McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sunday, May 5, 2024 7:54 PM
Gordo, Victor; Madison, Steve; Hampton, Tyron; Williams, Felicia; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Lyon, Jason
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Item 20. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: TO APPROVE SEWER USE FEE RATE STRUCTURE AND RATE ADJUSTMENTS (Public Works Dept.)
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn whyMsis:imp6rtan:t CAUTION: This email was deliyered from the Internet. Dp not Click links or open attachments tjnless you taoiv the content is safe. Report phishysiBg the Phjsh Alert Button, For mpr^^^^ OolTportal.
Raftelis, Public Works' consultant for the Rate Study, recommended the third of four scenarios, and a "rate smoothing option". The recommended scenario 3 and smoothing option propose minor timing changes but a comparison of total dollars collected for each average monthly bill 2024-2029 shows minimal change for the ratepayer. This is repackaging rather than actual revision.
Comparison of "Revised Rate" and "Smoothed Option" to Rate Increase Notice Rate Increase NoticeCurrentFY 2025FV 2026FV 2027FY 2028Fy 2029Total Total
Difference
from
Notice
AvgSFRBitlf*)
Avg Commercial Bill
$4.55
$35.51
$11.37
$65.40
$13.19
$75.86
$13.71 | $14.26
$78.90 | $82.05
$14.83 | $71.91
$85.34 | $423.06
n/a
n/a
Revised Rate per Att B
Avg SFR Bill (*)$4.55 | $11.05 | $12.81$13.33 | $13.86$14.41 | $70.01-$1.90 Avg Commercial Bill
Smoothed per AttE
$35.51 | $63.48 | $73.64$76.58 | $79.64$82.83 | $411.68-$11.38 AvgSFRBill(*)
(*) Avg SFR Bill Implied Use(hcf)
$4.55
13.0 $8.13 | $11.24
8.08.1 $13.27 | $14.06
8.08.0 $14.62 | $65.87
8.0 -$6.04
As is apparent from the total oi Average SFR and Commercial Bills in the table above, there is very little actual change for the ratepayer. Total differences from the Rate Increase Notice for FY 2024-2029 are negligible when spread over 5 years. Note also that PW's current implied sewer use is 13 hcf while Fy 2025-29 assume a large reduction to 8 hcf/month. The sewer rate increase would be even more dramatic if 8 hcf per month were also assumed for the current year.
The Water/Sewer/Refuse Bill Estimator posted on the City website provides a tool for ratepayers to compare the bi-monthly cost of three simultaneous proposed utility rate increases effective July 1,2024. The calculator uses "proposed" rates for Water, Sewer and Refuse as reflected in the rate increase notices. My PROPOSED July 1, Single Family sewer rate increase would be 340%. My REVISED increase per Attachment B would be slightly better at 329%. No rate information is provided for the "smoothing" option in Attachment E which only discusses the effect on sewer department revenues.
Three Separate Pasadena utilities are seeking major rate increases effective July 1. While rate adjustments are needed, three different consultants for Water, Sewer and Refuse, each devised rates for the maximum benefit of their respective clients. The combined effect on ratepayers for three simultaneous rate increases was ignored. The dramatic proposed rate increases July 1 are only the start; similar increases are proposed annually 1 5/6/2024
Item 20
for 5 years at compounding rates. Which utility is first in line? Which utility is more deserving? What is fair and reasonable for ratepayers who are also voters? Waiting until the last minute, "running out the clock" is no excuse for not proposing real adjustments to sewer rates that are more equitable for ratepayers.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON THE "REVISED" AND "SMOOTHED" RATE PROPOSALS. REQUIRE REAL ADJUSTMENTS, NOT JUST "REPACKAGING" OF THE SAME OLD ASSUMPTIONS.
Genette Foster
Council District 2
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Rose Malmberg
Monday, May 6, 2024 1 1:52 AM
Morales, Margo; PublicComment-AutoResponse
I oppose the proposed Sewer rate increases for 5/6/24 meeting - district 5 resident IMG_3248.heic; IMG_3249.heic; IMG_3250.heic
f
j Some people who received this message don't often get email fromearn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0010263" on the DolT portal.
Please provide the following to Jess Rivasand Mayor Gordo, Somehow there are other better alternatives than dumping all the proposed needs to rate payers. We have an increased sales tax. Revenue stream could come out of the General fund and the development fees can increase for sewer and storm drains. The increased use and need for more infrastructure like pumps can be passed on to the developers who are developing small properties into large complexes. It could be a specific line item due to the change in the property use.
Mayor Gordo spoke of the three buckets as it pertains to the proposed rate increases:
User fees
CIP
Reserves
Only the user fees must be passed on to the users or rate payers.
Capital Improvement Projects seem to be part of the infrastructure and as such could come from the General Fund, with proper planning rather than knee jerk/ emergency related problems.
Reserves were not a part of the equations in the past, so historically speaking, they don't need to be part of this now. In fact the citywebsite shows the City Mission as:, City Mission The City of Pasadena is dedicated to delivering exemplary municipal services responsive to our entire community and consistent with our history, culture and unique character.
The city should be responsive to our concerns and if the history of the city is not to keep money in reserves in the sewer/ storm drain department, then the city should follow its own mission. It does NOT matter what other cities do. Pasadena should follow its own city mission. These reserves are too great a burden for the rate payers.
P176 of Financial Statements 6/30/23 shows Sewer Fund has Cash $15.6 million, it's time to use some of the money to invest in future project. Just one resource, some general fund, development fees and limited rate increases.
15/6/2024
Item 20
P178 was the profit and loss from Last fiscal year 6/30/23. The fund had small profit $1.8 mil.
Please maintain our infrastructure properly so we minimize emergencies and the tremendous rate increases to the rate payers.
Rose Malmberg
Resident of districts
Sent from myiPhone
2 Kenebrew, Jerice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Elizabeth .
Monday, May 6, 2024 3:46 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Solid Waste Collection Fees
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] iarn why this is
^\] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0010263" on the DolT portal.
I am writing again, having attended two City Council meetings and finding out once there the discussion of waste collection fees had been rescheduled. I am a property owner in District 2 and am on a fixed income. Being on a strict budget and always looking for ways to conserve and save I believe the proposed rate increases are unreasonable. If the city is doubling down on increases because they haven't attended to planning on an incremental basis, the residents shouldn't be penalized as a result. As a physician once told me, "An emergency on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on mine." Please take your rate increases with what many residents are able to adjust to related to COLA.
Elizabeth Hammond
Sent from my iPhone
15/6/2024
Item 20