metered water usage during a month is essentially paying for 3,000 gallons, or $13.50
for water usage the customer is not discharging back into the Efland System. As such, the current rate
structure is inequitable to customers with less than 3,000 gallons of metered water use per month.
These low use customers are often low or fixed income families focused on limiting their monthly
utility expenses.
Based on water billing data from Apri12007 through February 2008 provided by Orange and Alamance
Counties, approximately 92 customers, or 45% of the Efland System fell within the 3,000 gallon
minimum water usage interval. With an average monthly metered water use by those 92 customers of
1,273 gallons, a substantial portion of the Efland System customers are paying for services they do not
receive. To improve customer equity, cost of service, and affordability for low income customers, we
recommend implementing a base charge and eliminating the minimum usage allowance. Since a good
portion of the current 97 customers with water usage under the 3,000 gallon minimum allowance use
less than 3,000 gallons, using the implied $1.70 base charge would result in loss of revenues for the
County. As such, we recommend implementing a "revenue neutral" base charge of $5.20 be assessed
to all customers regardless of water use. Based on water billing data, this revenue neutral base charge
and the current $4.50 volumetric charge per 1,000 gallons assessed for all water usage would provide
the same estimated wastewater charge revenues in FY 2008 as the current rate structure.
Alternative Rate Program Scenarios
Since the Efland System has a small customer base from which to recover costs and its wastewater
rates have not increased since 1987, significant rate adjustments are required to fully eliminate the
current and anticipated future revenue deficits. To demonstrate the magnitude of the potential
Mr. Kevin Lindley September 24, 2008
Orange County page 5
financial impacts of the customers of the Efland system, as well as the potential impact on the County,
we developed three alternative rate scenarios. These rate scenarios include the following.
1. Maintaining the current rates would require the County to provide an FY 2009 subsidy of
$142,000 which represents the anticipated revenue deficit. Should the current rates continue
to be maintained, the County would be faced with continued and increasing rate subsidies
under the anticipated operating costs and capital improvement plan.
2. Adjusting the rates to make up the $40,000 in operating costs eliminated from the Efland
wastewater system operating budget would require a January 1 rate increase of 150%. Under
this scenario, the County would still incur a FY 2009 rate subsidy of approximately $100,000
with continued and increasing rate subsidies under the anticipated operating costs and capital
improvement plan.
3. Adjusting the rate to achieve financial sufficienry in FY 2009 would require a January 1 rate
increase of 300%. Under this scenario, the rates should be sufficient to address anticipated
operating costs and capital improvements for FY 2010 as the rates would set higher than
would be required had rate increases been implemented on July 1. Less substantial rate
increases would be needed in later years to maintain revenue sufficienry thereafter.
As opposed to these scenarios, the County may prefer to incorporate a phased approach in
implementing a program of annual rate adjustments to move closer to financial sufficienry. This type
of phased approach will help to avoid customer "rate shock" that often results after a substantial rate
adjustment occurs after years of minimal or no rate increases. Rate shock is a situation where the public
is outraged when major rate increases aze implemented seemingly out of nowhere.
To avoid this, RFC recommends the County implement a program of annual rate adjustments beginning with
an initial 150% increase in FY 2009 followed by gradually more substantial increases in the following years.
The County should develop bill inserts to notify customers of the planned rate program and educate them
about the current deficits and future capital needs that aze driving the need for the rate adjustments. This will
help to avoid rate shock and reduce the potential for customers who feel utility bills aze burdensome.
Alternative Strategies to Address Rate Affordability
Although eliminating the minimum usage charge will help to improve customer equity and affordability
for low income customers, the County should also consider alternative strategies to further address rate
affordability for the low income customers of the Efland System. Although developing effective
affordability strategies and policies can be a challenging exercise, the benefits can be substantial. Not
only will affordable utility service benefit the Efland System's general economic and social health, but
properly structured assistance programs can yield tangible returns in terms of cost management, revenue
stability, and public opinion. If customers aze faced with utility bills that they find burdensome, the result is
likely to be excessive account delinquencies, customer complaints, and utility theft.
The County may want to consider a few alternative strategies for Efland System customers that qualify
under some financial hardship criteria the County may wish to establish. These criteria will be
discussed later and may be linked to qualification to other governmental low income programs to
minimise administrative costs to the County.
The affordability alternatives the County may wish to consider include:
Mr. Kevin Lindley
Orange County
September 24, 2008
page 6
IU
• Lifeline Rates: Special rates often set below the utility's actual cost of service and
therefore require offsetting contributions from other rate payers or through a subsidy
provided by the County. The most beneficial lifeline rates for the Efland System may be
to reduce or eliminate the base charge component of the modified rate structure. This
strategy would give the lifeline customer the added benefit of more control over the
amount of their bill by controlling water usage.
• Discount Plans: Plans that reduce the bills of low-income customers by either a fixed
amount or a percentage. Again, these plans have the most impact when the discount is
applied to base charges rather than the volumetric charge.
• Leak Repair Programs: Programs that provide utility vouchers to have plumbers visit
qualified low-income housing customers to identify and repair leaks. Low-income housing
generally has a disproportionately high inddence of water loss through leakage which
results in higher levels of water usage. Since this type of program would benefit the low-
income customers by reducing both their water and sewer bills, and have a positive impact
on water conservation efforts, the County may want to fund this as a joint program with
the water providers.
Since two of these alternatives focus on the eliminating or discounting a portion of the base charge, the
amount of affordability assistance could be enhanced by increasing the base charge component of the
rate structure to recover more from the higher income customers through this component of the bill.
To ensure these programs are effective in targeting the appropriate customers, the County will need to
develop assistance qualification criteria. Criteria commonly used to determine assistance eligibility
include the following.
• Income: This is determined as income commonly set between 1.25 and 2.0 times the
poverty level, adjusted by the number of members in the household Households
exceeding an income level spedfied by the County would be ineligible for assistance.
• EPA Income Indicator. This is a residential indicator that measures the monthly average
residential bill as a percentage of Median Household Income ("MHI'~ for the entire
system. The resulting indicator percentage is used to yield an estimated residential burden
of Low (< 1.0%), Mid-range (1% to 2%) and High (> 2%).
• Employment: Eligibility under this criterion is proven through the presentation of
dismissal notices, pink slips, or proof of successful enrollment in government
unemployment programs.
• Eligibility for other aid programs: Under this criterion, eligibility for utility billing
assistance is based upon successful enrollment in assistance programs offered by other
institutions. This criterion has the benefit of requiring minimal administrative costs
because the utility may be able to simply check applicant's names against enrollment
databases maintained by other programs. The disadvantage to this approach is that the
utility has no control over enrollment criteria.
• Geographic designation: Using customer addresses as eligibility criteria may be
appropriate if the utility can document specific poverty areas within the service area.
Mr. Kevin Lindley September 24, 2008
Orange County page 7
~~
Before using this criterion, however, policymakers should clarify the basis of the decision
for including one area while excluding others.
We have enjoyed the opportunity to provide this assistance to Orange County and wish to
acknowledge the significant efforts contributed by you and your staff in providing timely and accurate
input during the project.
If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (704) 373-
1199.
Sincerely yours,
RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Frank Davis
Manager
MEMORANDUM
TO: Laura Blackmon, County Manager
COPIES: Willie Best, Asst. County Manager
Pam Jones, Purchasing & Central Services Director
Donna Coffey, Budget Director
Kevin Lindley, PE, Engineering Associate
FROM: Paul Thames, PE, County Engineer
DATE: September 5, 2008
SUBJECT: Efland Sewer Rate Study
As per Asst. Manager Willie Best's request, the following information related to the Raftelis
study for setting Efland sewer rates is provided for your information and to assist you and
the BOCC in making both budget decisions and decisions as to how to set Efland sewer
rates so that the County`s contribution to the Efland sewer fund can range from none at all
to as much or more than the current contribution.
The Raftelis study was ultimately designed to consist of three parts: 1) a model in the form
of a set of interrelated spreadsheets that allow one to input a number of factors,
assumptions and projections related to number of customers, operating costs,
maintenance costs, NPDES permit compliance costs, capital improvement costs,
treatment costs, etc. and a sewer rate (per thousand gallons) to derive a shortfall in
operating and CIP costs that would be covered by a County contribution to the fund: 2) a
written report outlining the basis of the model, its operation or manipulation, and its built-in
assumptions (base rate, etc.); and 3) a verbal report and demonstration of the model's
functionality. The study will not make a recommendation as to an actual sewer use rate.
The ultimate product of the model is, however, a sewer use rate based on the inputs
outlined above and the amount of funds, if any, that the BOCC determines to provide to
continue directly subsidizing the costs of operating and maintaining the system.
The BOCC has indicated that it wants to develop a strategy that minimizes the impact of
increasing sewer rates on low income households. Unfortunately, it is not legally possible
to adopt a sewer rate structure that addresses this goal directly. While it may be possible
to set rates that group users by category, those categories must be based on
characteristics such as quantity of sewer use, residential or non-residential commercial/
institutional/industrial, etc. The sewer use rate must be the same for each customer in
each category that is created. However, as most low income and single occupant
households tend to be among the lower water/sewer consumers, eliminating the base rate
used in the current rate structure (minimum charge for 3000 gallons per month of sewer
use) should provide some relief from an elevated sewer use rate/cost per thousand gallons
to low use households (those that use significantly less that 3000 gallons per month).
Another option to provide relief for low wealth households is for the BOCC to set aside
assistance funds (based on some fixed criteria such as HUD's low/moderate income ~`' ,~
categories) in a special account controlled by one of the County's social service
departments that are experienced in identifying/qualifying low wealth households,
evaluating the amount of assistance required and managing funds that are to be used in
this manner. Those funds would then be paid into the Efland sewer enterprise fund on
behalf of the eligible rate payers should the BOCC determine that the system should
actually operate as an enterprise.
As of June 2008, Kevin Lindley and I had manipulated the model with our assumptions and
projections relative to costs, continued County subsidies to the sewer operating costs,
number of customers, etc. Based on the FY 2007-08 operations, the costs of operating
the system came out to be approximately $180,000, one-third of which was derived from
sewer use rates and two-thirds came from a direct subsidy from the County's General
Fund. These costs contained no funding for ongoing capital improvements (replacing
equipment) and no funding earmarked to create and maintain a fund balance. For the
purposes of using the Raftelis model to generate example sewer rates, we assumed that
annual contributions to the system's CIP fund were approximately $45,000, increasing at a
rate of 4% per year thereafter and that an annual fund balance of 15% was created and
maintained. Based on fiscal year 2007-08 income and costs, the total funding for the
sewer system would have been approximately $259,000 with the inclusion of CIP funding
and fund balance. The total billing in FY 2007-08 was for 11,000,000 gallons of sewer
use. Assuming that there was no direct General Fund subsidy for the system, the cost per
1000 gallons per month came out to be approximately $23.50 for the first year. This figure
represents in excess of a five-fold increase in the existing rate of $4.50 per 1000 gallons.
Should the BOCC elect to continue directly subsidizing the system at a rate of $120,000
per year, the sewer rate would decrease to approximately $12.60 per thousand gallons for
the first year. If the BOCC had determined to directly subsidize the system at a rate of
$60,000 per year, the cost of 1000 gallons of use would come out to be approximately
$18.00 per thousand gallons for the first year. None of these figures include costs
associated with subsidizing individual rate payer households.
Currently, approximately 45% of the Efland sewer customers use 3000 gallons of sewer
per month or less (42 households use 1000 gallons per month or less, 19 use between
1000 and 2000 gallons per month, and 31 use between 2000 and 3000 gallons per
month). The Efland Cheeks Elementary School averages approximately 80,000 gallons of
sewer per month and Hancor generally use in excess of 100,000 gallons per month. At
this point in time, we have not broken down the locations of those customers using less
that 3000 gallons of sewer per month. Accordingly, we are unable to estimate (by a
windshield evaluation of housing conditions) at this time the socio-economic status of
those customers would see only a slight increase in their sewer bills on the basis of low to
very low sewer use. Determining how many households will qualify for some level of rate
assistance will have to be accomplished by a house to house income and occupancy
survey.
Assuming that the BOCC would want have an opportunity to evaluate and deliberate on
how the Raftelis model works and how various decisions on model imputs (including the
amount of direct subsidy) would effect rates prior to holding a public hearing on increasing
the sewer rates, we assume that rate increases could not be set prior to the end of this
year at the earliest. It is our belief that the entire issue of setting rates (by means of
working through sample rates with the Raftelis model) and determining how any rate
subsidy will be calculated, funded, administered, etc., will require the BOCC to set aside at
least an hour and possibly more to discuss the issue in a less structured environment such
as a work session. Unfortunately, we have been advised that currently no work session
opportunity exists where this issue could be discussed prior to the end of this calendar
year.
Given this situation, it is unlikely that the BOCC will be able to deliberate on this issue, hold
a public hearing and give guidance to the staff on rate increase/direct subsidy policy before
March or April 2009. This timetable would give us some two or three months to impose
rates sufficient to recover the costs that the BOCC determined (by decreasing the subsidy)
in fihis year's budget process should be recovered. That, in turn, will result in a slight
increase in the rates cited above, assuming that CIP and fund balance funding is included
in the rates. However, once all of the cost and funding issues have been resolved, we can
easily generate annual rate recommendations based on increased sewer treatment and
operating costs as well as increases in the customer base with the attendant increase
sewer flows and tap on fees.
If I may provide additional information or clarification of this information at this time, please
advise.
Adopted November 19, 1985
Amended March 1, 1988 ~5
Amended November 15, 1988
NORTH CAROLINA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RULES
AND REGULATIONS FOR THE
OPERATION OF A SEWER COLLECTION
TREATMENT SYSTEtd TO SERVE THE
ORANGE COUNTY EFLAND AREA OF ORANGE COUNTY
Be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of
Orange County that the following rules and regulations
(hereinafter called the Rules) shall govern the operation of
the Orange County Sewer Collection and Treatment System
serving the Efland area of Orange County [hereinafter called
the System].
I. CLASSIFICATION OF SERVICE (Reserved. There
are presently no separate classifications of sewer service.)
II. WASTEWATER TREATMENT LIMITATIONS
Orange County has contracted with the Town of
Hillsborough which contract provides that the Town will treat
wastewater generated by the System subject to the following
conditions contained in the agreement between the County and
Town:
No customer shall be allowed to connect to the
County system unless and until such customer's
proposed discharge has been found acceptable by
both the Town and County. Approval shall be
predicated on (1) the quality of the effluent of
the potential user being compatible with the Town's
NPDES discharge permit, (2) compliance with the
Town's ordinance, rules and regulations concerning
1
im
pretreatment of industrial wastewater, and (3) all
County (subdivision, zoning, erosion, building,
etc.) and State (DOT, etc.) permits having been
properly granted. Under no circumstances will the
County permit the discharge of septic sewage in its
system.
III. RATE SCHEDULE AND AVAILABILITY FEES
A. Rate Schedule - Based upon monthly water
consumption: See Attachment A.
B. Availability Fees:
Each person, firm, or corporation
connecting to the system [hereinafter user or users] other
than those initially connected from among those initially
applying for connection, shall pay a $600.00 per residential
equivalent availability fee to the County and a $400.00
availability fee to the Town of Hillsborough. Availability
fees may change from time to time pursuant to duly enacted
resolutions of the County and the Town.
Those users initially connecting, from those initially
applying for connection, shall be exempt from the
availability fee. The initial application period expired
February 4, 1985. The initial connection deadline will be
established by resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners.
C. Acreage Fee [Reserved].
2
17
D. Stub-out Service Line Fee [Reserved].
IV. APPLICATION FOR SERVICE
Persons seeking service may make application
in person at the office of the Orange County Planning
Department. The application requirements are as follows:
1. A deposit as provided in Article V of
these rules must accompany the application and be paid at the
Orange County Planning Department or such other place as is
Amended designated by Orange County from time to time. A Sewer Use
3/1/88
and Easement and Agreement. must be on file, signed by the
property owner(s)/users.
~2. The conditions set forth in Article IX of
these rules must be satisfied in the case of an application
for service to undeveloped land.
3. Any former user may again become a user
by fulfilling the application requirements set forth in this
article and by paying any applicable availability or other
fees. In addition, any such former user applying again to be
a user must pay any outstanding account plus interest thereon
at the legal rate as it is established in North Carolina
General Statutes Section 24-1, its successor, and as the same
is amended from time to time, compounded annually. Any
person who has actually used and benefited from sewer service
which has been supplied to premises owned or directly
occupied or used by-that person, for which service there is
an outstanding. indebtedness remaining due the County, may
3
i8
become a user by completing the application requirements in
this article, by paying any availability fee or other
applicable fee and by paying the outstanding indebtedness for
the service which was supplied to the premises owned or
directly occupied or used by such person.
V. DEPOSIT
A. A minimum cash deposit is required of all
Amended users It shall be Thirty Dollars ($30.00). The deposit
11/15/88
shall be paid either in full at the time an application for
service is made or in a maximum of three equal consecutive
monthly installments, the first of which must be paid when an
application for service is made. ~ eq~--~e-~#-~e--a~~-r~c}s~
~'e~ ee~ed-se~ve~-~a-i~~-~e~-~~ae-~aaa~~e-a€- ee~~~ee-~ase~l-uge~-~~a
a~e~r~ge--g~efre~rt -wa~e~ -~s'age-~ ~~ed~e~.~ed--~~e~--~rs~a~c.~e--~~s-
~e~e~~ed-e~-a~~-ese~e~- Deposits will not draw interest.
Amended B. A separate deposit will be required for
3/1/88
each connection.
C. Each deposit may be redeemed by the user
upon disconnection from the system and upon payment in full
of all charges for service.
VI. INITIAL OR MINIMUM CHARGE
A. There will be a separate account
established for each sewer connection to the system. Each
such account will be in the name of the user. The minimum
monthly charge as provided in the rate schedule will be made
4
Iq
for each account for any monthly usage up to the minimum
3,000 gallons.
B. In those cases where the connection is to
property which receives its water by well, the minimum
monthly charge will be that established in the rate schedule
unless water consumption exceeds the minimum contained in the
rate schedule. The County reserves the right to meter the
well of any user to determine that user's water usage.
VII. COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY
A. The County will run a service line from
its collection line to the property line, except as provided
in Article IX, relating to extensions of the system.
Amended B. All plumbing installed,by the user for
3/1/88
connection to 'the system will be installed according to the
North Carolina State Plumbing Code and will be permitted,
inspected and approved by Orange County.
C. The County is not liable for damage of
any kind resulting from sewage or its collection from the
user's premises, unless such damage results directly from
negligence on the part of the County. The County is not
responsible for any damage done or resulting from any defect
or operation failure in the plumbing installed by the user,
or in any fixtures or appliances on the user's premises. The
County is not responsible for negligence of third persons in
the installation or operation of the System. The County is
5
ao
not responsible for damage caused by forces beyond its
control or for the interruption of service caused by forces
beyond its control.
D. Except in the case of an emergency, the
user will be notified in advance. of any anticipated
interruption of service. In the case of an emergency the
user will be notified as soon thereafter as possible of the
interruption of service'.
VIII. USER'S RESPONSIBILITY
A. The user is responsible for payment of
all monthly service charges incurred in connection with sewer
Amended
3/1/88 service. The owner of the premises to which services are
delivered is responsible for all charges as provided for in
the Sewer Easement and Agreement. If a delinquent user is
not the owner of the premises to which services are
delivered, the payment of the delinquent account will not be
required before providing services to the premises at the
request of~a new and different tenant or occupant of the
premises except as provided in Article IV.3. of the Rules.
B. The user is responsible for installing
all plumbing and apparatus necessary to connect to the
County's service line and for connecting all plumbing and
apparatus to the County's service line. Provided, however,
Amended no such connection shall be made without a permit to do so
3/1/88
issued by the County and upon such terms and conditions as
the permit prescribes.
6
a~
C. All plumbing and apparatus installed by
the user will be installed and maintained at the user's
expense in accordance with the County's rules and regulations
and any other State or local requirements.
D. The user will exercise reasonable care
and will be responsible for the exercise of reasonable care
by anyone on the user's premises with the user's permission
over any portion of the County system located on the user's
premises. Authorized County representatives will be
permitted by the user to access the user's property in~order
to inspect, as needed, portions of the County's system
located on the premises of the user.
E. The user will be responsible for the cost
of necessary repairs or replacement of lost or damaged
property of the County which is part of the System or used in
the operation and maintenance of the System which repair or
replacement is caused by or results from the negligence or
wrongful act of the user, the user's agents or employees.
Likewise any damage or injury to persons or property which
occurs on the premises of the user and which is caused by or
results from the negligence or wrongful act of the user will
be the sole responsibility of the user.
F. The amount of any such loss or damage or
the cost of repairs or replacements will be, when applicable,
added as a charge to the user's account which charge will be
7
as
added in full to the user's next statement unless other
arrangements are made which are satisfactory to the County.
IX. EXTENSIONS OF THE SYSTEM
System extensions to serve undeveloped land
may occur, but only as follows:
A. All such extensions must be consistent
with the overall System plan as adopted from time to time by
Orange County. All such extensions must be approved by the
County Engineer.
B. Extension of the System to new
developments can only be approved by the County Engineer if
Amended all zoning, subdivision, land use plan and comprehensive plan
3/1/88
regulations of Orange County or the Town of Hillsborough, if
applicable, are met. With respect to subdivisions, the
subdivision preliminary plat must be approved by the County
or the Town, if applicable,. which preliminary plat shall
include approved preliminary plans for the System extension.
Planned development plans which include System extensions
must include approved preliminary plans for the System
extension.
C. All System extensions must be consistent
with Goal 9.3 of the Orange County Land Use Plan which goal
"prohibit[s] the establishment of public water and sewer
services in the areas designated water quality critical
areas, except to address emergency situations" and with any
8
a3
Amended Water and Sewer Policy of the County adopted as part of its
3/1/88 -
Comprehensive Plan.
D. All System extensions shall be installed
according to and in compliance with. approved plans.
E. Construction of System extensions will be
Amended inspected by Orange County at intervals determined by the
3/1/88
County. The person seeking System extension agrees to permit
access to the System and the System extension for inspection
purposes. User connections to the System will only be
permitted after the extension of the System is finally
approved in writing by Orange County.
F. Upon the completion of the System
extension the owner/developer will convey by deed or other
appropriate instrument all portions of the System extension,
including but not necessarily limited to right-of-way
easements, collection lines, service lines, stub-outs,
permits, pump stations and equipment, plumbing facilities and
hardware. All System extensions will be at no cost to Orange
County.
X. ACCESS TO PREMISES OF A USER
A. It will be necessary for the safe and
efficient operation of the System for duly authorized agents
of the County to have access at reasonable times to the
premises of the user for the purpose of installing, removing,
inspecting and otherwise maintaining portions of the System
and for the purpose of reading and testing meters and for any
9
a~
other purpose in connection with the installation, operation
and maintenance of the System. Each user and property owner
upon whose property any portion of the system or connections
to it is located recognizes this need. and by making
application for sewer services grants authority to authorized
agents of the County for this purpose.
B. The Sewer Easement and Agreement includes
a grant to the County of an easement for the purposes
described in that agreement. Each user and owner by making
application for sewer services acknowledges the easement and
the rights described in that easement.
XI. CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY
The owner of premises which is served by the
Amended System is responsible for notifying the County or its duly
3/1/88
authorized agent of any change in the occupancy of his/her
premises.- Any change in the use of the premises which is
connected to the System will be communicated to the County
and the Town of Hillsborough for prior approval as described
in Article II of these rules and regulations.
XII. METER READING - BILLING - COLLECTING
A. Orange County and, if applicable, its
billing and collecting agent's records will be the basis for
all charges for service. All users are encouraged to
Amended maintain receipts and other payment information and~to bring
3/1/88
any discrepancies in the user's records and the County's
records to the attention of the billing and collecting agent
20
a5
of the County immediately so that corrections, if any, can be
made. The specific procedures to be followed in the event a
user believes there has been a billing error are described in
Article %III.
B. Meters will be read and bills rendered in
accordance with the policies established by the County and
any agency with which the County may contract. The County
reserves the right to vary the dates or length of time
covered by any statement, temporarily or permanently, if
necessary for the efficient operation of-the System.
C. Statements for sewer service will be
computed on the. basis of the published rate schedule then in
effect.
D. Charges for sewer service commence when
connection to the System is complete as prescribed and
described in the Sewer Easement and Agreement.
E. Each sewer connection will be separately
metered and will be maintained as a separate account.
F. t4onthly statements will be mailed on or
about the date the user's water meter is read, if there is a
meter, or the same date each month as determined by the
County's billing and collecting agent where there is no water
meter. Payment is due when the statement for sewer service
Amended is received and delinquent 20 days after the water meter
3/1/88
reading date. If payment is not made within 20 days after
the water meter reading date, sewer and water service will be
11
. a~
discontinued. Statements will be sent to the address of the
user as it appears on the application for service made by the
user. It is the user's responsibility to immediately notify
Orange County and its billing and collection agent of any
change in this address. The user's failure to receive any
statement or notice when it is addressed to the user at the
address contained in the application or a new address
provided to the County and its billing and collection agent
shall not be a basis for forgiving delinquent payment and
shall not be a basis for forgiving discontinuation of
service.
XII. DISCONTINUATION OF SERVICE
A. When service is discontinued, the deposit
Amended made by the user will be applied toward settlement of any
3/1/88
unpaid account. Any balance will be refunded to the user.
If the deposit is not sufficient to cover the outstanding
account balance, the County and its billing and collection.
agent may proceed to collect the balance in the manner
provided in the Sewer Easement and Agreement or in any other
manner provided by law for the collection of a debt.
B. The County, in addition to prosecution as
provided by law, may discontinue and permanently refuse
service to any user or property owner who tampers with a
meter or sewer connection which sewer connection has been
approved by the County. Any sewer connection not approved by
the County may be disconnected by the County and service
12
a~
refused to those participating in the unauthorized connection
or its use.
XIII. COMPLAINTS - ADJUSTMENTS
A. If a user believes any statement of
charges to be in error, the user may present a claim in
Amended
3/1/88 person to the billing and collection agent of the County
before the statement becomes delinquent. Any such claim made
after the statement has become delinquent will not be
effective in preventing discontinuation of service as
provided in these rules. and regulations. The user may pay
such statement under protest and the payment will not
prejudice the claim in case an error is found. Adjustment
will thereafter be made for any such error.
B. Request for special meter readings or
tests will be governed by the rules and regulations
established for that purpose by Orange County and its agents.
XIV. RETURN CHECK FEE
Each check for payment is accepted subject to
collection. The normal policies of the County's billing and
Amended collection agent regarding returned checks shall be followed.
3/1/88
All fees collected, provided they do not exceed those
permitted by law, shall be the property of the County's
billing and collection agent.
XV. ABRIDGEMENT OR MODIFICATION OF RULES
A. No promise, agreement or representation
of any employee of Orange County will be binding upon the
13
ae
County unless it is agreed upon in writing, signed and
accepted by the duly authorized officers of the County which
authorization must~be accomplished by resolution of the Board
of County Commissioners.
B. No modification of rates or any of these
rules and regulations may be made by any agent of the County.
Any modification of rates and these rules and regulations
will be accomplished by resolution of the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County.
XVI. ADOPTION OF RULES
Until further resolution of the Orange County
Board of Commissioners, the rules and regulations set out
above are adopted as of the date below and become effective
on and after November 19 , 1985.
Upon motion made by Commissioner Moses Carey ,
seconded by Commissioner Shirley Marshall the foregoing
resolution was adopted by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners this the 19th day of November , 1985.
Amended by resolution of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners on the 1st day of March , 1988.
Amended by resolution of the Oran ge County Board of
Commissioners on the 15th day of November, 1988.
14
as
ATTACHMENT A
First 3,000 gals. @ $15.20 (minimum charge)
Each additional 1,000 gals. (or any portion
thereof) @ _/1000 gals.
This rate schedule is, subject to change based upon up-to-date
projections of the actual cost of operations and actual cost
of operations.
15
30
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
ADDENDUM TO MARCH 24, 1988 SEWER BILLING AND
COLLECTING AGREEMENT
THIS ADDENDUM to the March 24, 1988 Sewer Billing and Col-
lecting Agreement between ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA,
hereinafter referred to as County, and ORANGE-ALAbiANCE WATER
SYSTEM, INC., hereinafter referred to as Contractor, entered into
this 15th day of November, 1988:
WITNESSETH:
Paragraph 6 of the March 24th Agreement is deleted in its
entirety and replaced by the following:
6. The Contractor shall collect a deposit for
each account established for the System. Accounts
shall be established by the Contractor upon receipt of
a copy of an approved application for service from. the
County and the receipt of the required deposit from the
customer. The amount of the deposit shall be equal to
twice the minimum charge for sewer service according to
the rate schedule in effect at the time application for
service is made. The deposit shall be paid either in
full at the time an application for service is made or
in a maximum of three equal consecutive monthly
installments, the first of which must be paid when an
application for service is made. The deposit shall be
kept by the Contractor for the County and applied
1
~i
toward settlement of the account upon disconnection
from the System. Any balance of the deposit after
settlement of the account shall be refunded to the
customer by the Contractor.
WITNESS our hands and seals on the date first above written.
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
By:
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Orange County Board of
_ Commissioners _
ATTEST:
(OFFICIAL SEAL)
Beverly Blythe
Clerk to the Board of
Commissioners of Orange County
ORANGE-ALAMANCE WATER SYSTEM, INC.
By:
Turner Forrest
President of the Board of
Directors
2