HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/15/2024 - Economic Advisory Board - AGENDA - Regular Meeting
Economic Advisory Board
REGULAR MEETING
May 15, 2024, 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
HYBRID MEETING OPTIONS
Physical Loca�on: CIC Room @ 300 LaPorte Ave.
Virtual option via Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84688470753
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. AGENDA REVIEW
4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
6. NEW BUSINESS
a. Presentation: Water Supply Requirements (WSR), Excess Water Use (EWU)
Surcharge, and Allotments for All Commercial Customers
i. Presenters: Heather Young, Community Engagement Manager; Donnie
Dustin, Water Engineer; and Katie Collins, Water Conservation Specialist
ii. Optional Read-Ahead: www.fcgov.com/utilities/wsr
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
9. OTHER BUSINESS
10. ADJOURNMENT
05/15/2024 – AGENDA
Page 1
04/17/24 Minutes
Economic Advisory Board
REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday, April 17, 2024 – 4:00 PM
300 Laporte Ave, CIC Room
1. CALL TO ORDER: 4:00 PM
2. ROLL CALL
a. Board Members Present –
• Tim Cochran
• Chris Denton
• Thierry Dossou
• Erin Gray
• Val Kailburn
• Braulio Rojas
• Richard Waal
b. Board Members Absent –
• Denny Coleman
• Renee Walkup
c. Staff Members Present –
• Jillian Fresa, Economic Health Manager, Economic Health Office
• Erin Sporer, Business Support, Economic Health Office
• Paul Sizemore, Planning, Development, & Transportation (PDT) Deputy
Director
d. Guest(s) –
3. AGENDA REVIEW
4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
a.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Chris motioned and Erin seconded to approve the March agenda. Motion
carried unanimously. 6-0.
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Meet & Greet with Mayor Jeni Arndt, EAB Council Liaison
• The board doesn’t want to be afraid to speak out and act.
• That is super important. Something I am worried about is I had a
Page 2
04/17/24 Minutes
meeting with a banker in the region and they asked if I feel like Fort
Collins is a city in decline. That is a concern. There are some things
that we need to pay more attention to like Attracting talent. We
haven’t attracted a major employer for a long time. Some of the City
processes are too involved and processed to detract businesses,
large and small. We have wonderful climate goals and always need
to remember there is a balance between driving up costs so the
average person can live and work here but also that people need
jobs and jobs are businesses. There is a part of this town that wants
to drive up the cost of housing and turn away businesses. I don’t
share those thoughts but want to have a vibrant, integrated,
welcoming community. We need to be intentional about it. We used
to rely on physical settings and trying new things. This is an
important board when we get an economic perspective. An example
is the building codes. Who isn’t for environmental causes, but we
have goals of affordability. We want to consider all of those, and this
is the board where all of that can happen.
• A board member shared an experience regarding a rental home he owned
that became vacant but some of the applicants couldn’t afford it. He also
mentioned that PSD’s enrollment is dropping. We might be living in a good
place now, but what will happen in five years if they don’t act. It is
important to provide support to Council to make tough decisions. We
should be active and not be shy.
• Question to Mayor - We have not attracted a big employer for a long time.
What do you think is inhibiting that?
• I am not sure. We have Woodward, HP, Broadcom, and Budweiser.
• I don’t know necessarily. We need diverse talent to attract.
Folks come to Fort Collins and end up leaving because they
don’t want to stay.
• The reason people stay is varied but most people who come
to Broadcom have seen the general nature of the City and
are proud to be in Fort Collins. People that haven’t come
here, the cost is too high. People make that decision. For
some it’s worth it. When you are young, you fathom expenses
and it’s hard to attract that. Locals are very excited to work for
Broadcom because they see what they offer and see what
they are getting. Why is it so expensive in Colorado because
it is worth it. You must find people that find it worthwhile.
There is always some turnover. Make sure people are not
leaving and not knowing about what jobs we have to offer. It's
hard to bring people here. People who have come haven’t
left. As soon as they are here, they get it. There is a segment
of people who don’t want that but we should have that in this
community as well. Not everyone should enjoy hiking, biking,
and going to Horsetooth.
• One board member moved to Colorado 30 years ago from
San Fransisco. Businesses around the Bay Area had an
expertise. In Colorado there was an expertise in navigation.
When they think of Fort Collins, they don’t get that. When
trying to attract businesses they look at what is the talent
around them. When you think of Fort Collins you don’t think
about one thing or another.
Page 3
04/17/24 Minutes
• The board commends activity at global and local level and Council
Priorities. It is not just about development and growth but a wide variety of
goals. What makes Fort Collins exciting is we are a good example of a
progressive city working on complex issues. There are different incomes
and ethnicities. Lots of cities are experiencing the same thing. This is a
diverse board that can hopefully help. We can’t please everyone but how
do you move in the right direction to move forward.
• The mayor believes this is a great role to try and help bring that out.
By the time things come to Council it is easy to pass. Council’s view
is so narrow. This is where a lot of work comes from, asking have
you talked to affordable housing about water supply rate etc. We try
to ask but we can’t catch it all. We do the best we can do. This
group can catch some of those things and it’s a great place to dig in.
• Can you describe what the Council Liaison role is and how often do you
come to our meetings?
• I come to almost zero. It is the person who if there is a problem or
question, I work with Jillian. I also lead interviews. I try to come
when I can and read your notes. There are a lot of conflicts but if
you want me to know something or want me to come, I will.
b. New Member Welcome
• The board did introductions. New members include Tim Cochran, Chris
Denton, and Val Kailburn.
c. Fort Collins Development Update
• Paul is part of a large department in the City
• 90 people - covers planning and development, historic preservation,
neighborhood services, etc.
• Recent development activity
• Reviewed data up to 2023 including development applications and
minor amendments.
• A little concern in new applications in 2021-2022, fluctuates
overtime. Not sure if it is a trend down, but in 2023 went back
up.
• Other set of data- forward looking pieces – pre-submittal review,
conceptual reviews, and preliminary design reviews
• consistent over time.
• Development applications by type
• 2022 inflated over 2023- double counting on some. Useful to
see what industry and sector we are seeing.
• Since 2020 commercial has been on steady decline – made
up by “other” (earlier stages of larger scale and longer-term
projects, ex pud plan), multifamily increasing as well. Single
family residential also declining overtime. Less zoned land
available for single family available.
• Building permit trends, looking at multifamily units, 2023 was a
strong year.
• Geographically looking at permits as well – some years we see it
concentrated in one area. This shows it spread out.
• Master plan communities
• Largest one is Montava
• NE part of town. Longest term built out over 25 years on 1000
Page 4
04/17/24 Minutes
acres. 3 phases that are all at planning right now in
development review process.
• Phase G and E moving along. The developer has run into
situation with ditch company regarding storm water. Need to
come into agreement to get these phases to approval so it is
taking longer than they expected. They are working on an
agreement.
• Phase D overview is not reliant on ditch company and will
now probably 1st phase to get started on construction.
Working hard to get to that by the end of the year. It is an
aggressive timeline.
• Bloom
• 225 acres. Many filings are in process and actively under
construction. It is smaller than Montava.
• Sonders Village
• 129 acres, 689 dwellings include 95 affordable housing units.
It just started.
• Commercial development
• Very few new nonresidential development apps in 2023
• Parts of larger developments
• Prospect sports only commercial project recently approved by
planning and zoning commission.
• Basketball venue with courts for league practice, games, and
tournaments
• Located on sharp point drive off east prospect.
• Projects under construction
• Morning Star/block 23
• Midtown King Soopers
• Multifamily overview
• List of 8 projects that have been through development project either
approved or prehearing.
• Policy process and customer service
• Land Use Code (LUC) foundational updates.
• 1st zoning code adopted in 1929. The current code from 1997
has been amended but there is only so much working around
the edges you can do. 2018 adopted new city plan.
• 1st phase of LUC includes a new framework for development
code but also focused on residential components. Last night
they came back with the 3rd iteration of updated code. This
version has taken out the components that were controversial
including not increasing density or allowable uses in existing
residential neighborhoods. All foundational changes that
adjust densities in already dense residential areas. Incentives
for affordable housing are all intact.
• Get foundational changes in place can get on to the rest of
the work they have been doing on the code.
• Phase 2 focuses on commercial corridors – 15-minute City
• Revise processes and procedures.
• Modernize development standards.
• Work session with city council June 11 to confirm scope.
• Development review evaluation
• State of development review- see what is working well and not
Page 5
04/17/24 Minutes
working in development review process.
• Creating plan – goals for development review plan, areas of focus
and rethinking performance measures on how review works.
• Come back and visit to share about that.
Questions
• What is the difference between single family detached and single family
attached?
• Attached is like a townhome, where they share a wall, but it is
individually owned.
• Are multifamily permits separate from multiunit buildings?
• We can permit them under master permits but it’s unit counts. So, it
is not individual permits.
• You are saying the reason Bloom was faster was because they didn’t
have a ditch issue and it’s also smaller.
• There was less complexity, and it is a quarter of the size of Montava.
In terms of timeline, Montava started the process before Bloom, but
Bloom made it to the construction phases before them.
• It seems like the new codes are trying to be more discreet in its
neighborhood designation on what is allowable in certain types of
neighborhoods.
• I think that is part of it. A big thing that has changed in 25 years in
zoning and land use codes is a lot of zoning ordinances are based
on lengthy descriptions where you describe allowable dimensions on
the lots, and they get pieced together section by section. In that
time, form-based codes have become the industry standard where
you define a building envelope, and you focus on the urban design
and form to fit within that envelope and less on the narrative
approach or even worrying so much about the different use types.
That is one of the biggest foundational changes being made.
• If there is anything the board can do now or with land use planning to be
supportive or any issues we need to consider, let us know.
• Feel last slide is admirable. The process is always a challenge because
you need to do work but get it done efficiently. Talk about attracting
companies, whatever size they are to come here, I think the development
piece, and that process however streamlined you can get it is great.
Obviously, you have to hit hurdles.
• That s a great point of the balancing act. It is Incumbent on us to
make sure we are applying standards and doing a good thorough
review on projects, and we are aware there are pieces to the
process where there are processes that are redundant, have
evolved over time where they don’t make sense, or don’t see them
because we are running through them repeatedly. So that is why it
was helpful to do that survey work and get some feedback on those
things that were process challenges. Some fascinating feedback we
got was that people who go through process are okay with
standards; the rub is that the process things can be hard.
• That is a piece of marketing, the one stop show if you want to open
a business. We talk about Fort Collins being open and welcoming
and all of that might be more elements where we can be more
welcoming, and we have updated processes to be efficient.
• It is something where we try to work with our Economic
Health partners to focus on small businesses that are not
Page 6
04/17/24 Minutes
developers and haven’t been through the process. It can be
daunting.
• You said with commercial there is only one, is that because people don’t
want to develop or are we running out of space?
• I can speculate. A lot of it is market supply and demand. Post covid
environment, that has been less of a demand for employment type
uses and office space. Those types of developments that might
have come through pre 2020 would classified as commercial. We
are not capturing those right now because there is enough
inventory. A lot of it is happening through those minor amendments
to existing development where a business already has location but
needs to expand. They can do it on their property, so they do not
need to acquire a new site.
• Do you have data on other communities to compare?
• Anecdotally with conversations. Loveland also presented. I
think there is a lot of alignment but haven’t done cross
referencing.
• I was just curious if it was local, regional, nationwide or
industry as a whole.
• When looking at housing and current demographics of the City as far as
income and the housing that’s available, and trying to have more unformal
affordable housing or likely curve of what people are going to be able to
need to spend on housing, are you going to be able to provide through this
plan a match to that long term need Or will we accidentally build too much
toward the higher or mid high?
• I wish I had my colleague lead Meaghan here who is the Housing
Manager. She could give a more detailed answer on demographic
impact. The foundation changes that City Council considered at first
reading has built in a lot of additional capacity on already high-
density zones. That is one of the key pieces of this first phase of this
Land Use Code update is take that long term approach of what is
needed in the future and trying to align those zone districts. Your
point on how much of those units are going to cost, that is the piece
I don’t have as much insight into as so much is driven by the cost of
construction and what the larger economy is doing. I think the hedge
there is the City has taken a strong position on taking more deed
restricted affordable housing so being able to provide housing for
folks that are at that very bottom end of the spectrum and there are
incentives that are built into the code update under consideration
right now would step that up from what we’ve historically had.
• Is affordable housing strictly multifamily housing or are those also
single-family residences too?
• Can be single family residences, multifamily, rental,
ownership. There is a need for all in the community. In
general, the regulations are set up where there are different
thresholds for what qualifies as being affordable. There is
opportunity development by development if this is a product
that fits well in that development and can choose.
• Are you seeing more condos or is condo defect loss still
problematic?
• We don’t have data to show trends so don’t want to give
answers one way or another but I think it’s safe to say a
Page 7
04/17/24 Minutes
majority are still apartments; condos are on the rare side.
•
8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
9. STAFF REPORTS
a. Sylvia and Megan are applying for an industry award for the mulberry corridor
and looking for some edits on the letter EAB wrote.
b. Council interested in EAB being more involved.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Board wants to be more active and effective.
• Role of memos, pros and cons also emphasized.
• Each month City staff present - asking them questions and drilling into things is
helpful for them to understand what residents care about so they can sharpen
their presentations for Council.
• Be more proactive.
• Recommends board to look at workplan, Council priorities and planning calendar.
• Jillian works to find presenters; it is a dynamic moving target.
• If the board feel something is important and relevant let Jillian or chairs know
• Board share duties of writing memos.
b. June meeting falls on holiday
• Meeting moved to June 26th.
11. ADJOURNMENT
a. (5:51PM)
Minutes approved by a vote of the Board/Commission on XX/XX/XX
Headline Copy Goes Here
Water Resources Engineer, P.E.
Donnie Dustin
Utilities Community Engagement Manager
Heather Young
5-15-2024
Water Supply
Requirements and
Pre-1984
Non-Residential Water
Allotments
Katie Collins
Water Conservation Specialist
Headline Copy Goes HerePurpose
1.Build shared understanding of the history and purpose
of Water Supply Requirement fees and pre-1984 non-
residential water allotments.
2.Share staff’s analysis of potential methodologies for
Water Supply Requirement fees and assigning pre-1984
non-residential water allotments.
3.Share planned customer engagement for 2024,
including a timeline and identification of impacted
parties.
4.Answer questions and seek input.
2
Headline Copy Goes HereQuestions for the Economic Advisory Board
1)What general questions do you have?
2)How might you or the community you represent be impacted by these changes?
3)What other input do you have?
3
Headline Copy Goes Here
Utilities Water
Service Area
Fort Collins Area Water Districts Map
~36,000 water taps (32,000 customers)
~3,000 are commercial (1,900 customers)
GMA
Major Streets
City Limits
Railroad
ELCO Water District
Fort Collins-Loveland Water District
Fort Collins Utilities (Water)
Sunset Water District
West Fort Collins Water District
Water Districts
4
Headline Copy Goes HerePurpose – Water Supply Requirements and Water Allotments
A form of Water Supply Requirements (WSR) and water allotments
has been in place since the mid-1960s. The purpose is to:
•Ensure secure water sources and protect the watershed
•Provide a financial mechanism to ensure current and future assets are adequate to meet community water supply and service needs
•Balance current needs and supply and future potential needs and acquisitions
5
Headline Copy Goes HereTimeline
April 9
Council Work
Session
April/May Aug./Sept.2025Oct./Nov.June/July
TBD
Work Session
Implementation
Council Finance
Committee
Water Commission
and Other Boards
Continue
Engagement
TBD First and Second Reading Regular Meetings
May
Initiate
Engagement
July 16
Council Work
Session
Planning &
Zoning and Other
Boards
Wrap Up
Engagement
6
Headline Copy Goes HereWater Supply Requirements, Water Allotments, and Dedication
Water Supply Requirement
Fee paid by new development and some redevelopment to ensure adequate water dedication to serve.
Assessed during development and redevelopment
Water Allotment
A volume of water dedicated to a non-residential user.
Two -thirds of non-residential accounts have assigned allotments.
Based on WSR
Excess Water Use Surcharge
A charge assessed to non-residential accounts with allotments when they exceed their allotment.
Based on Allotment
7
Headline Copy Goes HereWSR Methodology
•All regional water service providers have a version of a
WSR development fee
•Total fee varies based on water rights portfolio,
infrastructure and ability to support existing and future
customers to meet community values
•Water scarcity and demand drive the cost of acquiring
new water and impacts the value of our water rights
portfolio
8
Headline Copy Goes HereWater Fund Inputs
Water Utility Rates
Rates paid by existing customers
make up approximately 95% of
the water fund revenue.
Development/Redevelopment Fees
New development and redevelopment
within the water service area make up
approximately 5%.
Development/Redevelopment
The rate of development can be
unpredictable and water costs can
play a part in where development
occurs.
Future Storage Cost
Future storage has been identified
through the Halligan Water Supply
Project. Costs estimates of this
project have increased significantly.
Water Rights
Additional water rights necessary
to meet 2065 projected demands.
Additional Storage
Storage is needed for existing
and future use. 5%
95%
9
Headline Copy Goes Here
Headline Copy Goes HereOverview of Methodologies
Full Buy-In
•Cost of the entire existing water supply system which is expected to serve all existing and future
customers.
•Future customers buy in to the entire current system (total value of system/total yield).
Incremental
•Cost to expand the water supply system to serve future customers.
•Only reflects the cost of future water rights and infrastructure.
Hybrid
•Includes a “buy-in” component for the current water supply system and an “incremental” component
for the future water system needs that have not yet been purchased or built.
•Acknowledges future customers will use portions of the current and future water supply systems.
11
Headline Copy Goes HereWSR Historical Methodology
›Re-evaluating options
within the hybrid
methodology
›Market vs. cost-based
valuations
›Analysis of current risk
factors
(contingency/safety)
2002-2017
›2018: $17,300/AF
using hybrid method
with market-based
costing
›2020: $21,500/AF,
updated costing
›2021: $22,145/AF,
added 3% inflationary
increase
2018-2021
›$68,200/AF, same
methodology with
updated yields
2022-current
›$6,500/AF, based on
Colorado Big-
Thompson (CBT)
prices
2025-future
12
Headline Copy Goes HereCurrent Methodology Overview
HYBRID
Buy-in
Existing water rights
Incremental
Future water rights andinfrastructure
Total cost to
increase reliability
of water supply
Note: Future water supplies do not provide
adequate reliability without existing portfolio
13
Headline Copy Goes HereWater Supply Requirement Fee
WSR = Existing Water + Future Water rights & Infrastructure
Can determine past purchase prices and
costs.
Options on how to value:
•Market price in today’s dollars
•Cost of what was paid plus an
adjustment factor
Buy-In
Existing Water Rights
Incremental
Future Water Rights and Infrastructure
Requires modeling and predicting costs
of future water supply needs.
Options on how to value:
•Market-based
•Contingency
•Safety factor
14
Headline Copy Goes HereHybrid Method Pricing Options
*Contingency: Captures uncertainties in future costs
**Safety factor: Captures uncertainties in future demand and supplies (e.g., climate change, development types, etc.)
Method Cost (draft)Considerations
Market-based
30% contingency*
20% safety factor**
$116,500/AF •Current approach with updated costs
•Highest impact to developers
Market-based
30% contingency
$97,100/AF •Safety factor removed
Cost-based,
30% contingency
20% safety factor
$71,800/AF •Development costs reflect Utilities’
investment in water rights proactively (since
late 1800s)
Cost-based
30% contingency
$59,900/AF •Safety factor removed
•Lower than current fee
•Highest impact to existing customers
15
Headline Copy Goes HereMulti-Family Total Water Supply Requirement (Indoor & Outdoor)
2024 Multi-Family
100 bedrooms, 64 dwelling units, 30,504 sq. ft. lot area, 5,535 sq. ft. irrigated area
Provider Dedication Amount
(acre-feet)
Water Fee
($/acre-feet)Cost
Ft. Collins Loveland 15.29 $120,000 $1,228,200
East Larimer County 11.07 $60,600**$670,900
Loveland 10.62 $47,380 $503,200
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S)4.27 $116,500 $497,500
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS)4.27 $97,100 $414,600
Greeley 7.29 $51,500 $375,300
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S)4.27 $71,800 $306,600
Westminster 6.88 $40,400 $278,300
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS)4.27 $59,900 $255,800
**For larger developments,East Larimer County Water District only allows 30% of its WSR to be met with cash and the remainder must be met with acceptable
water rights, thus the cash equivalent listed here is based on the market value of acceptable water rights.
*MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor;
CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor
16
Headline Copy Goes HereComparison to Other Providers
15.29 AF
11.07 AF
10.62 AF
4.27 AF
7.29 AF
4.27 AF
6.88 AF
4.27 AF
*MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor;
CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS)
Westminster
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S)
Greeley
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS)
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S)
Loveland
East Larimer County
Ft. Collins Loveland
Multi-Family
(100 bedrooms, 64 dwelling units, 30,504 sq. ft.lot area, 5,535 sq. ft.irrigated area)
17
Headline Copy Goes HereComparison to Other Providers
1.25 AF
1.25 AF
1.25 AF
1.62 AF
1.72 AF
0.70 AF
0.79 AF
1.00 AF
*MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor;
CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor
Loveland
East Larimer County
Ft. Collins Loveland
Westminster
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS)
Greeley
FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S)
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS)
FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S)
Typical Restaurant
(2,800 sq. ft.)
18
Headline Copy Goes HereSummary: Hybrid Method Pricing Options
Method Cost Considerations
Market-based
30% contingency*
20% safety factor**
$116,500/AF •Current approach with updated costs
•Highest impact to developers
Market-based
30% contingency
$97,100/AF •Safety factor removed
Cost-based,
30% contingency
20% safety factor
$71,800/AF •Development costs reflect Utilities’
investment in water rights proactively (since
late 1800s)
Cost-based
30% contingency
$59,900/AF •Safety factor removed
•Lower than current fee
•Highest impact to existing customers
19
Headline Copy Goes Here
Headline Copy Goes HereWater Allotment Overview
•Proposing to assign
allotments to ~1,000
accounts that do not
have one (1/3 of total)
•Not proposing
additional WSR costs
•Allow time to adjust
use to avoid
surcharges
1965-1984
•Required volume
based on tap size
•Began to assign
allotments to non-
residential accounts
1984
•Allotments based
on business type
2022
•Required volume of
water based on acre of
land served
•No allotments were
assigned
2024
22
Headline Copy Goes HereWhy Update Now?
•Consistency
•Subject to same requirement for all customers
•Fairness
•Customers without allotments can use as much water as
they desire without surcharges
•Does not capture costs for water supply system use that is
above what was paid for through a WSR fee
•A higher WSR fee and surcharges increases the inequity
between customers who are subject to surcharges and
those who are not
•Conservation
•Programs and incentives for customers that would
regularly go over their allotment
23
Headline Copy Goes HereAllotment Methodology Overview
Method Description History Impacts
Hybrid
(Tap and Avg. Use)
Selects the greater between
average historical use and
tap credit
•Lowest impact
•Could assign a higher allotment than
needed making it difficult to
identify inefficiencies
Tap Credit Assigns a volume based on
meter size
Most current allotments
assigned with this
methodology
•Could underestimate allotment resulting in
potential unwarranted surcharges
Average
Historical Use
Assigns a volume based on
average historical water use
per tap (e.g., 5 years)
Have not assigned this
way
•Could assign a lower allotment compared
to the volume received with a tap credit,
undervaluing WSR
•Could assign a higher allotment than
customer needed making it difficult to
identify water use inefficiencies
Business Type Assigns based on business
type and specific use (e.g., #
rooms in hotel, square
footage of restaurant,
landscape details, etc.)
Current methodology
for setting allotments
•Best reflects actual water use need
•Limited data to fully evaluate impacts (44
customers assigned this way)
•Time -intensive process
24
Headline Copy Goes HerePotential Impacts
25
If all accounts used highest volume recorded in
the last five years:
•15% of accounts would exceed proposed
allotment
•Average estimated EWU per account at current
rate: $5k
•Total EWU impact = $824k
1989 TAP CREDIT
91%
5YR AVG
(2019-2023)
9%
SOURCE OF PROPOSED ALLOTMENT
Headline Copy Goes Here
Headline Copy Goes HereWork Directly with Impacted Parties
•Involve impacted parties in developing and refining alternatives for:
•WSR
•EWU surcharges
•Allotment assignments
•Goals:
•Keep impacted parties informed of project timeline, how to be involved, and decisions made
•Seek input on potential impacts to customers and community members
Phase 1 (April – June)
Broad engagement and
feedback collection
Phase 2 (July – Sept.)
Refine proposal and
incorporate feedback
Phase 3 (Oct. – Dec.)
Seek adoption
28
Headline Copy Goes HereImpacted Parties
•Market-rate developers
•Affordable housing developers
•Water-intensive businesses (breweries, restaurants,
etc.)
•Homeowner’s Associations
•Commercial real estate
•Commercial water customers
•With allotments
•Without allotments
•Irrigation only
29
Headline Copy Goes HerePlanned Communications and Engagement Opportunities
•Council Work Sessions
•Boards and Commissions
•Email communication
•Existing e-newsletters
•Survey
•Seek input from community groups
•Webinar and office hours for impacted allotment
customers
30
Headline Copy Goes Here
Headline Copy Goes HereQuestions
1)What general questions do you have?
2)How might you or the community you represent be impacted by these changes?
3)What other input do you have?
32