CORRESPONDENCE
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Terza West
Monday, February 26, 2024 11:40 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Proposed Water rate hike
Some people who received this message don't often get email from1. Learn 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. Learn more....
We were extremely shocked and dismissed about a possible 50% rate hike for water.
Ther rates are already too expensive not to mention there are mass layoffs in the city as well.
Please do not back this!
T West
1 McMiIlan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Terrie Johnson
Tuesday, April 9, 2024 12:52 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Increase in water rates
?i
BSome people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [/^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you taowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
You already charge an enormous amount of money for everyone's water usage. Even with all the rain we have had and not one person has watered their yard, front and back. The water bill we just got was ridiculously outrageous. The bill looked the same as when we were watering our grass and plants outside. People are struggling to make a living and to pay all of their bills . They have to cut back on grocery shopping for food and for gas in their cars. Budget, budget, budget!!! Think about how we all Live.
Even the seniors such as I are on a fixed income. Please don't raise the water ratesA, A A (1^ ^ Be the good Angel© Thankyou so muchjlij^ still gonna pray
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Loara Owen
Tuesday, April 9, 2024 1:47 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Rate increase proposal
I
I Some people who received this message don't often get email fromIjam why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnoivthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more.
I, Loara Owen, am a property owner/ratepayer at
increasing the sewer, refuse, and water rate.
,, Pasadena, 91103, oppose the proposal of
Sent from myiPhone
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Brian Wong •
Tuesday, April 9, 2024 5:36 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Opposition of PWP rate increases
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
grn why this is important at
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. Learn more...<https://mydoit.cityofpasadena.net/sp?id=kb_articte_view&sysparm_article=KB0010263>.
Hello,
I am a current PWP customer and property owner at . . Pasadena, CA 91104.
I emphatically oppose the increase of any PWP services. Please note my opposition.
Respectfully,
Brian Wong
1 i-?^-'^a»",_..-.:.
s'
'"T^:
w
co< LU
5o"s
0^<s §Qb co oLU
sQ a.
< ec
fc"m
^ ^ co3 a:
Q-
00 n
E
0 &
0 <
^c>. -0
^6 ~cu
¥ s
£is
-SOz
D
c
D
-a
g 0 .^.^0
^£ uu
9SS/*
^^ <y
^^
w0
{ii
^ "o
<° y,0^ 0
INC
yys
'&
'5.
*fb
^
^
•^1 ^
^ ^
^.^^
\-
^.
/^
!\
1l^
-^
^ ^-^ 51^.^ 0
<§ 's^ ^ ^a>
^bN.^
s ^ ^0^0
^^35 Ss ^ ^. ~^<: ^pi 3 I
F$ ^ ='•s ^1^ ll- 0 £.'^2: 3 .1'^>-^<LUVi .^>-Q •oa?
^.^ IIa:<
u cn% \i>
ojt'^
tS.
av>^
^ s^k -\ Ac. •5
?^.
W 0
^^». ^
t Is^^ %^ £6
?.^'it
^ ^^
c•< \-^^V. ^ c. ^ A
D
^^^ 1.1>< '^v\^^ ^ •is
0<^ ^.&\ a>•^4 a>.
S5^ 2&t •?9"3: I
I ^
ilt'^'t.V.^loil^l^^^>-
v& ^ ttl^ I 3-S
»ti
"^ ^^^^-^- ^^
^N^^^^^::?
a
,:8S^^BII^
gll?%y.;.
•ite
RECEIVED
2024 APR Z2 AM 8; 01
Gin CLERK
CITY OF PASADENA
s
^
s^
i
ws.
^
MlcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
David Eder <
Saturday, May 4, 2024 1:35 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Jason Lue
Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments I Some people who received this message don't often get email fromarn why this is imDortant ^] CAUTION: ThiserBail was delivered fromthe Internet. Do not click links or open attachrnentsunless you <mow thecontent is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For moreinformation about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0010263" on the DolTportal.
Dear City Clerk Staff,
Please consider this email as public comments for the PWP Proposed "Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments" which is proposed for staging in four annual increments, beginning on July 1, 2024.
The information on PWP's website regard ing why the rate restructuring is necessary is nebulous and nonspecific.
•
•
What are the specific costs that must be covered under these increases? What debt costs must be repaid?
What infrastructure improvements are planned, when are they to be undertaken and what are their anticipated costs?
If personnel costs are involved, what are the anticipated annual increases in budgetary amounts for this?
Without any specifics, it appears as a revenue grab. And worse, the rates increase significantly every year through 2028.
Using PWP's online bill estimator, our residential bill would increase 23% on July 1,2024.
Unfortunately the calculator does not allow estimation for the 2028 year rate - and looking at the proposed 2028 rates, it likely would be sky-high!
We are all for conservation and water use reduction.
We have completely changed our yard to a California native and xeriscape landscape. We have three water barrels and a large 400 gallon reservoir to collect rainwater from the roof during rains and use this water regularly to water fruit trees and the native plants. We have completely changed all faucets and toilets to low flow designs. Not to mention we collect rinse water in the sinks and showers to dump on various trees in the yard. The thrifty "army" style shower (rinse-soap-rinse) method is used daily at our residence. What more can we do to conserve?!
1 We understand the need for revenues to increase to offset inflationary pressures on the true costs of delivering services.
But it feels demoralizing when you are trying to do the right thing regarding conservation and yet the rates will increase exorbitantly beyond the annual inflation rates that the nation is presently facing. And without significant explanation of why these rates would be increased so much within the next four years, we cannot support the level of proposed increases.
We ask the Mayor and City Council members to reject this current PWP "Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments" and send them back to PWP to restructure these proposed rates so that all Pasadenans may be able to afford water while still increasing overall water conservation.
Thankyou for your consideration in this matter.
David Eder & Dr. Jason Lue
PWP customers at
Pasadena, CA 91105
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Michael Johnston
Saturday, May 18, 2024 6:11 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments g
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromi. Learn 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.
Regarding: Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments Dear Pasadena Water and Power,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed water rate structure adjustment scheduled for discussion at the public hearing on June 3, 2024. As a resident of Pasadena, I am concerned about the impact this rate increase will have on the community, particularly on households already struggling with the cost of living.
I urge you to reconsider this proposal and explore alternative solutions to address the rising operating costs and infrastructure improvements without imposing additional financial burdens on residents.
Sincerely, Michael JohnstonPasadena CA
1 MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
2Q2iiMAY21 PH 5:06
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
Pasadena City Council
Pasadena Environmental Advisory Commission
May 14, 2024
Water Rates
CiTY CLERK
CITi' OF PASADENA
At the Environmental Advisory Commission's monthly meeting on May 14, 2024, we received a presentation from the Pasadena Department of Water & Power on the proposed water rate structure that will be considered at a public hearing on June 3,2024. On the basis of that presentation, our own research, and subsequent discussion within the Commission, we have concerns about the new "Tiered by Customer Class" rates as proposed. We write to explain those concerns and to provide recommendations on direction that the Council should give to PWP regarding the proposed rate structure.
We recognize that PWP is funded by customer rate revenue rather than the General Fund, and thus it is dependent on rate revenue for operations and maintenance, capital investment, debt service, and reserve funding. We also recognize that PWP is now facing increased costs, including aging infrastructure that needs maintenance and replacement, water purchase price increases, inflation that effects construction costs, and power cost increases. As a result, PWP faces costs that will exceed revenue in the years ahead. While the tiered by customer class rate structure proposed by PWP may address some of those concerns, it raises other concerns that we believe demand further study.
First, we are concerned that the new rates will have a disproportionate impact on low- and middle-income households. PWP's case studies show that a "medium" family would face a
21.6% increase in its monthly water bill under the proposed rate structure, and that a "large" family would face a 23.5% increase in its bill.1 Such increases would be an abrupt and significant burden on Pasadena residents already feeling the strain of rising costs in other aspects of their lives, including other City services.
Second, we are not convinced that the tiered by customer class rates structure promotes conservation more than the current rate structure ("Tiered by Meter Size"). In light of the ongoing threats to water supply posed by climate change, water conservation should be a paramount goal of any rate structure implemented by PWP. We would expect that any change to the water rate structure would prioritize that objective, yet the assertion that the tiered by ' See Pasadena Department of Water & Power, "Water Cost of Service and Rate Study," Municipal Services Committee Presentation, March 26, 2024, at slides 27-28. customer class rates are "sending a conservation price signal based on the fact that the more water used, the higher the marginal price of that water usage"2 applies equally to the current tiered by meter size rates.
We recognize that PWP's rate structure proposal is the result of a tremendous amount of expertise, consideration, and hard work by PWP. We also recognize that PWP needs to take in more revenue than the current rates are generating. Nevertheless, we think that the considerations outlined above deserve further attention. We would like to see PWP undertake rigorous and transparent analysis in the areas of equity and conservation throughout the transition to these new rates, and devise a process to report those findings to the Council.
Along those same lines, we would like to see the Council formally revisit the impact of these rate changes earlier than the proposed 5 year timeline. We encourage a comprehensive review in 2-3 years, with a particular focus on conservation and equity.
Accordingly, we recommend that the Council:
1. Direct PWP to undertake an ongoing analysis of equity and conservation concerns leading up to and throughout the implementation of the new tiered by customer class rate structure.
2. Revisit the impact of the new tiered by customer class rate structures in 2-3 years, rather than the 5 years stated in PWP's proposal, with specific attention paid to conservation and equity.
We appreciate your consideration of these issues and recommendations. 2 See Agenda Report to City Council from Pasadena Water and Power Department through Municipal Services Committee, April 8, 2024, pg 3.
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
CP
Tuesday, May 21, 2024 3:07 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustment Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important /^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe 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.
To Whom This May Concern:
City of Pasadena Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments - PROTEST I am writing to PROTEST the implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustements.
Homeowner: Cindy Pan
Billing Address: , Pasadena, CA 91104-1012
Assessor's Identification Number (AIN):
Parcel:
Thank you,
Cindy Pan
1 JVIcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Wednesday, May 22, 2024 5:10 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn 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.
Dear City Counsel,
t protest the water rate structure and rate adjustments.
Sanguan Chow
Pasadena, CA91107
1 e
Implementation of Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustments Joseph Lund
3755 Fairmeade Road
Pasadena CA 91107
Just a side note:
RECEIVED
202^ MAY 24 AM 8: 35
CITY CLERK
CITY OF PASADENA
1) My City Council Member told me that Pasadena has a BIG problem with city salaries and pensions.
2) Well, the proposed Sewer Use Fee increase. Solid Waste Collection Fee increase and Water Rate increase certainly takes care of this.
Back to the water rate increase
The Block (Tier) Allocations will no longer be based on the Meter Size. It will be based on Customer Classification.
So why will I be charged based on my Meter Size, since all residential customers will receive the same baseline allocation? The Meter Size hasn't changed, since I moved here and I had no control over the meter size. The city does nothing to maintain my meter service, other than bill me.
Since citizens were conserving water, the city had to increase the fixed service fee. Conserving really paid off, didn't it!
Even if I use no water, here's the bimonthly bill increase:
Meter Size I CurrentJuly 1, 2024 | July 1, 2025 | July 1, 2026 | July 1, 2027 | July 1, 2028 1"$100.50$120.38$134.82$146.96$158.72$169.82
%Increase20%34%46%58%69%
% Increase compared to current
This is outrageous! I can't afford this on a fixed income.
The city has provided a Bill Estimator.
https://egovl.citvofpasadena.net/BillEstimator
I find something very interesting about the Bill Estimator. The Current Bill includes the Capital Improvement Charge (CIC). The Proposed Bill cost doesn't include this. Is this intentional? Why am I paying for this, when I'm not receiving any benefit? I can't even get my street resurfaced after twenty years and the city tree has raised and broken the curb. I guess all the city cares about is adding bike lanes!
And don't forget the Water Charges Utility Tax of 7.67%. The Bill Estimator excludes this, as well.
I made my own calculator including the CIC charge and Utility Users Tax, assuming I use 48 HCF in the hottest summer months.
Here's the bimonthly bill increase:
Meter Size | CurrentJuly 1, 2024 ) July 1, 2025 [ July 1, 2026 | July 1, 2027 | July 1, 2028 1"$308.77$438.56$484.21$522.57$559.73$594.83
%Increase42.04%56.82%69.24%81.28%92.65%
% Increase compared to current
One option is to let all my plants just die (this will definitely look good to my neighbors). The other is to have all my plants removed and have rocks or some combination of rocks and drought tolerant plants installed with a drip irrigation system. Do you have any idea of how expensive this would be? Also, how much heat the rocks will give off compared to green plants? And then there are the Drought Rate Percentage Increases. This is completely ridiculous, considering that 90% of the state's water supply is used for the environment and agriculture. Of the remaining 10%, only a portion of that is for residential use as opposed to commercial use. Reducing the residential water usage during times of drought is only going to result in maybe a 2.5% decrease in the overall state's water consumption. This is complete hog wash!
What is meant by the statement "The drought rates are recommended to take effect at the discretion of PWP's General Manager"? Does this mean whenever the city can't fund the employee salaries and retiree pensions, even when the new water rates have taken affect? Once again, this is outrageous while trying to live on a fixed income. ^~T^^{^
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Bob Gutzman
Friday, May 24, 2024 8:41 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Chapman, Justin; Madison, Steve
PWP Proposed Water Rate Hike
Some people who received this message don't often get email from,1. Learn why this is important [Al 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.
Hi.
I'd like my comments on the proposed water rate hike to be considered for the June 3, 2024 Water Rate Structure and Rate Adjustment hearing.
I spent a significant amount of time analyzing the current and proposed rates in the PWP mailing. In a nutshell, the proposed rate structure and rate hikes will be very burdensome to residents, particularly residents who are at the low end of water usage.
First, the current allocation for Block 1 for the smallest meter size is 0 - 8 billing units (BU). The proposed change lowers this amount, in Tier 1,to 0 - 7 billing units for single-family residences, and an astonishingly Low 0 - 5 billing units for multi-family residential. I strongly urge the City Council to keep the 0-8 billing units in placeforfaot&SFRsandformultifamily properties. (Even commercial users get to keep the 0 - 8 billing units in the proposed rate hike. Why not residential users?) It is particularly egregious to tighten down the tier allocations (which essentially jacks up the amount paid) for multifamily this much for two reasons. Why? First, with rent control in place in Pasadena, this is a huge surcharge to multifamily owners who are now constrained by rent control. In otherwords, multifamily property owners will be hit on both sides: they can't raise rents, plus their water bills will go up by an extraordinary amount. Second, multifamily property owners pay for water directly. Apartments, etc., are not separately metered so tenants have no incentive at all to save on water. In fact, they won't even be aware of this egregious rate hike and will continue to use large amounts of water because, for them, it is free. The property owners will be stuck with the entire burden. (Studies have shown that it is essentially impossible to get tenants to reduce water usage because nearly all multifamity properties have one water meter, and the property owner pays the water bill directly. Tenants have no incentive to reduce water usage.)
Second, the current Commodity Rate per BU (billing unit) is $1.76489. The proposed rate is a huge increase at $2.24818 per BU. This is an increase of 27%. But there is more. This proposed rate is only good for one year starting July 1,2024.There are a series of additional rate hikes from 2024 to July 1, 2028. The Last hike will be a stunning 80% higherthan the current rate. 1 Third, the fixed charges are going up too, and by a significant amount. The current distribution and customer charge (D&C) is $26.46. This is set to rise by 46%(!) on July 1 , 2024 to $38.62. By July 1,2028 it will be a jaw-dropping 706% more than the current D&C charge.
As an exercise, I re-ran my modest water bill with the proposed rates/charges, and see that I will have roughly a 37% increase in the first year alone, with my water bill escalating after that by massive amounts.
I strongly urge the City Council to moderate the proposed rate hikes and keep the current billing unit range for Tier 1 atO -8 BU for both SFRs and multifamily.
Similarly, I strongly encourage the City Council to moderate the rate hikes on sewer and trash as it appears that these two other categories will also be increased significantly (based on the online bill estimator).
Thanks very much.
BobGutzman
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kathy Musial
Monday, May 27, 2024 2:31 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Comment Re: June 3, 2024 Public Hearing - Water Rate Structure •
Some people who received this message don't often get email from'n 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.
Greetings,
I have received the Notice about the proposed water rate structure changes. Thankfully I am a very low water user (25 gal/per day excluding 2x monthly summer outdoor irrigation July-Sept).
I used the "bill estimator" to calculate the changes in my bill. Though my water rate would go down by $7.68 per year, this is more than offset by the 19.78% increase in the meter charge ($111 .60/year).
The charge for the meter, which is a fixed charge, currently represents 95% of my total bill, 96% under the new structure. I'm unclear how the increase in the fixed meter charge will have any effect on "water conservation goals".
I am over 65 and still working - and will have to continue working until I die as inflation, new and increased fees, and new parcel taxes continue to spiral upward far beyond my salary.
Regards,
KathyMusial
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
marcie chan
Monday, May 27, 2024 8:29 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Chapman, Justin; Madison, Steve
Proposed Water Rate Hikes by the PWP Need to Be Moderated Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe 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 my comments about the proposed water rate hike for the June 3, 2024 water rate hike hearing. Thank you.
I looked at the upcoming Metropolitan Water District (MWD) water rate increases, and they are much lower than PWP's proposed increases. (PWP gets about 60% of its water from the MWD.) It is clear that PWP plans to layer on extra increases well above the MWD's increases. This is not good.
In looking at the proposed PWP rate hikes, one thing is abundantly clear: The proposed rate structure and rate hikes will hit residents who are at the low end of water usage. Please don't penalize us. Instead, shift more of the increase to the users at the middle or high end. After all, they need to conserve more.
For example, the current allocation for Block 1 for the smallest meter size is 0 - 8 billing units (BU). The proposed change lowers this amount, in Tier 1, to 0 -7 billing units for single-family residences. Why? Commercial users get to keep the 0 - 8 billing units in the proposed rate hike. Why not residential users? More egregiously, the proposal calls for a very low 0 - 5 billing units for multi-family residential. I strongly urge the City Council to keep the 0 - 8 billing units in place for both single- and multi-family properties.
It is particularly painful to reduce the tier allocations (which basically increases the amount paid) for multi-family this much for two reasons. First, because Pasadena has rent control now, this is a big increase to small mom & pop multi-family owners who are now constrained by rent control. In other words, small mom & pop property owners will be hit with not being able to raise rents, plus their water bills will go up by an extraordinary amount. Second, mom & pop owners pay for water directly for their duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings. These types of properties are not separately metered, so tenants have zero incentive to conserve water. In fact, the tenants won't even be aware of this egregious rate hike and will continue to use large amounts of water because, for them, water is free. The mom & pop owners will be stuck with the entire water rate hike.
Another point: The current Commodity Rate per BU (billing unit) is $1.76489. The proposed rate is a large 27% increase at $2.24818 per BU. This proposed rate, which starts on July 1, 2024, is just one in a series of several hikes from 2024 to July 1, 2028. The last hike will be a 80% HIGHER than the current rate.
Third, the fixed charges are also increasing by a significant amount. The current distribution and customer charge (D&C) is $26.46, but is proposed to increase by 46% on July 1, 2024 to $38.62. And by July 1, 2028 it will be 106% HIGHER than the current D&C charge.
The City Council must reduce the proposed rate hikes and keep the current billing unit range for Tier 1 atO -8 BU for both homes and mom & pop multi-family properties.
The City Council must also reduce the rate hikes on sewer and trash. It seems like these two categories will also be increased significantly (based on the online bill estimator).
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Marcie Chan1