The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 06/14/2016 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1 Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC) Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado Gino Campana, District 3 Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann City Attorney City Manager City Clerk The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. City Council Work Session June 14, 2016 6:00 PM  CALL TO ORDER. 1. Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps. (staff: John Stokes, Carol Webb; 10 minute staff presentation; 1 hour discussion) The purpose of this item is to review the City’s past and future approach to the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) and the project sponsor, Northern Water. NISP currently is nearing the final stages of its federal and state permitting processes. To date, the City has fully participated in those processes. Northern Water also has recently proposed modifications to NISP’s operations through town that require consideration by the City and that may present certain opportunities for the City. Going forward, staff plans to engage Northern Water in discussions/negotiations regarding NISP. Such meetings and discussions will not change the City’s position regarding NISP, as currently set forth in Resolution 2015-082, and will not bind the City without subsequent action from City Council. 2. Downtown Parking Community Dialogue. (staff: Seth Lorson, Mike Beckstead, Kurt Ravenschlag; 12 minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to garner feedback from City Council on the recommendations from the Downtown Parking Community Dialogue, which is the parking element of the Downtown Plan. City investment is needed in order to implement the parking recommendations and staff is requesting an appropriation to invest in a parking data-collection system. The requested appropriation would come from the funds already assigned in the general fund budget balance from the 2015-16 budget for an on-street paid parking pilot. Also, staff is anticipating submitting a 2017-18 budget offer to invest in on-street paid parking technology. City of Fort Collins Page 2 3. Utilities Low-Income Assistance Program – Income Qualified Rate (IQR). (staff: Lisa Rosintoski, Lance Smith, Randy Reuscher; 12 minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion) The purpose of this item is to propose a discounted rate structure for low income households for electric, water, and wastewater utility services based on the 165th percentile of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Staff developed two priority improvements in 2015 to enable the successful implementation of a Utilities integrated low-income assistance program. The first improvement was to the existing Payment Assistance Fund Program (PAF) managing enhancements through several funding mechanisms to more effectively address temporary financial needs for utility customers facing imminent service interruptions due to unanticipated financial hardships. The second improvement is an Income Qualified Rate (IQR), which is a discounted rate structure for qualified Utilities customers, based on income, for electric, water and wastewater services.  OTHER BUSINESS.  ADJOURNMENT. DATE: STAFF: June 14, 2016 John Stokes, Natural Resources Director Carol Webb, Water Resources/Treatmnt Opns Mgr WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to review the City’s past and future approach to the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) and the project sponsor, Northern Water. NISP currently is nearing the final stages of its federal and state permitting processes. To date, the City has fully participated in those processes. Northern Water also has recently proposed modifications to NISP’s operations through town that require consideration by the City and that may present certain opportunities for the City. Going forward, staff plans to engage Northern Water in discussions/negotiations regarding NISP. Such meetings and discussions will not change the City’s position regarding NISP, as currently set forth in Resolution 2015-082, and will not bind the City without subsequent action from City Council. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Are there any questions or concerns regarding the City’s NISP-related work to date? 2. Are there any concerns, questions, or advice regarding the tactic of more directly engaging in discussions/negotiations with Northern Water? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) is a municipal water supply project designed and sponsored by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Northern Water) and fifteen municipalities and water districts, including the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District (FCLWD), a municipal water provider serving a portion of Fort Collins. NISP would involve substantial diversions of water from the Poudre River. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) must issue a permit before the project may proceed to construction. In addition, the project must receive a water quality certification from the Colorado Department of Health and the Environment (CDPHE) and an approved State Wildlife Mitigation Plan. The preferred alternative under review by the Corps (as well as three additional alternatives) would divert water from the Poudre River below the canyon mouth and above Fort Collins, thereby reducing flows through town. Under the preferred alternative, water from these upstream diversions would be stored in Glade Reservoir northwest of Fort Collins. In 2008, City Council endorsed a set of comprehensive comments to the Corps regarding the NISP Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Council also adopted Resolution 2008-002, stating that it opposed NISP as it was described at the time. The Corps then decided to issue a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) that describes the proponents’ preferred alternative (as well as three additional alternatives). It was published on June 19, 2015. In September, 2015, the City submitted comments and adopted Resolution 2015-082 (Attachment 1), stating that it could not support NISP as described “with the understanding that City Council may reach a different conclusion with respect to a future variant of NISP….” 1 Packet Pg. 3 June 14, 2016 Page 2 The next permitting steps will include the release of supplemental information related to water quality, the release of a Final Environmental Impact Statement, a water quality certification, and a State-approved Wildlife Mitigation Plan. Assuming all of these benchmarks are met, the Corp would issue a Record of Decision to either approve or deny the project. Northern Water recently announced a modification to its preferred alternative that would deliver more water through the Poudre River at certain times from near the mouth of the canyon to a location just upstream of the City’s Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility (MWRF) near Lemay and Mulberry (Attachment 2). A variation of this modification could deliver the water farther downstream to a location near the City’s Nix Farm facility, provided the City were to agree to certain modifications to the discharge point of the MWRF. The effects of MWRF’s discharge point relocation on the facility’s ability to meet National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations are being evaluated. The modification potentially poses certain advantages over previous versions of NISP. For example, it would eliminate a pipeline and water delivery from the proposed Glade Reservoir to Horsetooth Reservoir. The pipeline was a significant concern to Fort Collins from a water quality perspective. The new proposal also would deliver water to the Poudre River during low flow periods, which is likely to be beneficial. The new proposal, however, does not address other key concerns, in particular the fact that peak flows on the Poudre River will be significantly reduced, which has long-term negative consequences for habitat, as well as potential impacts related to flood- related safety concerns. Moreover, there continue to be concerns related to Poudre River water quality. In short, the modification raises a number of issues that require consideration by the City. To date, staff believes that the City’s comments to the Corps have been effective at describing the City’s concerns as well as influencing the Corps to seriously consider those concerns. Going forward the City will continue to participate in the formal Corps EIS process as well as comment on the State water quality certification and State Wildlife Mitigation Plan. While there may be continued opportunities to influence the analyses and decisions associated with these efforts, staff believes those opportunities are limited as the permitting process begins to wind down after nearly 15 years of effort by Northern Water. Further, as the analysis for NISP winds down, the formal processes will gravitate towards mitigation (required by the permitting agencies) and enhancements (efforts that go beyond what may be required). While continued participation in the formal permitting processes will be important and necessary, staff believes it makes sense at this time to enhance the City’s tactics and enter into direct discussions/negotiations with Northern Water about mutual interests and outcomes. In addition, with respect to the modification proposed by Northern Water, it is staff’s experience that discussions with the proponent of such a proposal may be more fruitful than reviewing the proposal in a vacuum. Furthermore, the modification potentially creates certain opportunities for the City regarding NISP and its operations through town. While the City occasionally has met with Northern Water to discuss NISP, those discussions have been general in nature and there has been no effort to deeply discuss, or even to negotiate, outcomes that meet the interests of both parties. Although there is no assurance that Northern Water would agree to engage in the suggested approach, Northern Water has indicated many times in the past that it would welcome a more involved relationship with respect to NISP. While the outcome of such discussions and negotiations are uncertain, the formal processes also are uncertain. Furthermore, based on staff’s observation, it appears that the Corps and the State may impose mitigation and monitoring requirements that fall short of the City’s expectations. Thus, it is possible that broadening the City’s approach will better protect and represent the City’s interests. Based on these observations, staff recommends that City Council appoint the City Manager and/or his designee(s) to be authorized to meet on a regular basis with Northern Water and to explore mutual interests in order to ascertain whether those interests can be met. If staff is able to develop concepts or plans with Northern Water to better meet the needs of both parties, staff would bring them to Council for its review. 1 Packet Pg. 4 June 14, 2016 Page 3 Key issues that would be explored in these potential discussion/negotiations are: (a) Water quality and other adverse impacts to the City’s water supplies that are used by the City to meet treated and untreated water demands; (b) Water quality and other adverse impacts to the City’s wastewater treatment facilities; (c) Adverse impacts to the ecology of the Cache la Poudre River from the point of diversion for NISP to the location where the river crosses Interstate 25; (d) Adverse impacts to the ability of the Cache la Poudre River to adequately convey storm and flood waters; (e) Adverse impacts to the aesthetic and recreational attributes of the Cache la Poudre River from the point of diversion for NISP to the location where the river crosses Interstate 25; and (f) NISP’s diminishment of “peak flows” in the Cache la Poudre River from the point of diversion for NISP to the location where the river crosses Interstate 25. The City’s concerns underlying these key issues are more fully expressed in the comments provided pursuant to Resolution 2008-002 and Resolution 2015-082. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2015-082 (PDF) 2. NISP Configuration Modification (PDF) 3. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 5 ATTACHMENT 1 1.1 Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Resolution 2015-082 (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 1.1 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Resolution 2015-082 (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) Fort Collins Poudre River Downtown Master Plan Reach - 3 River Miles Enhanced Flow Poudre River - 12 River Miles < @ Canyon Gage Lincoln Gage < @ NISP Delivery Pipeline (Route Approximate) NISP River Delivery Pipeline (Route Approximate) Glade Reservoir River Release Point Timnath Res. Inlet Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community . 01234 0.5 Miles cjb 3/25/2016 Northern Integrated Supply Project Project Configuration Modification 0 100,000 200,000 Overall Average Dry-Year Average Annual Flow (af) 0 50,000 100,000 Overall Average Dry-Year Average Annual Flow (af) 0 50,000 100,000 Overall Average Dry-Year Average Annual Flow (af) Key Existing NISP SDEIS NISP w/ D/S Diversion ATTACHMENT 2 1.2 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: NISP Configuration Modification (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 1 City Council Work Session Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps June 14, 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 2 1.3 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) NISP Participants 3 1.3 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 4 National Environmental Policy Act (FEIS in 2017) State of Colorado 401 Certification (2016/17) State of Colorado Wildlife Mitigation Plan (2016/17) Record of Decision NISP Permitting Process 1.3 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 5 Water Quality Ecology Stormwater Aesthetics and Recreation City Comments in 2008 and 2015 1.3 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 6 To oppose NISP as currently described; with the understanding that Council may reach a different conclusion with respect to a future variant….. Council’s Position 1.3 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) Continue to participate in the formal processes Engage in more direct, detailed discussions with Northern Water – perhaps negotiations Assumes that Northern would be willing Would not change City’s current position Any potential agreements would be brought to Council 7 City’s Approach Going Forward 1.3 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) 8 New NISP Alternative Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Fort Collins Poudre River Downtown Master Plan Reach - 3 River Miles Enhanced Flow Poudre River - 12 River Miles < @ Canyon Gage Lincoln Gage < @ NISP Delivery Pipeline (Route Approximate) NISP River Delivery Pipeline (Route Approximate) Glade Reservoir River Release Point Timnath Res. Inlet . 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 Miles cjb 3/25/2016 1.3 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) Northern IGA for Model Sharing 9 • Dynamic temperature modeling for NISP – Also needed for Halligan Project • Intergovernmental Agreement needed to share the model • Sharing models would avoid Halligan delay and ~$400,000 additional costs • Agreement: allows Fort Collins to comment on model results, but not methodology • IGA: Resolution (on consent) for City Council consideration on June 21 1.3 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) General Direction 1) Are there any questions or concerns regarding the City’s NISP-related work to date? 2) Are there any concerns, questions, or advice regarding the tactic of more directly engaging in discussions/negotiations with Northern Water? 10 1.3 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4531 : Northern Integrated Supply Project Update and Next Steps) DATE: STAFF: June 14, 2016 Seth Lorson, City Planner Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer Kurt Ravenschlag, Transfort/DAR General Manager WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Downtown Parking Community Dialogue. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to garner feedback from City Council on the recommendations from the Downtown Parking Community Dialogue, which is the parking element of the Downtown Plan. City investment is needed in order to implement the parking recommendations and staff is requesting an appropriation to invest in a parking data-collection system. The requested appropriation would come from the funds already assigned in the general fund budget balance from the 2015-16 budget for an on-street paid parking pilot. Also, staff is anticipating submitting a 2017-18 budget offer to invest in on-street paid parking technology. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does City Council support staff moving forward with an appropriation request to implement a parking data- collection system? 2. Does City Council support staff moving forward with a 2017-18 budget offer to invest in on-street paid parking technology? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION During the 2015-16 BFO process Parking Services proposed to pilot an on-street paid parking program. At that time, City Council’s perspective was that additional public outreach was necessary so funding was limited to a community dialogue aimed at exploring the merits of various parking management strategies. Planning Services began updating the Downtown Plan in 2015, which supported the Downtown Parking Community Dialogue. The Downtown Plan public engagement effort has included thousands of people through numerous engagement methods such as open houses, focus groups, public events, workshops, charrettes, boards and commissions, community groups, and online and text message questionnaires. Collaborating with the Downtown Business Association (DBA), some parking-specific outreach has been targeted at downtown business and property owners. The community dialogue has focused on strategies to achieve the following objectives as identified in the early phases of the Downtown Plan and the 2013 Parking Plan:  Increase the availability, ease of access to, and turnover of, on-street parking;  Develop a parking management system that is supportive of businesses, neighborhoods, and visitors;  Provide and communicate a variety of options for parking and for traveling to and around downtown;  Encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation to reduce parking demand; and  Identify a sustainable funding source for future access and transportation infrastructure investment. 2 Packet Pg. 19 June 14, 2016 Page 2 Staff has presented materials providing many case studies, strategies and options for achieving the above objectives (Attachment 1). Generally, the options have been focused on how best to manage on-street and garage parking facilities, and additional strategies to complement these resources. Although opinions are divided, the process has been gaining informed consent to make the changes necessary to more effectively manage current parking assets and plan for future parking infrastructure. Recommendations 1. Implement an on-street paid parking program; 2. Implement a system to collect parking utilization data; 3. Adjust enforcement: i. Explore expanding enforcement to weekends and evenings after 5 p.m.; ii. Limit 2-hour parking to an specific zone; 4. Create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program; 1. On-Street Paid Parking Program Parking Management Presently, on-street public parking is limited to two hours, Monday through Saturday 8 a.m. - 6 p.m. The public garages cost $1 per hour, with the first hour free. Being that the free on-street parking offers the most convenient and desirable spaces, the pricing system has been called “upside-down” which causes “garage avoidance” and trolling for available spaces creating congestion and increased exhaust emissions. Also, staff has learned that many downtown employees are “gaming the system” by moving their vehicles every two hours to a different block face, thus parking on-street all day long. The two-hour time limit also reduces flexibility for customers and visitors who want to stay longer. Funding Public Parking The 2013 Parking Plan states that “the City’s parking program will be self-funded.” And, “a parking enterprise or revenue fund will be used to account for all financial aspects of the parking program including, but not limited to, daily operations, maintenance, new parking infrastructure, neighborhood programs, and parking demand reduction initiatives.” Currently, the parking enterprise fund is only covering daily operations. New infrastructure, as evidenced by the Downtown Hotel Parking Garage public-private partnership, has been required to find other funding sources such as the City’s general fund. The Parking Plan identifies a need of up to an additional 1,510 public parking spaces by 2021 for which there is currently not a sustainable funding source. Recommendation The recommended on-street paid parking system would effectively manage parking resources and create a revenue source to invest in needed infrastructure and programs. An on-street paid parking program encourages people to park in the most appropriate locations based on the length of their stay. If they are planning to stay for the entire day, it would be more cost effective to park in the parking garages which would also create availability of on-street spaces for those planning a short visit. A theoretical financial model indicates that the revenue generated from an on-street paid parking program is adequate to service bonds to pay for all 5 remaining parking structures (Attachment 2). Additionally, it shows that surplus revenue would be generated that could be used to fund a more comprehensive transportation management program. 2 Packet Pg. 20 June 14, 2016 Page 3 2. System to Collect Parking Utilization Data Currently, the collection of parking data is done by hand. This means that it provides point-in-time occupancy data that does not indicate how long a vehicle has been parked nor when it leaves. The recommendation is to invest in technology to collect parking utilization data. For each parking space, the technology would indicate when a vehicle arrives, how long it stays, and when it leaves. This information will provide a much better understanding of parking behavior downtown and help with the implementation of on-street paid parking in terms of where the greater turnover is needed, when and where an expanded phase should begin, and inform variable rates based on demand. Additionally, staff is exploring technology that would inform the public where parking is available in real time. Staff proposes to implement this technology approximately a year before the on-street paid parking system. Preliminary research suggests the first phase of data collection would be for approximately 1,500 parking spaces. Most technologies on the market are sensors that are installed into each parking space. Staff estimates approximately $500,000 to implement the first phase. An appropriation would be requested from the funds already assigned in the general fund budget balance from the 2015-16 budget request for an on-street paid parking pilot. 3. Adjust Enforcement The most challenging times to find available on-street parking are when the 2-hour parking limit is not being enforced (i.e., after 6 p.m. and weekends). During these times people stay for extended amounts of time which doesn’t allow sufficient turnover; most likely, downtown employees working evening or weekend shifts. As noted above, many downtown employees are “gaming the system” by moving their vehicles every two hours to a different block face, thus parking on-street all day long. The recommendation to expand 2-hour enforcement is to encourage more turn-over during noted times. The creation of a 2-hour zone (in the downtown core) would allow people to park in the zone for two hours then they must move out of the zone as opposed to moving to another block face. The proposed adjustment in enforcement is to address these phenomena, in the short term, until on- street paid parking is implemented and supersedes these interim changes. 4. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Many ideas were proposed during the parking dialogue that would reduce parking demand, such as encouraging alternative modes of transportation, providing transit passes, providing parking passes for garages, etc. A TDM program could coordinate with downtown employers to reduce the amount of single-occupancy vehicles coming to downtown. FC Moves currently has a 2017 - 2018 budget offer submitted for a TDM program. Implementation Timeline ASAP: Adjust Enforcement, Create TDM Program Board and Commission Recommendations The following City boards were asked to provide recommendations based on the information provided above: Parking Advisory Board voted to recommend an alternative strategy for parking in downtown. It varies from the Downtown Plan’s recommendation in that it recommends an on-street paid parking pilot program to accompany the data-collection system and then use this data to determine IF the City should permanently implement the paid parking program. (Attachment 3) 2 Packet Pg. 21 June 14, 2016 Page 4 Planning and Zoning Board voted to recommend an alternative strategy for parking in downtown. It varies from the Downtown Plan’s recommendation in that it recommends collecting data with the proposed data-collection system and then use this data to determine IF the City should permanently implement the paid parking program. Additionally, they noted that the City should employ a comprehensive transportation and access management system with parking supporting the greater effort. (Attachment 3) Transportation Board voted to support the Downtown Plan’s recommendations. (Attachment 3) Downtown Development Authority (DDA) voted to support the Downtown Plan’s recommendations. (No memo provided.) ATTACHMENTS 1. Community Dialog (PDF) 2. On-Street Meters and New Garage Cash Flow Summary (PDF) 3. Board Recommendation memos (PDF) 4. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 22 DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMUNITY DIALOGUE KEY ISSUES: Throughout multiple stakeholder conversations and planning efforts, the following key issues were identiﬁed: • Perceived lack of adequate parking turnover and accessibility. • Concern about potential neighborhood impacts due to the increased pace of development. • Need for better communication about parking locations and availability. • Desire to move away from a punitive, enforcement- driven funding model. OBJECTIVES: Increase the availability, ease of access to and turnover of on-street parking. Develop a parking management system that is supportive of businesses, neighborhoods, and visitors. Provide and communicate a variety of options for parking and for traveling to and around Downtown. Encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation to reduce parking demand. Identify a sustainable funding source for future access and transportation infrastructure investment. Public Parking Vision Statement (Parking Plan, 2013): The City of Fort Collins will develop and manage parking as a critical component of public infrastructure and as a tool to promote and sustain economic health. Identify Vision/ Objectives Develop Options Evaluate Options/ Trade-offs Develop Recommendations ENGAGING STAKEHOLDERS PROCESS: ATTACHMENT 1 2.1 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) SPECTRUM OF PARKING ALTERNATIVES Where do your peer communities and districts fall along the spectrum? A combination of approaches and strategies is necessary to achieve the vision and objectives for parking and access downtown. ttt 2 HOURS FREE (then paid) 1 HOUR FREE (then paid) FREE PARKING 30 MIN. FREE (then paid) TIME- LIMITED PARKING (THEN LEAVE) 20 MIN. FREE (then paid) PAID PARKING ؘ Provides two-hour, free on-street parking with enforcement ؘ Provides a moderate amount of free on-street parking ؘ Preserves a limited amount of free on-street parking ؘ Promotes turnover ؘ Does not provide any free on-street parking ؘ Promotes turnover Fort Collins Boulder Missoula Sioux Falls Eugene On-Street Parking Management Strategies Garage Parking Management Strategies FREE PARKING PAID PARKING FIRST HOUR FREE ؘ Provides all day, free off-street parking ؘ Offers a viable alternative to on- street parking ؘ Attractive to both short- and long- term parkers ؘ Provides a moderate amount of free off-street parking ؘ Attractive to both short- and long-term parkers ؘ Does not provide DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Parking Community Dialogue: CASE STUDY SNAPSHOT City of Boulder Parking Services Boulder, Colorado Population: 103,840 PROGRAM OVERVIEW: Boulder Parking Services manages the parking garages, on-street systems and enforcement for Boulder’s three major commercial areas: Downtown Boulder, University Hill and, when completed, Boulder Junction. They also manage 10 Neighborhood Permit programs throughout the City. Their mission is to provide quality program, parking, enforcement, maintenance, and alternative modes services through the highest level of customer service, efﬁcient management and effective problem solving. QUICK STATS: z 2,700 on-street spaces z 2,194 spaces in garages z 1,300 bike parking spaces z 6,392 Ecopass holders z On-street paid parking via multi-space meters z Pay-by-phone available z Offer “1st hour free” in garages z Enhanced wayﬁnding through variable messaging signage z Piloting sensors in garages to indicate space availability z Installed parking meters in 1946 z 2014 parking revenue: $10,721,689 REVENUE FOR 2014 BY SOURCES: z On-street meter – 33% z Short term garage-hourly- 17% z Long term garage-permits – 26% z Parking products – garage/on-street – 6% z NPP-resident/commuter – 1% z Enforcement – 16% Boulder COLOR ADO 2.1 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES: z Boulder’s parking management and parking district system has a long history, with the ﬁrst parking meters installed on Pearl Street in 1946. During the past decades, Boulder’s parking system has evolved into a nationally recognized, district-based, multimodal access system that incorporates transit, bicycling and pedestrians, along with automobile parking. z The City takes an integrated approach to parking management and actively encourages the use of alternative modes of transportation. 56% of people accessing downtown by car, 19% walk, 9% take the bus, 9% bike and 9% use other methods like carpooling. z Boulder has a sophisticated customer base that is used to shopping in larger cities where on-street paid parking is common, so they don’t hear a lot of complaints from customers about paying for parking. z There is a fairly ‘signiﬁcant’ group of downtown business owners who feel that on-street parking should be free. However, Downtown Boulder Inc. (DBI) staff indicate that on Sundays when parking is free, all on-street space are completely ﬁlled by employees hours before any businesses even open. z Even with the City’s strong emphasis on encouraging the use of public transit, biking and walking when accessing downtown, there is still a 1,500+ person waiting list for a downtown parking permit and an estimated shortage of nearly 2,500 additional spaces by 2022. z Due to the limited supply of parking in Downtown Boulder, there is not enough parking inventory to support both employees and customers, so the DBI supports the City charging for parking on-street. z Revenue from on-street paid parking supports other downtown initiatives, including an EcoPass for all downtown employees, Transportation Demand Management efforts and downtown amenities like public art and pop-jet fountains. z As part of an ongoing, multi-year planning project (Access Management and Parking Strategy or “AMPS”), the City is creating a toolbox of funding mechanisms (i.e., Parking Beneﬁt District, TDM District) for commercial districts who want to manage parking and raise revenue. SOURCES: • Downtown and University Hill Management District and Parking Services • Downtown Boulder Inc. DOWNTOWN VITALITY: z Avg. Commercial Lease (Rent)/Sq Ft: $29.01 z Retail Mix: z Retail: 60% z Restaurants and Bars: 40% z Retail Sales Mix: z Restaurants and Bars: 55% z Retail: 45% z Downtown Vacancy: Very low (< 3%) 2.1 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Parking Community Dialogue: CASE STUDY SNAPSHOT Missoula Parking Commission Missoula, Montana Population: 69,122 PROGRAM OVERVIEW: The MPC manages three parking garages, 12 surface lots, the on-street system and enforcement for Downtown Missoula. They also manage a Residential Permit Parking Program adjacent to the University of Montana. Their mission is to work with government, businesses and citizens to provide and manage parking and parking alternatives, the MPC identiﬁes and responds to changing parking needs and opportunities. QUICK STATS: z 1,100 on-street spaces z 1,275 spaces in garages z 200 bike racks z Installed parking meters in 1948 z Currently implementing new multi-space meters and Pay-by-phone z Offer “1st hour free” in garages z 2014 parking revenue: $1,557,656 REVENUE FOR 2014 BY SOURCES: z Lease spaces – 44% z Parking meters – 31% z Parking tickets – 14% DOWNTOWN VITALITY: MONTANA Missoula z Avg. Commercial Lease (Rent)/Sq Ft: $15.12 z Retail Mix: z Retail: 65% z Restaurants and Bars: 35% z Retail Sales Mix: z Retail: 60% z Restaurants and Bars: 40% z Downtown Vacancy: 13% 2.1 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES: z The Missoula Parking Commission’s biggest focus right now is working on implementation of new smart meter technology and transitioning to a different rate structure (from .25/hour to $1.00/hour). They have selected multi-space meters with a Pay-by-Phone option. z Their second biggest priority is stakeholder and community education. The MPC works to communicate proactively to stakeholders about why rates are changing and that there are multiple options available for customers including less expensive off-street garage parking. z The Missoula Downtown Partnership (MDP) actively works with the MPC to keep downtown stakeholders informed about the changes in parking management policy and technology. z While there is a small vocal downtown business owners who feel that parking should be free on-street, the MDP supports the MPC’s use of on-street paid parking to ensure turnover and availability for customer parking. z MDP staff and board members were heavily involved in the community engagement efforts that surrounded the recent selection of new parking meter technology for Downtown Missoula. z Increased meter rates have allowed the MPC to decrease their reliance on revenue from ﬁnes, and they have seen compliance increase and ﬁne revenue decrease. z The MPC recently used meter revenues to invest in the award-winning Park Place parking structure. Almost immediately after the commitment was made to build Park Place, a developer purchased a signiﬁcantly-sized adjacent property that had long been vacant. z Having meters provides a diversiﬁed revenue stream that has helped MPC navigate the recession. SOURCES: • Missoula Parking Commission • Missoula Downtown Partnership 2.1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Parking Community Dialogue: CASE STUDY SNAPSHOT Cherry Creek Business Improvement District Denver, Colorado District size: 16 blocks DISTRICT OVERVIEW: The Cherry Creek North Business Improvement District (BID) was established in 1989 as the ﬁrst business improvement district in Colorado. The District serves the area between 1st and 3rd Avenues, University and Steele Streets, a 16-block area. The mission of the BID is to creatively plan, manage, and promote Cherry Creek North as the premier outdoor shopping and dining destination in order to support the success of their businesses. QUICK STATS: z 670 on-street spaces z 2,054 spaces in garages z 2 B-Cycle stations z Installed parking meters in 2003 z On-street paid parking via single space smart meters z 2014 on-street parking revenue: $1,276,092 (Off-street is all privately managed) DISTRICT VITALITY: z Avg. Commercial Lease (Rent)/Sq Ft: $22.32 z Over 400 Businesses, 74% are Local z Retail Mix: z Retail: 40% z Restaurants and Bars: 14% z Ofﬁce/Services: 46% z Retail Sales Mix: z Retail: 36% z Restaurants and Bars: 34% z Other: 30% z District Vacancy: 10% Denver COLOR ADO 2.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES: z In 2003, an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) was created between the City of Denver and the Cherry Creek North BID to address a mutually agreed-upon “lack of adequate public parking”. The IGA included three strategies to address the issue, including: z Installing multi-space smart parking meters z Implementing a Residential Parking Permit Program to protect surrounding neighborhoods from spillover z Building a parking garage through a Public Private Partnership with the BID that included condominiums on top and two levels of parking for employees (approximately 200 spaces) that would be provided to employees at a subsidized monthly rate (about half price) z In 2009, the multi-space meters were replaced with single-space smart meters, which were very well- received by district stakeholders and customers due to the increased convenience of having a meter at each space. z The BID is working with private property owners to identify unused and underutilized spaces in garages for additional employee and visitor parking. z Before the installation of parking meters, there was no mechanism to keep employees from parking on- street in front of stores. There are still some instances of this happening but it isn’t nearly as prevalent as before the implementation of meters. z While there were some challenges with meter technology that was originally installed (it was early generation equipment), since the new single-space meters were installed in 2009, complaints and tickets have gone down signiﬁcantly while meter revenue continues to rise. The new meters also decreased the tension between City enforcement ofﬁcers and district stakeholders. z Consumer expectations are rapidly changing and the BID doesn’t hear many complaints from district business owners or patrons about paying for parking. While the BID admits that they may have lost some customers with the installation of paid parking on-street, the district has continued to thrive and now there are multiple options for people to choose from when visiting the district. z The two biggest lessons learned from the district’s installation of meters were: 1. It’s about balancing the needs of all users and offering multiple options at varying price points; and 2. The importance of using data to determine who is actually parking in valuable on-street spaces, which in Cherry Creek North’s case was employees and business owners. SOURCES: • City of Denver Public Works • Cherry Creek Business Improvement District 2.1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Parking Community Dialogue: CASE STUDY SNAPSHOT Epark: City of Eugene Parking Services Eugene, Oregon Population: 159,190 QUICK STATS: z 996 on-street spaces z 2,627 spaces in garages z 917 bike spaces; 100 bike racks z On-street parking is a mixture of coin-operated and single-space credit card meters z Pay-by-phone available (off-street only) z Offer “1st hour free” in two largest garages (~1,000 spaces) z Installed parking meters in 1939 z 2014 parking revenue: $3,100,000 z Revenue by sources: z Leased commercial space: 18% z Monthly garage permits: 41% z On-street meter revenue: 19% z Daily garage parking: 12% z Citations (in garages): 1% z Special events: 3% z Citations (on-street): 6% DISTRICT VITALITY: z Avg. Commercial Lease (Rent)/Sq Ft: $24.00 z Retail Mix: z Retail: 50% z Restaurants and Bars: 50% z Retail Sales Mix: z Retail: 36% z Restaurants and Bars: 34% z Other: 30% z District Vacancy: 25% Eugene OREGON 2.1 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES: z Epark Eugene has parking management jurisdiction for the entire City of Eugene including enforcement of public streets on the University of Oregon campus. The downtown program (which includes 52-block area) accounts for about half the overall program in size and in revenue generated. z There is a mixture of coin-operated meters and single-space credit card enabled meters throughout Downtown Eugene and on the University of Oregon campus. Multi-space meters are also being piloted in some areas. z The City is currently transitioning from a Residential Parking Permit Program (RPPP) that costs $40/ annually to a market-based fee structure that will cost $150 per quarter (or $600/annually). z In 2010, parking meters were removed from a 12-block area in Downtown Eugene where the City wanted to incentivize redevelopment. Now that the area is nearly redeveloped, the business owners are asking the City to reinstall meters to encourage turnover and address the issue of employees parking on-street. z The biggest challenge that Epark is currently facing is its decentralized organizational structure. Maintenance of the off-street facilities is currently managed by another City department, as is ﬁne adjudication. z Downtown Eugene offers a variety of transportation options, including bus depot, train station and Bus Rapid Transit connect to the University of Oregon. z According to the Eugene Chamber (Downtown Eugene Inc.), off-street garages are almost never at capacity, however there are very few available on-street spaces. z While downtown vacancy is at about 25%, this is mostly because there are a few very large vacant spaces; most of the smaller retail spaces leased at the beginning of summer 2015. z Downtown retail is majority locally-owned and can be very seasonal; there are some businesses that aren’t open for months at a time (especially when school is not in session). z Parking garage safety is biggest concern for downtown business and property owners. SOURCES: • Epark: City of Eugene Parking Services • Downtown Eugene Inc. 2.1 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Parking Community Dialogue: CASE STUDY SNAPSHOT Sioux Falls Public Parking Sioux Falls, South Dakota Population: 164,676 QUICK STATS: z 1,000 on-street spaces z 2,400 spaces in garages z On-street paid parking via combination of coin-operated and single-space credit card meters z Installed parking meters in the 1940s z 2014 parking revenue: $2,010,881 z Revenue for 2014 by sources: z On-street meter: 16% z Garage and surface lot permits: 65% z Enforcement: 18% z Miscellaneous: 1% DOWNTOWN VITALITY: z Avg. Commercial Lease (Rent)/Sq Ft: $14.28 z Retail Mix: z Retail: 50% z Restaurants and Bars: 50% z Retail Sales Mix: z Retail: 36% z Restaurants and Bars: 34% z Other: 30% z District Vacancy: <6% Sioux Falls SOUTH DAKOTA 2.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DRAFT – 10.12.2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES: z Perception is that there is not enough parking in Downtown Sioux Falls, however the downtown development organization is partnering with the public parking system to change this perception through public education and marketing efforts. z The City recently rebranded the public parking system and transitioned from enforcement ofﬁcers to “Parking Attendant Liaisons”. z The public parking system launched a mobile-optimized website that has off-street parking locations and rates, on-street meter rates and information about when parking is free (after 5:00 PM during the weekdays and on weekends). z Sioux Falls Public Parking reports that their biggest opportunity is the integration of new technology – both hardware (i.e., transition from coin-operated to single-space credit card enabled meters) and software (i.e., new mobile and web resources for customers). z The public parking system functions as a self-supporting enterprise fund and is trying to balance their desire to offer a range of affordable off-street parking permit rates while also planning for future investment in additional structured parking assets. SOURCES: • Sioux Falls Public Parking • Downtown Sioux Falls Inc. 2.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) On-Street Meters and New Garage Cash Flow Summary (in 000's) Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Revenue On-Street Metered $ - $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 $ 5,079 Garages - - - - 831 848 1,441 1,470 1,899 1,937 2,392 2,439 2,813 2,869 2,926 2,985 Total Revenue $ - $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 3,024 $ 3,855 $ 3,872 $ 6,520 $ 6,548 $ 6,978 $ 7,016 $ 7,470 $ 7,518 $ 7,891 $ 7,948 $ 8,005 $ 8,064 Expenses On-Street Sensors $ (525) $ (53) $ (54) $ (277) $ (78) $ (80) $ (81) $ (627) $ (84) $ (86) $ (319) $ (90) $ (91) $ (93) $ (720) $ (97) On-Street Metered $ (714) $ (71) $ (73) $ (74) $ (76) $ (762) $ (147) $ (874) $ (152) $ (155) $ (158) $ (161) $ (873) $ (167) $ (1,004) $ (174) Garages $ - $ - $ - $ (247) $ (856) $ (1,072) $ (1,487) $ (1,683) $ (1,963) $ (2,176) $ (2,743) $ (2,685) $ (2,917) $ (3,200) $ (3,036) $ (2,327) Total Operating Expenses $ (1,239) $ (124) $ (126) $ (598) $ (1,009) $ (1,913) $ (1,715) $ (3,183) $ (2,199) $ (2,416) $ (3,219) $ (2,935) $ (3,882) $ (3,460) $ (4,760) $ (2,599) Bond Repayment Garages $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (932) $ (932) $ (1,578) $ (1,578) $ (2,027) $ (2,027) $ (2,595) $ (2,595) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) Total Bond Exp $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (932) $ (932) $ (1,578) $ (1,578) $ (2,027) $ (2,027) $ (2,595) $ (2,595) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) $ (3,060) Total Expenses $ (1,239) $ (124) $ (126) $ (598) $ (1,941) $ (2,845) $ (3,293) $ (4,762) $ (4,226) $ (4,443) $ (5,814) $ (5,530) $ (6,942) $ (6,521) $ (7,820) $ (5,659) Cash Flow $ (1,239) $ 2,900 $ 2,898 $ 2,426 $ 1,914 $ 1,027 $ 3,226 $ 1,787 $ 2,752 $ 2,573 $ 1,656 $ 1,988 $ 949 $ 1,427 $ 185 $ 2,405 NPV @ 3% $22,703 Fund Balance $ (1,239) $ 1,661 $ 4,559 $ 6,984 $ 8,898 $ 9,925 $ 13,151 $ 14,938 $ 17,690 $ 20,262 $ 21,918 $ 23,907 $ 24,856 $ 26,283 $ 26,468 $ 28,872 ATTACHMENT 2 2.2 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: On-Street Meters and New Garage Cash Flow Summary (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Community Development & Neighborhood Services Planning 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.221.6376 970.224.6111- fax DATE: May 17, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers FROM: Kristin Kirkpatrick, Planning and Zoning Board Chair Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager RE: Downtown Parking Recommendation 1. The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the Downtown Parking Recommendation at its May 12, 2016 hearing. These recommendations included: Implement an on-street paid parking program; 2. Implement a system to collect parking utilization data; 3. Adjust enforcement: i. Explore expanding enforcement to weekends and evenings after 5 p.m.; ii. Limit 2-hour parking to an specific zone; 4. Create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program; The Planning and Zoning Board, on a 5-1 vote (Hobbs absent, Schneider dissenting) supported an alternative recommendation to further study the need for an on-street paid parking program, with the outcomes and recommendations of such study based upon a parking monitoring system and parking usage data collected. The Board agreed with the Downtown Plan’s recommendation to adjust enforcement and create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. Further, Board members forwarded the comment (6-0 vote) that “while the Board recognizes the complexity of downtown parking issues, they primarily focus on Land Use Code issues coupled with a dynamic in-fill and redevelopment market; the only way to be successful in these situations is to focus more holistically on transportation demand management and parking as a strategy within that umbrella”. ATTACHMENT 3 2.3 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Board Recommendation memos (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Chair, Susan Kirkpatrick Vice Chair, Holly Wright PARKING ADVISORY BOARD MEMORANDUM DATE: May 16, 2016 TO: City of Fort Collins Councilmembers FROM: Parking Advisory Board RE: Parking Advisory Board’s Downtown Plan Parking Element Recommendation On April 11, 2016 Seth Lorson presented staff recommendations from the Downtown Parking Community Dialogue (an element of the Downtown Plan) to the Parking Advisory Board. The Parking Advisory Board voted 8 – 1 to not support the recommendations and drafted an alternative recommendation as follows: (proposed changes in bold) 1. Implement a monitoring system to collect data on occupancy and turnover, and pilot an on-street paid parking program in a portion of downtown. 2. Adjust enforcement: (Same as staff recommendation) • Explore weekends and evenings • Explore 2-hour parking limits to an entire zone 3. Create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. (Same as staff recommendation) 4. Engage in public-private partnerships to use under-utilized surface parking on private lots and parking structures. 5. After one year, analyze data collected from monitoring system to determine if an on-street paid parking system should be implemented throughout downtown. Parking Advisory Board members would like to acknowledge the time and efforts that City Staff has dedicated to educate Board members and for allowing them to be part of the Downtown Plan. These Staff efforts helped to generate the dialog about the alternative recommendations the Parking Advisory Board crafted. Discussion: Staff recommendation to implement an on-street paid parking system without first developing robust data about availability and turnover is premature. This conclusion is consistent with the Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods parking plan, adopted January 15, 2013. The staff did not present new evidence of the need for on-street paid parking in the near term. Creating a pilot program with paid on-street, along with the downtown-wide monitoring system would provide additional data. Downtown Fort Collins has several surface parking lots and parking structures that are under- utilized but in private hands. Parking spaces in structures cost $30,000 - $35,000 to build, it is important to explore entering into formal relationships with parking lot owners to potentially structure financial arraignments to gain access to these parking assets with the City managing the permitting process. Surface lots are perceived by some citizens safer than structure parking and the land-use is already committed to parking use. This option has been discussed for many years but has never been specifically directed through policy. 2.3 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Board Recommendation memos (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Eric Shenk, Chair Annabelle Berklund, Vice Chair Transportation Board DATE: April 27, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers FROM: Eric Shenk, Transportation Board Chair, on behalf of the Transportation Board RE: Downtown Parking Recommendation The Transportation Board reviewed the Downtown Parking Recommendation presented by Seth Lorson at our April 20, 2016 meeting. These recommendations include: 1) Implement a monitoring system to collect data on occupancy and turnover; 2) Adjust enforcement by exploring enforcement on weekend/evenings and/or expanded 2-hour parking limits to an entire zone; 3) Create a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program; and 4) On-street paid parking. The Transportation Board voted to support these recommendations on a 3-2 vote. The Transportation Board unanimously agrees that the above recommendations are an appropriate policy framework from which to develop a refined downtown parking management plan. The dissenting votes expressed concerns that until these recommendations are refined into a plan, i.e. type of parking monitoring system, additional manpower needed for enforcement, source and amount of resources needed to implement a TDM program, that this policy lacks the objective details necessary to be properly vetted by the Transportation Board. If Council and Staff move forward with the above recommendations then the Transportation Board would welcome ongoing updates as a more detailed plan comes to fruition. Respectfully submitted, C. Eric Shenk, Transportation Board Chair 2.3 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Board Recommendation memos (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Downtown Parking Community Dialogue ATTACHMENT 4 2.4 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Agenda 1. Overview 2. Process 3. Recommendations 4. Next steps 2.4 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Overview • Council Directive • Over a year of public dialogue based on: – Issues and objectives – Case studies – Building on the Parking Plan • Recommendations: – On-street paid parking – Data collection system – Adjust enforcement – TDM 2.4 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Process 2.4 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Public Engagement • Public: workshops, charrettes, events, online & text surveys • Targeted Stakeholders: Working Group meetings, parking focus groups • City Boards and Commissions: Parking Advisory Board, Transportation Board • DDA and DBA 2.4 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Public Engagement How should we encourage people to park in the location most appropriate for their type of trip? 2.4 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Feedback • Lack of parking availability (on-street & garage) – Finding available spaces quick and convenient • Employee parking – cost, location • Flexibility in length of stay • Communicate parking locations/availability • Reduce parking demand with ped/bike/transit • More parking garages • Divided on paid parking – don’t “shock” the system 2.4 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Workshop Poll 5. How should we encourage people to park in the most appropriate locations based on the length of stay? (select 3) (Multiple Choice - Multiple Response) Responses Percent On-street paid parking 18.02% Free parking garages 14.53% Better communication and wayfinding 7.56% Expand enforcement to evenings and weekends 8.72% Enforce 2-hour limit in a zone 11.05% Transportation Demand Management 12.21% Incentivize employees to park in garages 19.77% Other 8.14% Totals 100% 2.4 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Recommendations 1. On-Street Paid Parking 2. System to collect parking utilization data 3. Adjust enforcement: • Explore weekends and evenings • Expand 2-hour parking limits to a specific zone 4. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. 2.4 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) On-street paid parking • Manage parking based on cost – encourages turnover • Creates revenue sources for projected 1,510 public spaces needed – Sustainable revenue – Non punitive-based – Support growth trajectory 2.4 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) On-street paid parking • Financial Model: – Supports development of 5 additional parking structures – Surplus revenue for other programs 2.4 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Data Collection System • In-space technology • Real-time data – Occupancy – Turnover • Direct public to available spaces • Inform on-street paid parking – Locations – Variable pricing 2.4 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Data Collection System • Approx. 1,500 spaces • $500,000 • Appropriate from $750,000 already assigned in general fund reserve 2.4 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Adjust enforcement • Interim relief measures • Explore weekends and evenings – Encourage turnover • Expand 2-hour parking limits to a specific zone – Mitigate the “2-hour shuffle” 2.4 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Implement programs to reduce parking demand • Help employers with parking and transit passes • Carpooling and flex-time work schedules • Incentivize alternative modes (bikes, transit) • Enhance communication about transportation options 2.4 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Board Recommendations (Transportation Board, Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and Economic Advisory Commission supported Downtown Plan recommendations) 2.4 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Questions Does City Council support staff moving forward with an appropriation request to implement a parking data- collection system? Does City Council support staff moving forward with a 2017-18 budget offer to invest in on-street paid parking technology? 2.4 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) Thank You! 2.4 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue) DATE: STAFF: June 14, 2016 Lisa Rosintoski, Utilities Customer Connections Manager Lance Smith, Strategic Financial Planning Manager Randy Reuscher, Utility Rate Analyst WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Utilities Low-Income Assistance Program – Income Qualified Rate (IQR). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to propose a discounted rate structure for low income households for electric, water, and wastewater utility services based on the 165th percentile of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Staff developed two priority improvements in 2015 to enable the successful implementation of a Utilities integrated low-income assistance program. The first improvement was to the existing Payment Assistance Fund Program (PAF) managing enhancements through several funding mechanisms to more effectively address temporary financial needs for utility customers facing imminent service interruptions due to unanticipated financial hardships. The second improvement is an Income Qualified Rate (IQR), which is a discounted rate structure for qualified Utilities customers, based on income, for electric, water and wastewater services. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have feedback on the proposed Income-Qualified Rate? 2. Does Council have concerns staff has not addressed? 3. Is Council supportive of a January 1, 2017 implementation date? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Utilities staff, in collaboration with internal and community stakeholders, has determined that an effective conservation strategy addressing affordable energy for low-income customers includes the development of an Income-Qualified Rate (IQR). Incorporating IQR will enable Utilities to refine and improve conservation and efficiency programs as they relate to low-income customers who may not have the ability to participate due to transportation difficulties, lack of time, or lack of financial resources needed to meet up-front conservation or efficiency program costs. When a Utilities customer has persistent financial difficulty in paying for utility services, the PAF is not adequate or appropriate to address this situation month after month. In addition, any further rate increases required to either support Utilities increasing costs of service, or to support accepted utility purposes such as resource conservation efforts, are likely to exacerbate a low-income customer’s difficulty in paying utility bills. Thus, IQR is an opportunity to address the financial hardships of the low-income customer segment, through a rate structure that encourages participation in energy and water conservation and efficiency programs. Staff proposes the implementation of a two year pilot rate beginning in January 2017. Using data collected throughout 2017, staff will provide City Council a memorandum in 2018 outlining the execution results, which will evaluate the rate and determine if adjustments are necessary. After monitoring and collecting data for two years, a full analysis and evaluation will be conducted and brought to City Council for consideration of continued implementation in 2019. 3 Packet Pg. 57 June 14, 2016 Page 2 Utilities Low-Income Assistance Program Evaluation In 2014, a comprehensive low-income assistance program evaluation was conducted with internal and external key stakeholders, in order to understand Utilities role to optimally support low-income customers, detailed in Attachment 1. Stakeholders involved in both the 2014 evaluation report and on the 2015 implementation project team effort included: 1. Interdepartmental participants: Customer Connections, Social Sustainability, City Finance, Utilities Finance, Neighborhood Services. 2. Boards, Commissions and Committees: Energy Board, Water Board, Senior Advisory Board, Affordable Housing Board, Human Relations Commission, Community Development Block Grant Commission, Commission on Disability, Council Finance Committee, Economic Advisory Committee, and Chamber of Commerce. 3. Governmental Partners: Colorado Energy Office, Larimer County Human Services Department 4. Community Action Partners: Energy Outreach Colorado, Volunteers of America, United Way, Office on Aging, Catholic Charities, La Familia/The Family Center, Discover Goodwill, Social Sustainability Grantee Training participants (26 non-profit agencies). 5. Housing Partners: Fort Collins Housing Authority, Neighbor to Neighbor, Care Housing, multi-family group- metered properties. Payment Assistance Fund (PAF) Improvements to funding and administration of the PAF include leveraging community match funding through Energy Outreach Colorado and repurposing abandoned utility service account balances in the same manner as the State does to support a more robust PAF. Through these enhancements, it is expected the PAF annual budget may exceed $100,000 annually making it possible to help more customers each year with payment assistance for temporary and time sensitive needs. Income Qualified Rate (IQR) In the Fort Collins community, the average household with income of less than 165% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) pays 4.6% of their income for electric, water and wastewater services compared to the 2.6% of household income paid by those households earning the Area Median Income (AMI) (see Graph 1). To address this disparity the proposed IQR would align the percentage of household income at 165% of FPL to that of an AMI 2.5 person household. When structuring the IQR, it is important the same ratio of fixed and variable charges exists in order to convey the same conservation signals to customers. This could be accomplished by reducing both the fixed and variable charges for the IQR customers for each of these three utility services by a combined 40%. See Table 3 for a discount break down for each service. 3 Packet Pg. 58 June 14, 2016 Page 3 Graph 1: Based on 2009-2013 US Census data. In order to estimate how many potential households may qualify for IQR, staff utilized the latest American Community Survey data to estimate household incomes for Fort Collins. Based on that data there are as many as 9,000 eligible households, or ~ 16% of our residential customers, potentially eligible for the IQR (See Graph 2). This is consistent with the latest US Census data (2009-2013) which indicates 18.6% of people in the City of Fort Collins are below poverty level, compared to 13.2% in the state of Colorado <http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/08/0827425.html> and 15.4% nationwide. Graph 2: Based on 2009-2013 US Census data. The actual cost of IQR depends on the level of enrollment. Table 1, below, shows cost by utility at various enrollment levels. 3 Packet Pg. 59 June 14, 2016 Page 4 enrollment % Electric Water Wastewater 25% $ 350,307 $ 57,679 $ 96,309 50% $ 700,614 $ 115,358 $ 192,618 75% $ 1,050,922 $ 173,037 $ 288,926 100% $ 1,401,229 $ 230,716 $ 385,235 IQR Annual Cost Table 1 Assuming 100% enrollment, Table 2 shows the necessary rate increase to fund this program if the increase is kept within the residential rate class and if the increase is shared across all rate classes. Achieving an enrollment rate less than 100% would scale the rate impact accordingly. Based on the experiences of other communities, enrollment above 75% of eligible households is difficult to achieve. Electric Water Wastewater Residential Rate Class Only 3.0% 1.3% 2.4% All Rate Classes 1.2% 0.8% 1.8% % Increase By Utility Service (Assuming 100% Enrollment) Table 2 The intent of IQR is to reduce overall cost of utility services to the same relative level experienced by a household with income at the Area Median Income, so each utility service would see a different discount rate (See Table 3). The discount would be applied to both the fixed and variable charges for each utility, ensuring the same price signals are communicated to this segment of residential customers as are to the entire residential rate class. Electric Water Wastewater 165% FPL 2.0% 1.3% 1.3% AMI 1.3% 0.7% 0.6% Discount 35% 46% 54% % Income By Utility Service Table 3 Specific utility purposes the IQR serves IQR provides a utility purpose in relation to energy and resource conservation, as well as affordable rates for customers. IQR will serve the utility purposes beneficial to the utility rate payers described below. Utilities will collect and analyze IQR participation data to annually determine the extent to which these program benefits are achieved across the residential rate class and each utility. This data will be reported to Council as outlined in the “Evaluation with Measures” section below, and the data will be used to refine the IQR parameters to maintain the highest and most sustainable rate benefits for each utility: 1. The IQR qualification process will establish a mechanism to identify and to promote the most applicable conservation program opportunities for low-income customers, including education and the ability to identify whether programs and rate structures are effective for this customer segment.  IQR supports the continuous improvement of residential programs, with direct data recognizing the household incomes of ratepayers and their relative abilities to pursue conservation and efficiency incentives.  Currently, $2M is collected annually for residential energy efficiency programs, and $750K for residential water conservation programs. Of this, low-income customers pay approximately $320K and $120K, respectively, but participate at approximately half the level of customers who are not low-income (See Table 4). 3 Packet Pg. 60 June 14, 2016 Page 5 Table 4  Financial hardship and a prevalent tenant status in this customer segment, impair the ability and likelihood to pursue home efficiency improvements. 2. IQR will directly reach low-income customers with behavior-related programs designed to permanently reduce their energy costs, and education focused on conservation by creating a financial incentive paired with bill payment assistance.  Low-income homes are more likely to be heated primarily with inefficient units, e.g., portable electric heaters, electric resistance heaters, electric water heaters; less likely to have and use programmable thermostats; more likely to use high heat settings; and less likely to participate in energy saving appliance programs. This is likely due to up-front costs associated with some efficiency programs (e.g., appliance replacement), the general inability of tenants to address dwelling efficiency needs, and the challenges of communicating with this traditionally hard to reach customer segment.  The IQR has the potential to funnel program resources to achieve targeted low-cost efficiency measures with high conservation behavior change potential within this traditionally non-homeowner segment, without relying on direct system replacements or other actions that disproportionately reward third-party property owners or managers at the expense of rate payers. 3. Aligning bill payment assistance with energy efficiency programs is a utility industry best practice leading to more effective outreach to low-income households.  Delivering programs through an IQR will allow Utilities to craft programs sensitive to this customer segment’s unique circumstance and targeted to their consumption profile, which may include low and no cost upgrades, behavioral awareness and habit change.  The anticipated result is reduced consumption with the segment and across the residential class, due to greater adoption of conservation practices and participation in efficiency programs. Increasing participation in such efforts in less energy efficient housing serves the broader utility purpose of promoting energy and resource conservation. 4. IQR will align with efforts to position the Home Efficiency Loan Program (HELP) as a strategy to support low- income customers’ participation in energy efficiency. With a clearly defined income qualified customer segment, it may be possible to craft eligibility requirements for HELP specifically targeted to IQR enrolled homeowners. Increasing participation in such efforts in less energy efficient housing serves the broader utility purpose of promoting energy and resource conservation. 5. IQR will enable Utilities to better study the effectiveness of strategies to reach specific customer segments. Staff will be able to compare the use of targeted marketing and outreach strategies with actual premise usage, allowing Utilities to better quantify realized energy savings. 6. IQR will enable Utilities to better leverage existing low or no cost regional efficiency programs, such as LEAP, Monitor My Use, Larimer County Energy and Water Program, and Colorado Energy Office Weatherization/Longs Peak Energy Conservation. 3 Packet Pg. 61 June 14, 2016 Page 6  Data gathered through IQR will be unique from that available through other regional programs because it will focus on City customers, as opposed to broader populations, and will correlate income and conservation receptivity with greater granularity than other agencies can provide. Aligning with other government partners to gather and evaluate this data will aid in determining whether messaging to low- income customers is tailored to encourage the intended customer behaviors.  On-going analysis of this data will allow for timely enhancements across Utility conservation and efficiency programs. Execution of the Income Qualified Rate Outreach Outreach will be intentional in reaching a spectrum of customers within the low-income segment. Tactics will include widely accessible, mass communications such as website and social media information, as well as direct mail to potential participants and targeted communication disseminated through local service providers and internal partners. Staff will work with local service providers and internal partners to eliminate these barriers and increase access to IQR. Administration Larimer County Department of Human Services (DHS) administers the state sponsored LEAP program. LEAP deploys a thorough qualification process to successfully qualify thousands of applicants for energy assistance each qualification season (November-April). Rather than creating a new qualification process for IQR, staff proposes qualifying customers through the established and time-tested LEAP process. In 2017 LEAP will qualify applicants at 165% FPL. This threshold is dictated by the state LEAP office on an annual basis and may change periodically. IQR qualification will track the established statewide LEAP threshold each year. Customers will be required to reapply each year. Leveraging the LEAP qualification process has several monetary and customer benefits: 1. It is highly accessible: customers can apply via phone, fax, mail, or email. 2. It avoids several administrative costs. Analysis’ show administrative costs associated with creating a Utilities administered qualification process would require at least 2 additional fulltime employees. 3. It allows customers to fill out one application for both LEAP and IQR, achieving convenience and accessibility for applicants. 4. It leverages state funding, allowing Utilities PAF emergency assistance dollars to go further. 5. It allows customers to receive more benefits by ensuring both IQR and LEAP are utilized. Education and Direct Installs Once a customer is on IQR, they will be targeted with low cost and no cost conservation behavior change and direct install opportunities designed to reduce their use. Opportunities will leverage existing resources and will include City, state, county and non-profit administered programs. Conservation opportunities with a range of customer participation levels will be available in an attempt to reach the spectrum of customers within the low- income segment. Medical Assistance Program (MAP) IQR offers a larger discount than MAP, yet the income qualifications are very similar. Staff recommends using the 2017 and 2018 IQR qualification process to migrate existing MAP customers to IQR. At the end of the IQR pilot (December 2018) it is possible some MAP customer’s income will be too high to qualify for IQR. If that is the case, staff recommends these customers continue with MAP due to the continuous electrical needs associated with durable medical electrical equipment or air conditioning needs. 3 Packet Pg. 62 June 14, 2016 Page 7 Evaluation with Measures Staff proposes the implementation of a two year pilot rate beginning in January 2017. Using data collected throughout 2017, staff will provide City Council a memorandum in 2018 outlining the execution results, which will evaluate the rate and determine IQR participation and energy and water conservation program participation among the low income segment. After monitoring and collecting data for two years a full analysis and evaluation will be conducted and brought to City Council for consideration of continued implementation in 2019. Next Steps  Prepare rate ordinance for consideration at the August 16 City Council meeting as part of the consent calendar.  If the rate ordinance is adopted on Second Reading, launch community outreach campaign in compliance with City Code waiting period following adoption. ATTACHMENTS 1. Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (PDF) 2. Energy Board memo (PDF) 3. Affordable Housing Board memo (PDF) 4. United Way letter (PDF) 5. State Low-Income Energy Assistance letter (PDF) 6. Energy Outreach Colorado letter (PDF) 7. Water Board memo (PDF) 8. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 63 1 | Page Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report Fort Collins Utilities 20144 ATTACHMENT 1 3.1 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 2 | Page TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 4 Recommendations Identified by the Project Team ..................................................................... 4 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Management Process ..................................................................................... 5 Project Team .............................................................................................................. 6 Data .......................................................................................................................... 8 Payment Assistance Program ................................................................................................... 8 Utility Payment Assistance Program ..................................................................................... 9 Payment Assistance Program & Utility Shut-Offs ............................................................... 10 Graph 1: 2013-14 Utility Delinquencies, Shut-Offs & Accts. Assisted w/ PAF$ .............. 10 Payment Assistance Program Strengths & Limitations ....................................................... 11 Graph 2: Payment Assistance Fund Assistance Awarded 2004-2013 ............................. 11 Medical Assistance Program ................................................................................................... 11 Graph 3: Medical Assistance Program Participation ....................................................... 12 Medical Assistance Program – Strengths & Limitations ..................................................... 13 Rate Impact Adjustments .................................................................................................... 13 Graph 4: 2013 Medical Assistance Program Customer Use ............................................ 13 Graph 5: Medical Assistance Program Participation by Rate Category .......................... 14 Conservation/Efficiency Education ......................................................................................... 15 City Finance Rebate Program ................................................................................................. 15 Graph 6: City Finance Office 2013 Rebate Summary ...................................................... 16 Low Income Rate .................................................................................................................... 16 Focus Group ........................................................................................................................ 17 Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 18 Graph 7: Low Income Assistance Program Criteria ......................................................... 19 Temporary (T) Assistance: ...................................................................................................... 20 Chronic (C) Assistance: ........................................................................................................... 20 Graph 9: Low Income Assistance Program – Chronic Application .................................. 20 Scenario Creation ..................................................................................................... 21 Utilities Role in Supporting Low Income Customers .............................................................. 21 Rates ....................................................................................................................................... 21 Administration ....................................................................................................................... 21 Fundin ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Conservation/Efficiency Education ......................................................................................... 21 Graph 10: Utilities’ Role in Supporting Low Income Customers ..................................... 22 3.1 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 3 | Page Scenario Forming ...................................................................................................... 22 Graph 11: Scenarios for Structuring the Low Income Assistance Program..................... 23 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 23 Next Actions ............................................................................................................. 24 Appendix 1: Project Team Benchmarking 2012 ............................................................................. 25 Appendix 2: Research and Recommendations from 2012 Project Team ...................................... 29 Appendix 3: Low Income Assistance Program Project Charter 2014 ............................................ 36 Appendix 4: Catholic Charities Emergency Clinic 2013 Program Data .......................................... 39 Appendix 5: Medical Assistance Application 2014 ........................................................................ 43 Appendix 6: Compiled Focus Group Questions & Responses (4.29.14) ........................................ 45 Appendix 7: Larimer County Area Median Income 2013 ............................................................... 53 Appendix 8: Bill Insert/Envelope for Payment Assistance Campaign 2014 ................................... 54 3.1 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 4 | Page Low Income Assistance – Program Evaluation Report Executive Summary The purpose of the Low Income Assistance Program evaluation project was to evaluate existing low income utility customer assistance programs and design a program portfolio incorporating elements of energy efficiency, education, income criteria, as well as collaboration with other City programs and local non-profits. The following key deliverables were managed by a multi- disciplined project team: x Create a comprehensive program that addresses community needs based on Utilities’ role. x Structure programs to have minimal impact on staff time. x Provide education to increase awareness and conservation practices for low-income customers, empowering them to reduce electricity and water use and lower their bills x Create measurable performance metrics/phased approach. x Avoid shut-offs and reduce write-offs; intervene earlier to minimize costs to the Utility and the customer. x Create networking opportunities with local non-profits and other City departments to support sustainable implementation of program. The project team, consisting of Utilities staff, City staff and external non-profits, received presentations that provided detailed data, from both internal and external presenters, to understand how Utilities provides low income utility support, as well as how other agencies administer low income support. This process consisted of understanding the data, creating Utilities low income criteria based on Utilities role, reviewing the criteria based on seven scenario options and recommending a scenario that best supported the community’s need for low income utility assistance. Recommendations Identified by the Project Team 1. Utilities role is managed within four categories: rates, administration, funding and efficiency. 2. Low Income Assistance Program criteria was determined to consist of income, Utilities electric customer, and efficiency/conservation education. There are two systems generally used for classifying low income program participation: the Federal Poverty Guideline and area median income (AMI). AMI was selected for this program because the majority of local non-profits use it as the system to determine low income program 3.1 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 5 | Page participation in our area. For the purposes of this program, low income is defined as income between 0% and 50% of the area median income for Larimer County. 3. Temporary crisis is defined as assistance available in situations where a customer could not pay utilities because of an emergency or life-changing circumstance. This assistance would be offered through the current Payment Assistance Program and would be limited to $150 maximum per calendar year (could be more than one disbursement). Documentation on the situation requiring temporary utility assistance would be requested. 4. Chronic circumstance is a long-term situation with difficulty making utility payments due to financial hardship. A low income electric rate could offer a tiered approach based on the area median income for Larimer County: one rate for customers who fall between 0%–29% AMI; a second rate for customers who fall between 30%–50%. Participation in this “low income” electric rate would be facilitated through the City Finance Office as an extension of the existing City Rebate Program. The Medical Assistance Program would be discontinued. 5. The focus group work session identified the following barriers to program participation: location of trust, convenience (one application to fulfill requirements) and transportation. 6. Requirement that both temporary and chronic levels of assistance include an energy/water efficiency/conservation educational opportunity and/or audit. Conclusion In conclusion, the Project Team recommends (1) enhancements to the current Payment Assistance Program and (2) the creation of a low income electric rate, with two levels of eligibility based on participant income level. The Payment Assistance Program would be administered through the Utilities Customer Connections Department - Customer Finance Division. The “low income” electric rate would be facilitated through the City Finance Office as an extension of the existing City Rebate Program. An enhanced Payment Assistance Program and a “low income” electric rate will strengthen support to the low income population by recognizing that financial hardship often has two characteristics: temporary crisis and on-going financial difficulty. Utility customers would be eligible for one but not both of these offerings in any calendar year. Project Management Process Utilities staff began benchmarking low income programs offered by the Utilities with other key municipal utilities and local Investor Owned Utilities, specifically Austin Energy, Colorado Springs Utilities, Eugene Water and Electric Board, Xcel Energy (appendix 1 and appendix 2). In late 2013, Utilities began a review titled the Low Income Assistance Program. The Utilities Customer Connections Manager pulled groups of staff together to share information and select a project manager. The project description was to “evaluate current utility assistance programs 3.1 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 6 | Page and design a “low income” program for utility customers, incorporating elements of energy efficiency, education, income criteria and collaboration with other City programs and local non- profits.” Critical to the project was engaging City staff who had experience working directly with the low income population and/or had been involved in recent trainings such as “Bridges Out of Poverty” and homelessness initiatives. Engagement with representatives from local non-profit groups who had experience and in-depth knowledge about working with the low income population was also invaluable. On February 7, 2014, the project launched with 11 team members and bi-weekly meetings scheduled through June 2014, for a total of 12 meetings (appendix 3). This group received presentations from local non-profits on low income offerings, as well as utility customer program and rate design information. A focus group was held on February 7, 2014 to gain insight from other local non-profit groups, as well as community members, on the need for assistance and the role the utility might play in providing assistance. Project Team The project team represented various departments across the City and local non-profits who work with low income community members. Each member brought valuable experience to their role on the team: Mary Atchison, former Director of Social Sustainability City of Fort Collins – Mary worked on various low income community initiatives in 2014. She has 12 years of nonprofit leadership experience and ten years as a private therapist. Bevia Byrne, Fort Collins Utilities Customer Support Supervisor – Joining the City in 2012, Bevia has completed several “Bridges out of Poverty” trainings and events and was also part of the City’s Bridges Steering Committee. As supervisor of the Utilities customer support team, she leads the customer service representatives in assessing and directing low income and financially struggling customers to the various payment assistant organizations for support. René Evenson, Fort Collins Utilities Customer Accounts (project manager) – In her role as residential accounts coordinator, Rene’ helped create the Payment Assistance Program for Fort Collins Utilities in 2004. She has 12 years of experience helping residential customers understand electric and water consumption and providing resources to reduce their use. Shawn Montoya, Fort Collins Utilities Customer Finance – Shawn has worked in the collections/adjustments/lending areas at credit unions and now at the City of Fort Collins for a combined total of over 20 years. His interest in the low income discussion is 3.1 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 7 | Page based on finding pro-active methods for assisting individuals and families that have a true financial need. Amanda Nagl, Neighborhood Administrator City of Fort Collins – Amanda is involved in this project from a quality of life focus for families and neighborhoods, with an emphasis on process improvement for the organization. Her education is in Organizational Leadership and Human Resource Management (M.S.) and Psychology (B.A.). Randy Reuscher, Fort Collins Utilities Finance Rate Analyst – Randy studies the effect utility rates and rate design has on various sectors in our community. He and his department have presented information on current residential rates, proposed rate scenarios, area median income data and customer segmentation based on income data and has been an active member of this discussion. Jenne Loffer, United Way 2-1-1 Call Center Manager – Jenne has worked as the United Way of Larimer County 2-1-1 Call Center Manager for nine years. She is also involved in community committees and boards, such as the Fort Collins Housing Authority Board and the Young Adult Resource Alliance. Jenne is passionate about helping people and working collaboratively to make the community the best it can be for all people. Linda Rumney, Social Worker Larimer County Office on Aging – Linda Rumney is a social worker who has been with the Larimer County Office on Aging (LCOA) for ten years. The LCOA provides resources and services for older and disabled adults as well as the intake for the Foundation on Aging emergency grant program. Linda works with clients who struggle financially and strongly supports programs to assist those that are most vulnerable and struggling to meet their basic needs. Emily Sander, former City of Fort Collins Finance – For the past 17 years, Emily has worked with federal, state and local governments, as well as non-profit organizations, to help them better serve the community. Ms. Sander is a graduate of Colorado State University and holds a Bachelor of Science in Human Development and Family Studies. Nancy Stafford, Director Property Management, Fort Collins Housing Authority – As an employee at the housing authority, Nancy works with low income families daily. She is very aware of the difficulty for the lowest income households to provide basic necessities like heat, cooling and water for their families. She felt privileged to participate in the discussions regarding low income utility clients. Bill Switzer, Fort Collins Utilities Finance Rate Analyst (retired) – Bill was a Rate Analyst with Fort Collins Utilities for 42 years. He was a member of the team who created the Medical Assistance Program and provided program history as well as background on rate philosophy and design for this project team. 3.1 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 8 | Page Data Project team meetings received presentations on Utility programs, rate theory and design and information on other programs available to low income members of the community. This material provided team members an opportunity to understand how programs support low income community members. It was also a forum for sharing their experience working with community members. The intent was to give each team member a solid basis for evaluating current programs and headroom to brainstorm about future offerings. Payment Assistance Program The Payment Assistance Program was created in 2003 out of a concern that low income customers might be negatively impacted by the new electric rate philosophy in the “Energy Supply Policy.” Utilities staff researched local and nationwide payment assistance programs and recommended the “Payment Assistance Program.” Since implementation in 2004, the Payment Assistance Program has awarded an average of $33,000/year in donations to roughly 350 utility customers who are in danger of shut-off for non-payment. Catholic Charities Larimer County manages the application/verification process through their “Emergency Assistance” clinic. This clinic works to provide a number of services, and draws from a number of funds to provide that assistance (appendix 4). Currently, the maximum amount a customer can receive in Payment Assistance Program funds is $150/year. If the utility bill is larger than that amount, funds may be pulled from one of the other sources of support available to Catholic Charities. In some instances, there may be no other funding available. The Payment Assistance Program is the only funding source that helps Fort Collins Utility customers with delinquent amounts for water billing. 3.1 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 9 | Page City of Fort Collins Utility Payment Assistance Program 12/01/03 Utility Payment Assistance Program The City will offer a utility payment assistance program, administered by Fort Collins Utilities and Catholic Charities Northern, to help residential customers with low income or a financial crisis remain current with their utility accounts and avoid shut-off. Program Guidelines x Program is open to Fort Collins Utilities’ customers. x Customer must have received a shut-off notice for a current address in the customer’s name. x Customer is eligible for help once within a 12 month period. x Deposit and late fees will not be included. x Assistance is available for both electric and water usage. x Program participation subject to available funds. Administration Catholic Charities Northern will receive program applications and screen applicants through their existing “Emergency Assistance Program.” With utility account history and other information from Fort Collins Utilities Credit and Collections staff, Catholic Charities staff and trained volunteers will determine need and award assistance. A yearly administrative fee of 8% of the funds administered will be paid to Catholic Charities. Budget The City of Fort Collins will solicit donations from ratepayers to fund this program. 3.1 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 10 | Page Payment Assistance Program & Utility Shut-Offs One of the indicators of need in our community is the number of utility shut-offs that occur due to non-payment of the utility bill. Not every shut-off is due to financial difficulty. Some shut-offs may occur because the account owner forgets to pay the bill or may be out of the country. However, the majority of the shut-offs do occur because there is a financial hardship for the customer. The current due date for a utility bill is 20 days after the bill is generated. If no payment is received by day 43-44, a pink shut-off notice is mailed and a $10/late fee is added to the utility bill. If no payment is received by day 50, the customer’s services are interrupted. Graph 1: 2013-14 Utility Delinquencies, Shut-Offs and Accounts Assisted with PAF$ The number of utility accounts in 2013-2014 that were shut-off was less than the total eligible for shut-off. However, the average number of customers who received payment assistance was 29 per month, leaving an average of 700 customers monthly who did not receive assistance from the Payment Assistance Program. A customer might be denied assistance if no funding was available at the time of the request or if the customer had already received assistance in the calendar year. No data is available on how many customers requested assistance but were denied. Shut Off Total Cut for NonPay Cut for NonPay Cancel Actual Cut NonPay Assisted Dollar Notices Processed by Month Count by Month Count by Month Accounts Amount Mailed # COUNT YR/Month COUNT YR/Month COUNT YR/Month PAF Helped PAF $ 4,385 1310 2014/04 388 2014/04 922 2014/04 30 $3,441 4,032 1124 2014/03 314 2014/03 810 2014/03 23 $2,402 4,901 1093 2014/02 322 2014/02 771 2014/02 34 $3,410 5,374 1145 2014/01 360 2014/01 785 2014/01 46 $5,767 4,857 984 2013/12 329 2013/12 655 2013/12 30 $3,359 4,666 1139 2013/11 323 2013/11 816 2013/11 19 $2,123 5,397 1295 2013/10 440 2013/10 855 2013/10 35 $3,944 4,644 1055 2013/09 367 2013/09 688 2013/09 23 $2,557 5,054 1091 2013/08 354 2013/08 737 2013/08 23 $2,324 4,529 1157 2013/07 364 2013/07 793 2013/07 30 $3,387 4,627 1114 2013/06 456 2013/06 658 2013/06 23 $2,316 3,691 1372 2013/05 505 2013/05 867 2013/05 24 $2,449 4,982 1664 2013/04 854 2013/04 810 2013/04 30 $2,995 4,856 1222 2013/03 434 2013/03 788 2013/03 15 $1,527 5,394 944 2013/02 355 2013/02 589 2013/02 39 $4,329 4,725 952 2013/01 335 2013/01 617 2013/01 44 $5,759 4,757 1166 406 760 29 $3,256 2013-14 Utility Delinquencies, Shut-Offs and Accounts Assisted with PAF $ The bottom amount is the average per month (from left to right) : total shut-off notices mailed; total shuts offs originally scheduled; total cancelled before shut-off: total that were shut-off; total accounts that PAF 3.1 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 11 | Page Payment Assistance Program Strengths & Limitations The Payment Assistance Program has been successful in helping a limited number of customers over the last ten years. All the funds that are donated are spent during that calendar year: Graph 2: Payment Assistance Fund Assistance Awarded 2004-2013 Payment Assistance Fund Assistance Awarded 2004-2013 Year # Customers Total Avg. Amount 2004 218 $16,680 $76.50 2005 313 $27,044 $86.40 2006 320 $28,947 $90.46 2007 349 $33,317 $95.47 2008 347 $33,698 $97.11 2009 427 $41,192 $96.47 2010 378 $37,791 $99.98 2011 391 $37,010 $94.65 2012 345 $34,530 $100.00 2013 328 $36,385 $111.00 Customer donation amounts are either “one-time” or a specified amount added to the utility bill. Donations have been trending to the “one-time” donation method and have been declining in the last few years. Every year significant amounts of funding have been used from other funding sources to assist utility customers. The agreement for program administration with Catholic Charities Northern Colorado has been in place for ten years. During that time, the clinic has moved from The Mission on Linden Street to the Sister Mary Alice Murphy Center for Hope on Conifer Street. Access to services has been reorganized from the “first-come-first served” method to appointments only on M-Th 8-5pm. This has created a challenge for some utility customers and has made it more difficult to receive assistance. Medical Assistance Program The residential “tiered electric rate” was adopted in 2011 and implemented in 2012. At that time, concerns were raised regarding customers who used durable medical equipment (non- optional electricity usage) or medically necessary air conditioning and the impact a tiered electric rate would have on their quality of life. Following a Council discussion, staff began gathering information for the purpose of developing a Medical Assistance Program. Local non- profit groups also provided input. 3.1 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 12 | Page Program objectives included: (1) enhance the quality of life for our citizens; (2) remove the economic impact of tiered electric rates due to medically necessary electric consumption; and (3) maintain community conservation values. Customers were qualified for the program based on the following criteria: x Customer of Fort Collins Utilities x Household use of Durable Medical Equipment (DME) x Household medically necessary use of air conditioning (AC) x Income threshold of 60% area median income (AMI) – approximately 185% of the federal poverty level Three “electric medical” rates were created: x Durable Medical Equipment (E102) x Medically Necessary Air Conditioning (E103) x Durable Medical Equipment and Air Conditioning (E104) The Medical Assistance Program was well-received by customers, with highest participation occurring in 2013 (appendix 5). In 2014, participation declined. The total participating in 2014 at the time of the presentation to the project team was about 80 customers. Graph 3: Medical Assistance Program Participation 3.1 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 13 | Page Medical Assistance Program – Strengths & Limitations The Medical Assistance Program has been available to customers for three years. During that time, the number of participants has fluctuated and overall participation has been low. Barriers to participation in this program may include the need to re-apply every year, the necessity to have the attending physician sign the application and the need for equipment information on the application. However, based on feedback from customers who have participated in the program, the assistance has been valued and worth the effort to apply. Rate Impact Adjustments Customers who qualified for the program were given credit for kWh consumption used to power durable medical equipment or medically-necessary air conditioning. It was determined that the credited revenue for the kilowatt-hour (kWh) reduction should be recovered over a wider range of use because the first tier of use was not solely for medical reasons. Consumption credits were calculated in this way: x DME - Monthly credit equivalent of 150 kWh per month used for electric durable medical equipment recovered over the full first tier (500 kWh). 150 kWh determined from other city estimates in CA and AZ as well as Longmont. x AC - Summer (June – August) monthly credit equivalent of 350 kWh per month recovered over the full first two tiers (1000 kWh) for air conditioning (staff estimate). Graph 4 below shows how program participant electric consumption tracked through the three electric “tiers” in 2013: Graph 4: 2013 Medical Assistance Program Customer Use 3.1 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 14 | Page The average credit per customer based on category (DME, AC or DME & AC) is outlined below for 2012 & 2013. With the combination of DME & AC, customers received about $200/year. DME only was about $150. Customers with medically-necessary air conditioning received the smallest amount, Graph 5 below: Graph 5: Medical Assistance Program Participation by Rate Category 3.1 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 15 | Page Conservation/Efficiency Education One of the goals of the low income program evaluation was to investigate how to tie education on energy and water conservation/efficiency with receiving assistance. There are several ways to accomplish this goal. Attending an efficiency class could be a requirement in the month following the award of assistance. This class could be centrally located at a non-profit location or at the Senior Center, Northside Aztlan Community Center or be available as a video that could be watched either online or at a designated location. Video content will respect privacy and financial circumstances of the customer. Additionally, where all parties agree (including the landlord) a “walk-thru” audit could be recommended or required. This audit could: check lighting fixtures and replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs; provide a clothesline where eligible; install low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators; and do a safety check of gas fired appliances. Participation in these educational offerings could dictate the customer’s eligibility to continue to receive assistance from one year to the next. Any reductions in consumption could be tracked using the customer consumption data in the utility customer information system. Future program offerings could also include specific measures or rebates that would be available to the low income population. City Finance Rebate Program A low income rebate program is administered every year through the City Finance Office. It includes rebates on sales tax on (1) food, (2) property tax/rent or (3) utilities. The utility rebate has been in place since 1975 and serves senior and disabled low income utility customers. The rebate amount is based on a monthly consumption average for all utilities: Sales Tax: x Established in 1984 – Rebate to low income citizens x $55 per eligible household member – amount updated annually Property Tax/Rent: x Established in 1972 – Rebate to senior and disabled low income citizens x City portion of applicants property tax levy OR x 1.44% of rental payment for year Utility: x Established in 1975 - Rebate to senior and disabled low income citizens x Based on billing data for average monthly Fort Collins Utilities customer consumption of water, wastewater, stormwater and electric service x Eligible applicants given rebates for each service in the applicant’s name: Electricity $48.43 Water $32.14 Stormwater $17.87 Wastewater $14.26 *amounts from 2013 3.1 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 16 | Page Requirements for these rebates include: x Income – 50% Larimer County area median income x Residency in Fort Collins one year prior to application date x US Citizenship x Proof of ID for all members 18 years or older x Utility rebate available to customers of Fort Collins Utilities x Applications are accepted August 1 – October 31 each year. Applicants can mail in applications or turn them in at 215 N Mason. City Staff is available to help applicants throughout the program and the rebate check is mailed within 6-8 weeks. Graph 6: City Finance Office 2013 Rebate Summary Low Income Rate The Utility Finance Department presented information that investigated the case for a low income “discounted” rate. This investigation looked into the Utility’s emphasis on offering annual efficiency/conservation programs for customers. These include: x Energy Star dishwasher and refrigerator rebates x LED & CFL lighting discounts x Free EV charging stations 3.1 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 17 | Page x Residential solar rebates x Low-flow toilet rebates x Free sprinkler audits The Utility also spends money annually to purchase renewable energy to meet self-imposed community goals. Together these expenditures represent 5% of residential electric charges and 6% of water charges. All customers, regardless of their income level, pay for these progressive policies and programs. Certainly not all, but the majority of low income customers are typically renters and not home owners. It is unclear how many of them can participate in the current level of efficiency/conservation programs outlined above. However, a discounted or low income electric rate could reduce their utility expense and give them a benefit equitable to participation in the utilities’ efficiency/conservation programs. Specific details about this discounted electric rate will be forthcoming from the Utility Finance Department. The project team recommends a low income rate that has two tiers of participation for utility customers between 0% and 50% AMI. Focus Group A focus group was held on April 4, 2014. Over 30 people attended from the following non-profit and City groups: Project Self-Sufficiency Vida Sana Catholic Charities Larimer County United Way Larimer County Office on Aging Make Change NoCo National MS Society Serve 6.8 Fort Collins Housing Authority Disabled Resource Services City of Fort Collins Neighbor to Neighbor Social Sustainability Environmental Services Fort Collins Utilities Financial Services Neighborhood Services The presentation to this group shared the project purpose, introduced the project team members and outlined the timeline. The group was then given six questions that explored low income need in the community, the role of the utility in conjunction with assistance and what a successful program might look like. Seven discussion groups led by a volunteer facilitator discussed each of these questions and recorded their findings. 3.1 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 18 | Page Focus Group Questions 1. Is utility payment support for low income assistance an issue or need in our community? 2. What challenges do customers who are trying to receive low income assistance encounter? 3. What kind of reasons could be associated with receiving low income utility payment assistance? 4. What should Utilities’ role be in supporting low income assistance for utility payments? 5. What would a successful low income utility payment assistance program look like? How would you measure success? 6. Other comments/observations you believe are relevant to a utility low income assistance program. An edited transcript of answers to focus group questions is attached (appendix 6). Several themes developed regarding needs that could be addressed by the program: x Transportation to apply for assistance is a challenge. x There are different populations with unique needs. x There is a need for energy/water conservation education. x Work should be done with landlords to make properties more energy efficient. The project team attended and was active in the focus group discussion and evaluated responses. Those responses and emerging themes, as well as information received from presentations and project team experience, formed the basis for the program evaluation and recommendation – the key deliverable of the project team’s efforts. Criteria The project team had several discussions reviewing data presentations and focus group input. Each team member contributed expertise gained from their non-profit experience. This project team has direct experience working with many segments of the low income community, including senior, people with disabilities those with medical circumstances and those with financial hardship. Team discussions centered on characterizing those populations and creating program criteria that would have the broadest reach in assisting these customers. Criteria based on income level of the participant seemed the broadest level of participation, since this would capture seniors, medical circumstances and financially challenged participants. 3.1 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 19 | Page Federal programs covered the remaining populations. An electric account with Fort Collins Utilities and the willingness to participate in electric/water conservation education or audits were felt to be crucial requirements to maintain program integrity. Also, rather than requiring that the utility customer be in danger of being shut-off for non-payment, the requirement for this program would be an electric account that is “delinquent” or behind in payments. Graph 7 below shows the criteria that were evaluated. Criteria received a “yes” or “no” based on a group process that reviewed enhancements unique to this program and the availability of other City or Federal programs: Graph 7: Low Income Assistance Program Criteria Input from the focus group indicated that there are various “populations” within the low income community that require different levels of support. Additionally, we heard that not only are there “low income” but there are “no income” members of our community. Rather than bundling all low-income into one category, the project team created two categories of need. Guiding principles for this discussion was the Larimer County area median income data and historical experience with the Payment Assistance Program regarding need. Some customers find themselves in crisis with paying a utility bill rarely, while others have an on-going need for assistance. Using this information, two levels of assistance were defined: Criteria Yes/No T/C Comments Income YES - Federal Povery or AMI Guideline C Basis for chronic support Disabled NO Covered by income; SSI or SSDI; A&D Senior NO Covered by income Medical Circumstances NO Covered by medical rate Utilites Customer YES T or C Education: YES; see types below class requirement C brochure/video T webportal training T or C Energy/Water Walk Thru Audits YES T or C Recognizing rental properties and simple adjustments such as lighting and irrigation in partnership with Larimer County Conservation Corps. Utility Bill Delinquency YES T or C shut-off notice not required Low Income Assistance Program Criteria (requirements for assistance) 6.5.14 T=Temporary C=Chronic 3.1 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 20 | Page Temporary (T) Assistance Would be available when a customer could not pay utilities because an emergency had occurred. This would be offered through the current Payment Assistance Program and would be limited to $150 maximum a calendar year (could be more than one disbursement): Graph 8: Low Income Assistance Program – Temporary Application Chronic (C) Assistance Would be available to customers with ongoing challenges in paying utility bills. A “low income utility rate” would offer a tiered approach based on the area median income for Larimer County: one rate for customers who fall between 0%-30% AMI; a second rate for customers who fall between 30%-50%: Graph 9: Low Income Assistance Program – Chronic Application A component of both levels of assistance is a combination of audits and conservation education. The need for education in resource conservation/efficiency was a recurring theme in focus group discussions and the timing with receiving assistance seems optimal for providing this education. Requirements Definition Mechanism Next Actions Comments Income Self report for tracking application Use existing PAF application and review with Catholic Charties Proof of hardship medical, job, car, utility disconnect notice application As part of application ask what is hardship Utilites Customer City of Fort Collins service territory for electric and/or water Account Create a menu of options for conservation classes. Delinquincy not required if person experiencing hardship may not be delinquient but rather being proactive. Education Video in lobby, web-portal training in lobby, brochures Complete one energy/water audit marketing & visit Audit may not be possible if owner does not allow. However, could pursue other options such as, light bulbs, toilets, shower nozzles, etc. Note: Receives maxiumum assistance of $150 one time a year, but can use money incrementally. Low Income Assistance Program: Temporary Application Requirements Definition Mechanism Frequenc Next Actions Income AMI - aligns with Sec. 8 and City Rebate Low Income Electric Rate - Sliding Rate; 0-30%; 30-50% Annual verification -Collaborate with City Rebate program on application -Rate follows person Utilites Customer City of Fort Collins service territory for electric Account verification Ongoing Education Attend one energy or water conservation class Web portal training Logged into CIS 1 time a year Create a menu of options for conservation classes. Energy/Water Audit may not be possible if owner does not allow. However, could pursue other options such as, light Walk Thru Audits bults, toildets, shower nozzzles, etc. Low Income Assistance Program: Chronic Application Complete one energy/water audit Logged into CIS 1 time 3.1 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 21 | Page Scenario Creation Utilities Role in Supporting Low Income Customers For the past 15 years, Fort Collins Utilities has created and administered programs to assist customers having difficulties staying current with their utility bills. The Payment Assistance Program and Medical Assistance Program have both been successful. However, more support could be offered to low income customers. An evaluation of the Utilities’ role in supporting low income customers is crucial in determining what additional support can be offered. The project team identified four areas of responsibility for the Utilities’ role in supporting low income customers: rates, administration, funding and efficiency. Rates The cost of providing electricity has continued to rise and rate increases have been implemented for the residential segment of our community over the last few years. The utility already administers an electric medical rate and offers help with a payment assistance program. Therefore the key question was: What combination of programs and rates does the Utility offer to low income customers? Administration The core competency of the Utility is providing electricity and water services, maintenance, billing and customer service. Although the Utility offers programs to help customers stay current with utility payments, there are other non-profits in the community which have a much more seasoned track record with offering this help. Input from the focus group indicated that low income customers have the highest comfort in dealing with known organizations, where there is convenience for completing an application and where transportation is accessible to the point of application. Therefore the key question was: Is the Utility the most knowledgeable and efficient administrator for low income programs? Funding Funding for the Payment Assistance Program has come from customer donations and funding for the electric medical rate has been covered in the cost of service to all customers. Therefore the key question was: How might we increase funding to cover programs that provide assistance to more low income customers? Conservation/Efficiency Education Conservation/efficiency education for low income customers has been challenging to track and measure. Low income customers often cannot pay for an audit and don’t have the disposable income to replace old and inefficient appliances with energy efficient models and receive a rebate. More focus is needed on how to raise awareness about resource conservation and incentivize efficiency. Therefore the question was: How do we provide both classes/audits and other opportunities to this segment of our community? 3.1 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 22 | Page Graph 10: Utilities’ Role in Supporting Low Income Customers Scenario Forming The project team participated in a “scenario forming” brainstorm that yielded various combinations of roles, and therefore, various ways the Utility could structure the program. After discussion with the project team, Scenario 2 seemed the most beneficial in terms of meeting project deliverables and crafting a program that would meet the needs of the low income population. Scenario 2 includes: x A “low income electric rate” – this would have two tiers, would be income based, and would apply to customers whose income level ranged from 0% - 50% AMI (Appendix 7: Area Median Income). x The Utility would administer the program in conjunction with the City Finance Office, using the existing framework of their “rebate program” to promote and receive applications for the “low income rate.” x The Payment Assistance Program would serve customers who find themselves in temporary emergency situations; marketing and fundraising enhancements might include: 1. Adding a “round-up” option to the utility bill to the nearest dollar or a fixed dollar amount. 2. Expanding the current customer donation campaign to include both commercial and residential customers with outreach twice a year. 3. Working with the City Attorney to move any credits left on customer inactive accounts to the Payment Assistance Program after a defined period of time. Utilities Role in Supporting Low Income Customers Rates Administration Funding Efficiency low income utility does all fundraising (PAF) rebates 1x/year medical utility does none education (3rd party admin) grants programs funding walk-thru audits rate utlities combo repurpose credit on (energy & water) customer accounts $ Qualify for both medical and low income City 100% combo City does none (3rd party admin) round up on bill Barriers: Location of trust Convienience (i.e. one application for all low income funding) Transportation NEED: Metrics Process: Data→ Criteria→ Scenario Creation→ Recommendations 3.1 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 23 | Page 4. Working with Utility Key Account businesses to make the Payment Assistance Program part of their yearly charitable giving. x Educational opportunities on saving energy and water resources would be provided to all customers who receive assistance; a walk-thru audit would be available if all parties agree (including landlords). Graph 11: Scenarios for Structuring the Low Income Assistance Program (Slide from 1/27/15 City Council work session) Recommendations The project team recommended the following activities based on the decision making process that selected Scenario 2. The recommendations are: 1. Utilities role is managed within four categories: rates, administration, funding and efficiency/conservation education. 2. Low Income Assistance Program criteria was determined to be; (1) income, (2) Utilities customer, (3) conservation/efficiency education and possible audit. 3.1 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 24 | Page 3. Low income is defined as income between 0% and 50% of the area median income for Larimer County. There are two systems generally used for classifying low income program participation: the Federal Poverty Guideline and area median income (AMI). AMI was selected for this program because the majority of local non-profits use it as the system to determine low income program participation in our area. 4. Temporary crisis is defined as assistance available in situations where a customer could not pay utilities because of an emergency or life-changing circumstance. This would be offered through the current Payment Assistance Program and would be limited to $150 maximum a calendar year (could be more than one disbursement). 5. Chronic circumstance is a long-term situation with difficulty making a utility payment due to economic hardship. A low income utility rate would offer a tiered approach based on the area median income for Larimer County: one rate would be for customers who fall between 0%–29% AMI; a second rate would be for customers who fall between 30%–50%. This program would be administered through the City Finance Office as an extension of the existing rebate program. 6. Work to minimize the following barriers to receiving assistance identified by the focus group: location of trust, convenience (one application process for several programs) and transportation to the application site. 7. Both temporary and chronic levels of assistance include an energy/water conservation/efficiency educational opportunity and/or audit. 8. Rates—create a low income rate that addresses chronic financial hardship circumstances; discontinue the electric medical rate because the project team recognized that medical rate participation would be addressed under the low income rate guidelines. 9. Administration—Utilities manage the temporary low income support program titled the “Payment Assistance Program” and partner with City Finance Office in the management of the low income rate implementation. 10. Funding—Increase marketing and funding support for the Payment Assistance Program. Next Actions The project team identified the following next actions for the ongoing management of the program: x Create metrics to measure program success and determine frequency of evaluation. x Expand efficiency/conservation education program offerings. x Expand fundraising/marketing for Payment Assistance Program. 3.1 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 25 | Page Appendix 1: Project Team Benchmarking 2012 Project Team Charter Customer Connections Department Low-Income Assistance Program Members Bevia Byrne Lori Clements René Evenson Laurie D’Audney Maia Jackson John Phelan Lisa Rosintoski Diana Royval Lance Smith *Heidi Phelps/Sharon Thomas (Social Sustainability) *Julie Brewen/Michele Christensen (Housing Authority) Project Statement: Fort Collins City Council tasked Utilities with creating a comprehensive low- income assistance program after the implementation of the tiered electrical rate. Based on the current values and project efforts at Utilities, staff plans to incorporate elements of energy efficiency and education in the program. Objectives (S.M.A.R.T.) 1. Improve current assistance programs 2. Create a comprehensive program that addresses community needs 3. Structure program to have minimal impact on staff (CSR) time 4. Increase awareness and education or conservation among members of the low-income community 5. Create measurable performance metrics/phased approach 6. Avoid shut-offs and reduce write-offs; intervene earlier 7. Track repeat customers Gaps The largest gaps that have emerged in the research process are the need for more bill assistance, a lack of an energy efficiency element, the need to partner more with organizations external to the City of Fort Collins to offer assistance and better communication/collaboration between City departments. Phase 1: Review other assistance programs run by other utilities x Austin Energy x Eugene Water and Electric Board x Colorado Springs Utilities 3.1 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 26 | Page x Excel Energy Summary: A strong effective program incorporates elements of education, energy efficiency, conservation and monetary assistance. Review current city-wide assistance programs x Finance Department: Utility rebate program x Recreation: Scholarship program x Social Sustainability: Resources to partner with organizations external to the City Summary: The program that the Finance department offers could potentially be expanded as part of the low-income assistance program; we could also raise some awareness for it on our website or distribute some of their printed materials at our events. The Recreation department can offer input on how to develop applications and verify income. Social Sustainability can provide connections city-wide of organizations to partner with and can assist with focus groups. Review the data of current programs/community data x 66,000 (approx. total Utilities customers) / 345 (customers helped by the Payment Assistance Fund in 2012 ($35,100 available funds). (391 customers/ $36,300 in 2011) x Cliff-effect: the phenomenon that often people at the lower ends of the income spectrum may be able to get a lot of assistance, but as they work their way up towards self-sufficiency, the benefits begin to drop off. They make too much to get help but not enough to survive or move upward. x 80% area median income (AMI) for Larimer County for a family of four $60,650 x 2013 median income for a family of four: $75,800 2007-2011 Census data for Fort Collins Income ranges Families Married-couple families Non-family households Less than $10,000 3% 1.1% 16.6% $10,000-$14,999 2.1% 0.8% 9.5% $15,000-$24,999 6.1% 4.0% 17% $25,000-$34,999 7.7% 6.2% 13.1% $35,000-$49,999 10.8% 9.4% 17.5% $50,000-$74,999 21.1% 21.2% 13.7% This income range corresponds with 80% of AMI for Larimer County Phase 2: Other programs that Utilities could partner with and outreach opportunities x Social Sustainability x Finance: expand current rebate program. x Catholic Charities: expand current role and involvement, enlist assistance for management of new low-income program. x Volunteers of America: run a senior focused handyman program with emphasis on energy efficiency. 3.1 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 27 | Page x Larimer Home Improvement Program: funded by social security, provide low rate loans for energy efficiency repairs. x Disabled Resources: run a handyman program focused on energy efficiency. x Northern Colorado AIDS Project: assist those in need with home repairs and upgrades. x Low-income assistance program or “fair.” Possible funding opportunities x Community Development Block Grants (CDBG): Federal grants that fund programs that benefit low to moderate income persons, prevent or eliminate slums or blight, fulfill community development needs. Up to $800,000 in potential funding available. x Ray C. Anderson Foundation: Funds projects that support economic, environmental, and social sustainability. Grants from $2,000-25,000. x Community Foundation of Northern Colorado: Funds projects that inspire community building and sustainability. Must be a 501c3 organization or a municipality. x Fort Collins Utilities becomes a 501c3. Phase 3: Potential scenarios for program Option 1 x Hire temporary/seasonal employees to assist customers in filling out applications for LEAP, Longs Peak Energy Conservation, City of Fort Collins programs. x Customers at 50% of AMI qualify for a free home energy/water audit. x Direct install of window plastic, light bulbs, shower heads, sink aerators, etc. x Educational material on conservation behavior. Option 2 x Customers at 80% AMI qualify for a free home energy/water audit. x Depending on the income level, after receipt of audit results the customer could qualify for certain upgrades for free or at a significantly reduced cost. x Educational material on conservation behavior. Option 3 x Customers at 80% AMI qualify for a home energy/water audit, an assessment/consultation of their usage and bill history. x Some upgrades identified as necessary in the audit could be done for free or at a reduced cost based on income level (pricing could be developed on a sliding scale correlated with income levels). x Partner with other agencies that perform direct install and home upgrades. x If the customer attends educational programs or online learning opportunities to lower their usage they could receive credits on their bill. Host focus groups with low-income members of the community x Gather feedback on possible programs. x Identify gaps in assistance in the community. 3.1 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 28 | Page x Discuss needs that are currently being or not being met. x Discuss ideas and opinions on assistance needs with perspective of individuals in that community. Major Milestones: x Complete summary materials to include in Council retreat packets. x Host focus groups June/July. x Write up final program plan by August. x Send materials through the Council approval process August/September. NOTE: After each milestone is completed there will be a phase gate review with core team for continuation to next milestone. 3.1 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 29 | Page Appendix 2: Research and Recommendations from 2012 Project Team Fort Collins Utilities low income program research and recommendations Maia Jackson, Project Support Coordinator What are we currently doing city-wide to assist low-income community members? (applicable to Utilities customers and our program development) Finance Department x Sales tax on food rebate x Utility rebate x Property tax/rental rebate The Finance department offers three different rebate programs to assist low-income member of our community. The one that is most applicable to Utilities is the utility rebate. This program offers a rebate on utilities paid during the year. It is only available to low-income seniors 65 and older and low-income disabled residents. The amount of the rebate depends upon the number of services provided at a particular residence/location. Electrical service only = $48.43; Water service only = $32.14; Stormwater service only = $14.26; Wastewater service only = $17.87; or a maximum rebate of $112.70 if all of the above services are provided by the City of Fort Collins. Applicants need to have lived within the City of Fort Collins for one year and be a legal resident of the United States. The income qualifications for the utility refund are set to 50% of the area median income (AMI). This allows for an increased number of senior and disabled residents to qualify. For reference this would be a maximum household income of $38,850 for a family of four. This is the same income qualification level for the property tax rebate and the sales tax on food rebate. The rebate program has set enrollment dates; the enrollment period begins on August 1 and closes October 31. Estimated total cost of the utility rebate program is $179,000. Finance has offered to share the current list of participants in the three rebate programs for us to cross reference with our customer information. This will be a resource to help get an idea of how many people might participate in the program, a place to start to set up focus groups and a frame of reference for which parts of the community to start outreach with. Recreation Department The Recreation department offers a scholarship and reduced fee program for reduced income individuals. To qualify for reduced fee consideration, the following guidelines must be met: x Participation in a state or federal assistance program, or income within federal low income guidelines per most recent tax return. 3.1 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 30 | Page x If assistance is received through any county, state, or federal program(s), current verification must be provided, specifying an expiration date if applicable, or obtain a benefits report from Larimer County Human Services. x If not on a qualifying assistance program, a copy of most recent tax return must be attached to this application. x Proof of Fort Collins or Poudre School District residency, including a current utility bill showing name and address, or three other bills mailed to the same address. x Proof of lawful presence in the United States. The important piece to consider about the Recreation department program is how they verify income and how they work with state and federal agencies to determine if a person meets the qualifications to participate. If a customer is already participating in a social services program with the county, state, federal government or Poudre School District they only need to provide proof of their participation in this program to be eligible. Income guidelines are based on federal income guidelines and poverty levels. Income can also be verified by tax returns or pay stubs. If a customer applies and is not affiliated with any of the other assistance programs but meets the income requirements, their information can be verified with pay stubs and tax returns. Social Security is also a resource that can be utilized for income verification. Staff can call to verify information that has been provided by customers but cannot request information on behalf of the customers. All copies of tax returns/paystubs/any personal information is shredded after the application is approved or denied and while it is in process it is stored in a lockbox. Files are retained for three years per retention policy. It takes staff anywhere from five minutes to three hours a day to process applications. They have a check sheet for the applications that front desk personnel go over when an applicant drops off the application. This helps with problems of missing documentation or incorrect information which tends to add more time for the staff processing. Last year their department processed 1,300 applications and had 3,500 individuals participating in the program. Social Sustainability Department Currently does not have a specific low-income assistance program of their own but they work collaboratively with external to the City organizations and non-profits. They would like to see more collaboration and cross-communication among internal city groups that offer assistance programs. The department is very interested in collaborating and helping with the development of the low-income assistance program and spreading the word once it is operational. They had feedback on how to structure the program and how to gather ideas from the community to ensure that what is created is actually what the population we are reaching out to needs. They suggested hosting several focus groups in the community. We can utilize connections with the groups that the Social Sustainability department works with, the list of people participating in the rebate programs with the Finance department, and our own list of customers that have accessed assistance from our existing funds/programs to create focus groups. These focus groups would give us a well-rounded picture of the problems, the needs 3.1 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 31 | Page and how the people most closely affected view possible solutions. It would also provide an opportunity to present ideas of potential programs and gather feedback. A sliding scale program set-up was suggested for a way to address energy fixes for customers at different income levels. Concern was expressed that the dynamic of the “cliff effect” may become a factor in this program. This is the phenomenon that often people at the lower ends of the income spectrum may be able to get a lot of assistance, but as they work their way towards self-sufficiency, the benefits begin to drop off. They make too much to get help but not enough to survive or move upward. The Utilities program should be conscious of this phenomenon as the program is written so that we are helping the most people possible and the ones that are in the most need. An advantage of staying mindful of this phenomenon when writing the program is that this assistance and education could be a vehicle to help push this group of people that are perpetually struggling out of poverty. This could provide an overall benefit to the community: stronger community members and more energy efficient homes with more mindful and aware occupants. Fort Collins Housing Authority (FCHA) In addition to administering the Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) programs, they manage the Public Housing units owned by the Wellington Housing Authority, and operate the Larimer County Housing Authority’s HCV program. FCHA manages the non-subsidized affordable housing properties owned by Villages, Ltd. and the low-income senior apartments located in the historic Northern Hotel. Housing programs include: x Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8) x Project-Based Vouchers x Public Housing x Single Room Occupancy (SRO) x Resident Service Programs x Villages Affordable Housing FCHA has offered to be a resource in setting up the income verification pieces of the assistance program. They have also offered to help with customer lists as a place to begin outreach. What are other utilities doing to assist low-income community members? Eugene Water and Electric Board Contacts: Wendi Shultz-Kerns, Cash Accounting Supervisor (Runs the customer assistance program). Is in the office Mon.-Thurs. 541-685-7074 (direct line) wendi.schultz- kerns@eweb.org x Education became a priority and they now split their funding; half towards energy education and half for monetary assistance. x Utilize incentive credits (all towards the bill cost), no cash dispensed, won’t be paid out if they move outside of the service area, managed with different pay codes. 3.1 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 32 | Page x Performed a survey through an external company and found that the education component is very important and impactful on starting lifestyle change. x Put out an RFP, accepted bids, the Human Services Division won the bid, they then outsourced to various local agencies that work with the low-income community in a social service capacity. Major recommendation: model program to have “one-stop shopping” which allows clients to apply for multiple programs in one place, offer a bus pass etc. x Customer calls EWEB customer service line, referred to one of the partnering intake agencies, customer calls the agency (agency has special phone line dedicated to the program), customer makes appointment and they are advised as to what income paperwork they need to bring in, agency processes application (utilize a state based system so they can see other assistance programs that the customer accesses), the voucher is approved or denied and they sign a release approving that their account information and energy use/consumption will be shared with the external agencies. x There is a voucher system for each entity, each agency sends a spreadsheet in daily with the new voucher numbers, posted to the customer account using a special pay code, and it then charges the appropriate budget. The agencies are not given funds directly, they are given a budget to work within and EWEB is invoiced for specific program work only. x Program is funded with 1% of revenue from rates, eligibility based on 60% margin median household income, requires two in-house staff members, three energy advocates (that provide the case management and education), and staff from intake agencies (approximately 25 people). x The breakdown is about 9% admin, and 15% delivery cost = about 24% cost to operate. x Can be renewed with an intergovernmental agreement each year. Austin Energy Contacts: Elaine Kelly-Diaz (oversees the groups that handle the customer assistance programs) Elaine.Kelly-diaz@austinenergy.com Ronnie Mendoza, Customer Assistance Program Manager x Two components to the program: The discount program which has fixed charges and the “+1” program that offers energy assistance. They also have a free weatherization program that is available to all customers regardless of income. x Enrollment process: They use forms rather than automatic enrollment, this allows for more checks and balances. Customers that qualify receive other assistance benefits through city, county, and federal agencies. The Health and Human Services Commission generated a list of customers that qualify because of their being a part of other assistance programs. x Massive outreach program to community agencies to bring them on as partners in the program. Calls for major involvement in the community. They serve over 1,900 3.1 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 33 | Page households. Having strong community advocates is a major contributor to the success of the program. x The “+1” program is a budgeted line item, the assistance program is unrecognized revenue, the customer charge is waived—it is approximately a $300,000 budgeted expense x Devote four staff members to the program: one admin, two community coordinators, one coordinator that works specifically with medically vulnerable customers. Major recommendation: don’t split up staff member duties, devote people specifically to the vulnerable customers and create a sub-group in the “customer care department” whose sole purpose is working with the customer care program. x In house they manage the service agreements and funds, the community organizations take care of the qualification and application processes. x If a customer is in the discount program they are automatically eligible for the efficiency program but at what level is determined by the energy audit, the customers usage and personal situation. x Not everyone receives the energy efficiency program, there is an education component to it, energy audit, conservation, and weatherization. Colorado Springs Utilities Contact for Utilities: Monica Whiting, General Manager, Customer Revenue & Services Department, Customer & Corporate Services Division, direct line (719) 668-3824, mwhiting@csu.org Contacts for the LEAP program: Felicia Hubbard, fhubbard@csu.org Kelly Smith, KKSmith@csu.org Energy Resource Center contact: Howard Brooks (ERC director) direct line 719-591-0774, website: http://www.erc-co.org/ HEAP program contacts: Deb Mathis (program manager): dmathis@csu.org, direct line 719-668- 8509. Mark James (Deb’s manager) MJames@csu.org x C.O.P.E. program (Customer Option to Provide Energy) is a donation program, Colorado Springs Utilities matches up to $500,000. x When a customer calls in for assistance customer service staff refer them to local agencies that help to administer the program; it is a once a year opportunity for assistance. x LEAP program was discovered to be underutilized by Colorado Springs Utilities customers. With further research it was discovered that the application was very difficult and customers that should be approved were being denied because of mistakes on applications that could have been prevented if they had guidance. x Decided that during “LEAP season” they would hire a seasonal or temporary employee and have a specific “LEAP desk” set up in the customer service area and encourage customers to come in for assistance and guidance on their applications. x The courier that picks up payments from drop boxes around the city also would come and pick up the LEAP applications and deliver them to the county office. 3.1 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 34 | Page x This program immediately doubled their customers’ use of the LEAP program. x Energy Efficiency program: They partner with the Energy Resource Center (ERC) which is a state run program that provides energy audits for low-income customers and will provide home improvements, customers just need to work for it a little more. x They will support tenants; landlords need to sign off and the ERC will negotiate with the landlords on the cost. x Colorado Springs Utilities program Home Efficiency Assistance Program (HEAP). They have a contract with the ERC to run this program. It is modeled after the ERC, but uses CSU’s criteria. Also focuses on water, not just energy; can be a tenant or owner occupied x The cost is built into the rate, it is a demand side management project; it is not a subsidizing situation. What are we currently doing as a utility? The current assistance options Fort Collins Utilities supports and communicates to our customers are: x Payment Assistance Fund—Fort Collins Utilities manages voluntary customer donations. Utility customers who have received a shut-off notice can get payment assistance once during a 12-month period. Persons contact Catholic Charities Larimer County at 970-484-5010 to schedule an appointment. An intake worker will interview the person and contact Utilities for information about his/her account. If the person qualifies and money is available, he/she will receive assistance that can be credited to electric and water accounts. x Resource Referral—Fort Collins Utilities website recognizes United Way as a resource for individuals who are in need of utility bill assistance. x Program Information—Utilities customers are made aware of LEAP (Larimer County manages). Funds are provided by the federal government and the Colorado Energy Assistance Foundation (CEAF). Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP) is a program designed to help low-income households with winter home heating costs. If a household is eligible for LEAP, it may also qualify for help such as minor furnace repair or replacement of broken windows. Households must submit a written application during the LEAP season (Nov. 1 – Apr. 30). x Home Energy and Water Efficiency Programs—Fort Collins Utilities provides home energy audits at substantially reduced cost, monthly reports and rebates to support lowering utility bills in a sustainable manner. x Program Sponsorship—Utilities customers are made aware of the Larimer County Conservation Corps. Through a partnership with Fort Collins Utilities, Loveland Water and Power and Platte River Power Authority, the Larimer County Conservation Corps is offering free energy and water assessments and efficiency upgrades to qualifying residents through March 29. The basic assessments include a visual inspection of appliances, heating/cooling systems, and insulation levels in walls, attics and crawlspaces. Corps members also will install free CFLs, programmable thermostats, 3.1 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 35 | Page retractable clotheslines, low-flow toilets, showerheads and faucet aerators and provide conservation tips and rebate opportunities to help lower energy and water bills. The 2013 goal is to assess and complete efficiency upgrades for 250 households within Fort Collins. x Medical Assistance Program—This program was developed after the implementation of the tiered rate with the recognition that some members of our community would be pushed into a higher tier because of their dependence on certain types of high energy medical equipment. This program is available to customers who require the use of medically necessary equipment in their home and/or have medical conditions that require the use of air conditioning during the summer months. To qualify for the program the maximum household income cannot exceed 60% of the area median income ($46,620 for a family of four), the customer needs to obtain a signature from his or her physician stating the equipment necessary and/or verifying the need of air conditioning in the summer months. The customer must also prove lawful presence in the United States. Currently, we do not collect any income or tax verifying documentation and we do not contact employers of the customer. Acceptance into this program does not automatically renew and must be applied for annually. What should our program look like? x Laurie’s recommendations (emailed) x John’s recommendations (meeting on 2/27) x My ideas x Recommendation 1: Offer assistance in filling out LEAP applications. In addition to LEAP, offer assistance with the Federal Weatherization Program (currently managed through Longs Peak Energy Conservation). This could also be an opportunity to partner with applicable City of Fort Collins assistance programs that are Utilities related. Hire temporary/seasonal employees and have them stationed at customer service to assist customers in filling out paperwork. Include the Longs Peak program in that process and offer information on any other city-wide (utility related) assistance programs. x Recommendation 2: Ask those who need help for their feedback on what a successful, accurate program looks like. Host two to three small, select focus groups of hand-picked people throughout the Fort Collins community that fall into this income demographic and would be likely to utilize such a program. Enlist the help of Social Sustainability, Finance and the Fort Collins Housing Authority in gathering potential participants and gathering feedback. x Recommendation 3: Education component—bill credits (home energy audit). x Recommendation 4: Sliding scale assistance program for home upgrades with education component. Focus on incorporating the “forgotten” low-income groups in our community: 50-80% of AMI-- $60,650 for a family of four in the Fort Collins/Loveland area. (Justification: contacted Ken Waido and Timothy Wilder for specific quantitative data if it exists.) 3.1 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 36 | Page Appendix 3: Low Income Assistance Program Project Charter 2014 3.1 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 37 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 38 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 39 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 40 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 41 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 42 | Page Appendix 4: Catholic Charities Emergency Clinic 2013 Program Data “Utilities Public Assistance Fund” is the Utility Payment Assistance Program. In addition to these funds, utility customers received $29,000 combined assistance from the Utilities EOC (Energy Outreach Colorado), Utilities EFSP (FEMA) and Utilities Private Funds (Catholic Charities). 3.1 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 43 | Page Appendix 5: Medical Assistance Application 2014 3.1 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 44 | Page 3.1 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 45 | Page Appendix 6: Compiled Focus Group Questions & Responses (4.29.14) Compiled Focus Group Questions & Responses (4.29.14) 1) Is utility payment support for low income assistance an issue or need in our community? Big issue with many families. Utility bills high and income to pay is low; that is why they need assistance. Yes! Go thru $170,000 per year at CCN. DRS: High need, lots of people come to DRS for utility assistance; they typically can help those with disabilities—difficult because shut off is usually close, maybe an hour away, first issue is how to stop shut off. x Serve 6.8: 40-50 people/week ask for assistance. x MS: EOC funds only 1x/yr. – Many requests beyond 1x/yr. x UT: No emergency funds @ utilities. x Medical assistance thru utilities – too low income $36,000. x 211 highest call need. x Housing Authority utility allowance doesn’t meet need. x Many callers have LEAP, it isn’t enough. x Some need is for those that don’t qualify for existing due to income but can’t afford utilities. (High rent, all electric home, high % of income to rent.) 2) What challenges do customers who are trying to receive low income assistance encounter? Diversity and Transportation: x Right language and outreach targets; Spanish-speaking need help with application; more services in languages people speak. x Undocumented families have equal rights. x Transportation/Dial-A-Ride and SAINT all have limitation in the area of transportation; just getting in to pay the late fee can be an issue; particularly with mental illness issues that lead to procrastination. x No dispatch-able transport system = problem. x Transportation – to access agencies, doctor signatures. x Need transportation to complete application. Working With Utility: x Can only make payment arrangements every six months and people still get behind. 3.1 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 46 | Page x Have to go up Utilities Chain of Command which takes time; person answering usually can’t do anything about it, have to explain; sometimes they pass call to decision makers but other times not, frustrating. x Shut off notice typically gives them 3-4 days; it is the pink slip that opens up help. x Seems like Utilities is more “hard core” than they used to be; very subjective depending on who answers but appears staff has been trained more hard line than years prior. x Utilities – Will cut off for non-payment regardless of medical needs. x Some clients may have been offered payment plan by Utilities but they didn’t follow through, waiting for crisis slip (pink) to respond. x Section 8 reimbursements are confusing on utility bill. x N2N writes check and should reflect on individual bill. x Utilities are concerned with frequent flier customers/abuse of the program. Family Finances: x Some people have no income. x These clients are living on $700/month; A and D clients are living on $174/month—no education is going to help in these situations. x Credit and criminal past can be a problem. x Problem = money, not communication gaps. x Late fee when strapped = big issue, increases problem. x For some, it is a money management issue; for example, people still buy cigarettes every day. x Shortage of resources/loan. x Hard winter leads to more need/more issues Funding Support Issues & Where to Go: x United Way cut funding to DRS 75% during “Bridges Out of Poverty” campaign; DRS clients are getting out of poverty so they don’t fit that “funding mold” anymore. x 211 might help, lots of questions about where to go for help. x Not enough options. x Not enough promotion/education about accessing donated utilities or about how to donate to it. x No awareness on criteria; assistance is there but not aware. x First come, first serve. Usually run out of money – CCN. x Where to access help – where to start. 3.1 Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 47 | Page x Resources (community) need to be defined. x Murphy Center and area churches are who they typically go to. x PSS has some funds to help people in their program with Utilities. Housing Issues: x Market rent is the real issue, if rent were lower, people could pay utilities. x Utilities is not the problem leading to homelessness, that is a housing issue. x There are some cases where Utilities cost is the straw and could lead to losing housing. x I see the housing cost as the most challenging issue in Fort Collins. This then causes utilities to become an issue. In a college town, most places can charge per bedroom. It is unrealistic for a family in this town to try and make it with such high housing costs. x Agencies have few funds to make properties more energy efficient, especially multi-family. Different Populations with Unique Needs: x Disabilities vs. those working toward self-sufficiency = different populations and very different needs. x Many DRS clients suffer from mental illness and other issues, may be paralyzed by anxiety or fear so they procrastinate, increases crisis. x There are concerns about medical equipment for DRS clients, they are not familiar with the medical program and neither are their clients, lots of hoops to jump through for this population. x For some it is a temporary issue; for others it is ongoing. Create a system for each that looks different. Program Constraints & Marketing: x More outreach marketing. x Agencies want to be more proactive than reactive. x Paperwork – system: Programs not communicating info HIPPA. x Assistance 1 X annually. x Time – crisis mode issue; working with agency system. x Limited appointment availability. “Hoops” customers need to jump through to get assistance (Call every day. Lottery, Mon-Thurs. afternoons.) x So few DRS clients have registered their medical equipment. x No one stop shot for assistance; time intensive for agencies and customers. x Most DRS clients do not have computer access to pay online. 3.1 Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 48 | Page 3) What kind of reasons could be associated with receiving low income utility payment assistance? Financial x Low income (wages)/financial situation/no income. x Priorities: rent, utility, food; downsize when income diminishes; determining what is important; making trade-offs to pay other bills. x Elderly – fixed income. x Unexpected expenses – car, layoff, medical, job loss, death in family, natural disasters. x Medical/mental health issues, disability, hospital stay, no family-support to help, large medical crisis, get behind on bills and can’t catch up, shortage of payees in Fort Collins—Touchstone has a few but not enough. x Increase in utility use/cost. x Shift of cost (help for utilities but not for car repair). x High rent. x Lack of money management skills; poor planning abilities; people wait until last minute. x People access lots of funds, some on a schedule; Are people depending on help to pay every month? x Landlords regulate utilities. Family Changes x Single parents; divorce. x Larger household with kids/grandkids or aging parents. x Health reasons. 4) What should Utilities’ role be in supporting low income assistance for utility payments? Working with Other Organizations: x Partnerships with organizations/agencies that support low income; can explain better and better access; distribute funding; understand language, culture and sensitive to assistance. x Know where low income population is going to for help. x Work with health agencies; going beyond. x Non-profit can validate/investigate; income verification concern for Utility. x They are trained to work with these clients in a humanizing manner. 3.1 Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 49 | Page x Maybe a liaison for agencies when they call Utilities, a title to ask for? Some way to save time. x Train Utilities staff to work with agencies. x Collecting customer donations and contracting vendor to appropriate funds or if there is an existing organization to appropriate funds with guidelines of assistance (round up on bill? Corporate sponsors?). x Example: Project Cope/Colo. Springs. Energy Conservation & Education: x Education on how to conserve and be energy efficient (requirement for assistance). x Education about budgeting. x Educating agencies. x Rebate programs for efficiency for landlords/owners who add efficiency measures (insulation) when remodeling (program requirements are issue). x Utilities could give more aid for larger homes. x Require energy audit for aid? (Who would pay?) x Educational awareness on utility usage. When to use appliances or how simple tasks like window plastic, turning off lights, how to use thermostat, etc. can save money. x Referring customers to payment assistance organizations who educate on budgeting, employment, housing and medical needs. City’s web site offering listing of various organizations (with disclaimer). Program Design: x More info on client account. x Collect $/fundraise for project. x Client realization that City is providing assistance. x Utilities manage $; challenge is the administration of the money; designated fund. x Providing or supporting centralized customer information system for customer convenience as they seek assistance. Database or site with access from assistance organizations or customer access. x Computer in lobby for customer assistance access (restrictions on access). x Variations across agencies might be an obstacle. x Agency – intake, 1 x/year. x Review annual aid amount? More than $150. x Program for people with zero income. 3.1 Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 50 | Page x Create a pool of money to apply for Project Self Sufficiency. x Is there a way to trigger Utilities that someone is in the hospital? A plan that can be worked out for that? Issue: There are not enough advocates. Utilize retirees? x Tracking of reason for assistance for statistical purposes would be helpful in determining community needs. x Exceptions – when come into play? x Behavior vs. circumstance; entitled vs. folks truly trying to support themselves. x Utilities to disperse $ for distribution thru credible agencies. x Education re: existing resources. 5) What should a successful low income utility payment assistance program look like? How would you measure success? What a Program Could Look Like: x Easily accessible with information and languages. x Education assistance. x Give money with commitment to visit home to review utility support/education (how to manage renters). x Give more resource options to low income utility support such as food, home repairs, etc. x How to support rental properties with owners “comply with building efficiency and conditions”; how to enforce. x Quality of tracking difference. For example, tracking utility use before and after (audits). x Partnership with LCCC. x % of funds to address root cause. x Round up on utility bill. x Other collaboration; free energy saving devices. x Is it a discount rate? Issue is that there are always those in crisis. Some DRS clients would benefit from a discount. x Discount doesn’t alleviate crisis issues. x Different populations need different plans. x Work with landlords to include utilities = they know what they are getting into x Example= Legacy Apartments. x Taking physical & mental health into consideration. x Need resources to help with all needs to achieve a balanced life rather than living day to day. x Social Sustainability Summit? Resource fairs for needs? 3.1 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 51 | Page x Effective communication/updates on organizations with current funding. x Transportation referrals (SAINT or bus availability) – the most frequent obstacle in getting assistance according to 211; work with transportation for shuttle. Measure & Communicate Success: x Amount or # coming in to ask for assistance. x Raise awareness. x Measure of success should be by number of involuntary shut-offs and/or notices (decrease). x Number of households assisted each year. x Data on repeat assistance customers, year after year with likelihood of repeat assistance need. Collect metrics (reasons); what is triggering requests? x Education tracking and impact on assistance needs (surveys after assistance awarded). x Monitoring assistance. For example, how results saving compared to before assistance; bill reduction monthly vs. crisis mode. x Education assistance. x Communicate success to donors and receivers; better utilization of social media. x Market to people who have auto debit. x Get more people to contribute; marketing to businesses. x Define success. x True outcomes take time. x Define parameters of who should receive assistance. x All work together to accomplish same thing. 6) Other comments/observations you believe are relevant to a utility low income assistance program. x Lack of knowledge about utility assistance program. x Need to partner better. x Make sure we run out of funds! x Sense calmness from receiving support. Not to worry having utility. Need to continue to offer calmness to more people. x How do you know how much to give? (good question) x Walmart with donations and partnerships. x Utility low income open house. x Helping people who cannot attend. 3.1 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 52 | Page x Anything needed to strategically manage funds – PAF & EOC (look at water turn offs). x Educate owners on including water in rent. x Second donation campaign to cover water in summer. x Verify income? x Clarify “low income” and boundaries for the program. x Crisis need as opposed to “abusing” the opportunity. x PS-S recommended studying Loveland’s program—she said it works very well. Questions: x What happened to REACH program? x Did LEAP replace REACH? x How is the current program advertised and how do people contribute? x Should there be some system change to alert but allow more time for crisis response? (i.e. the doorway to help is also the roadblock) 3.1 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 53 | Page Appendix 7: Larimer County Area Median Income 2013 3.1 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) 54 | Page Appendix 8: Bill Insert/Envelope for Payment Assistance Campaign 2014 3.1 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Low Income Assistance Program Evaluation Report (4537 : IQR) Utilities – Energy Board 700 Wood St. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6702 970.416.2208 - fax fcgov.com M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 3, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers FROM: Peter O’Neill, Energy Board Chairperson RE: Utilities Low Income Assistance Program – Income Qualified Rate (IQR) The Energy Board received a presentation from the Utilities Customer Connections and Strategic Financial Planning staff at our February 4 regular meeting detailing the proposed Low Income Assistance Program, including the Income Qualified Rate (IQR), scheduled to be presented to City Council work session on June 14, 2016. The Energy Board has previously received presentations on the Low Income Assistance program and supports the implementation, as the Low Income Assistance Program will provide a rate structure that supports conservation. The board unanimously supported the Low Income Assistance Program implementation. On behalf of the Energy Board, Peter O’Neill, Chairperson Fort Collins Energy Board cc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Kevin R. Gertig, Utilities Executive Director Tim McCollough, Light & Power Operations Manager DocuSign Envelope ID: 85049421-36C4-4334-8C04-E27E66AFCB19 ATTACHMENT 2 3.2 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Energy Board memo (4537 : IQR) ATTACHMENT 3 3.3 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Affordable Housing Board memo (4537 : IQR) ATTACHMENT 4 3.4 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: United Way letter (4537 : IQR) 1575 Sherman Street, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.5700 www.colorado.gov/cdhs John W. Hickenlooper, Governor | Reggie Bicha, Executive Director May 23, 2016 Dear Members of Ft. Collins City Council: The Colorado Department of Human Services Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP) is pleased to offer support for the concept of an electric discount rate for low- income customers of Fort Collins Utilities. The mission of LEAP is to assist vulnerable Coloradans with paying their home heating costs and provide repair and/or replacement of furnaces to assure a safe, healthy, and warm environment. LEAP believes that a partnership with Fort Collins Utilities aligns with the mission of LEAP and will be an excellent way to address the high energy burden that many of your low-income households struggle with through strengthening the system of utility assistance available to customers in Larimer County. A discount rate is a strong supplement to the assistance LEAP provides and partnering provides opportunities for collaboration and enhanced outreach opportunities to reach more Fort Collins Utilities customers. In addition we believe a LEAP partnership is in the best interest of Fort Collins Utilities rate payers. Please let me know if you have any questions. We look forward to working with staff at Fort Collins Utilities to assist the most vulnerable Larimer County households meet their basic needs. Sincerely, Aggie Berens Aggie Berens LEAP Manager City of Ft. Collins City Council Members 281 N. College Avenue Ft. Collins, Colorado 80524 ATTACHMENT 5 3.5 Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: State Low-Income Energy Assistance letter (4537 : IQR) 225 E. 16th Avenue, Ste. 200, Denver, CO 80203-1612 Tel: 303.825.8750 Fax: 303.825.0765 www.EnergyOutreach.org February 5, 2016 City of Fort Collins City Council Members 281 N College Ave. Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Dear Members of Ft. Collins City Council: Energy Outreach Colorado (EOC) is pleased to offer support for the concept of an electric discount rate for low-income customers of Fort Collins Utilities. EOC is the only independent, non-profit organization in the state raising money to help limited income Coloradoans afford home energy. Since it was established in 1989, EOC has raised more than $231 million to fund energy bill payment assistance, energy efficiency upgrades for affordable housing and non- profit facilities, and advocacy on behalf of low-income energy consumers. EOC has been pleased to partner with Fort Collins Utilities to serve your vulnerable utility customers. In 2015, EOC helped 485 families with their Fort Collins Utilities’ bills totaling more than $100,000 in assistance, a 24% increase over 2014. We estimate that our assistance helped only 5% of the actual eligible low-income population in your community. While energy efficiency programs and access to solar energy are strategies that EOC is pursuing (in partnership with Fort Collins Utilities) to help reduce vulnerable families’ energy costs, we have also advocated for innovative rate design, including a low-income discount rate, as a critical solution to help families reduce their energy burden and improve their affordability of other necessities. In fact, EOC was the organization that worked to promulgate the rules at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission for the current Percent of Income Programs that exist with the investor-owned utilities in Colorado. We support Fort Collins Utilities use of a similar approach in its proposal for a discount rate for low-income customers. Here are some facts – x Over one in four Colorado households are faced with home energy insecurity and have trouble paying their energy bill. x The cost of home energy regressively impacts low-income households. Vulnerable households pay a significantly higher portion of their income than non-low-income households to heat and light their homes. x The inability to pay for home energy severely impacts a household’s capacity to pay for food, medicine, medical care and other necessities. Because payment for gas and electric utility service is a top priority, in order to maintain utility service and stay in their home, low-income households do without necessities that most of us take for granted. x The National Energy Assistance Directors Association recently published a report that, based on a survey of households that received LIHEAP assistance, indicated the following o 45% of households went without medical or dental care o 38% went without filling a prescription or taking the full dose of a prescribed medicine o 32% of households went without food for at least one day o 44% closed off part of their home in order to save energy o 33% used unsafe methods to heat their homes ATTACHMENT 6 3.6 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Energy Outreach Colorado letter (4537 : IQR) EOC believes that a discount rate for low-income households serves the interest of Fort Collins Utilities and its customers. Reduced collection costs and continuity of service provide benefits to the entire system. Affordable energy is critical to the wellbeing of our most vulnerable neighbors. A discount rate for vulnerable households in Fort Collins will help ensure that low-income citizens can stop sacrificing other absolute necessities and live in a safe and healthy home. EOC monitors innovative energy policies on a national level and is keenly aware of Fort Collins Utilities’ position as an innovator. We believe the inclusion of a low-income discount rate among the package of programs and services that you provide your customers is a model action and one we hope will be replicated across Colorado. Please let me know if you have any questions. Again, congratulations to your Utility staff for their compassion and concern for your vulnerable customers. Sincerely, Skip Arnold Executive Director. 3.6 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Energy Outreach Colorado letter (4537 : IQR) Utilities – Water Board 700 Wood St. PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6702 970.416.2208 - fax fcgov.com M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 6, 2016 TO: Mayor Troxell and Councilmembers FROM: Brett Bovee, Water Board Vice Chairperson THROUGH: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Kevin R. Gertig, Utilities Executive Director RE: Comments on Income Qualified Rate Concept At the City of Fort Collins Water Board Work Session on June 2 the Board heard a presentation by Utilities Customer Connections Manager Lisa Rosintoski on the proposed Income Qualified Rate (IQR) program. Fort Collins Utilities is currently considering a two-year IQR pilot program in 2017 and 2018. Members of the Water Board would like to submit the following comments to City Council as they consider the IQR program at their upcoming Work Session. These comments were compiled from multiple Water Board members and represent a range of opinions and ideas. Overall, Water Board members were supportive of the IQR program, and most comments focused on how the program would be implemented. x The planned IQR program does not include stormwater fees, and perhaps it should. Staff stated that stormwater fees were not included because they are not tied to water conservation efforts underlying the IQR program. Some Water Board members maintain that stormwater should be included for program discounts. x The discounts to be applied to customer’s bills are based on the difference in utility costs (as a percentage of income) between “average” and “low income” households in the Fort Collins service area. Utility costs for low income households average 4.6% of income while utility costs for average income households average 2.6%. The IQR program would provide a discounted utility bill based on this 2.0% difference. The data underlying this discount is based on Fort Collins customers, but perhaps more fundamental questions are: (1) What is a reasonable amount to pay for utility service, and is 4.6% beyond that reasonable amount when compared across the Colorado Front Range and nationally? (2) Should the discounts be based on a broader dataset (regional, national) of what an acceptable or reasonable utility bill should be, rather than just Fort Collins data? x Instead of having a simple discount plan depending on your median household income, Utilities might consider a graduated discount plan. This type of plan would provide the greatest discounts to the lowest income customers. If not a part of the pilot program, it should at least be considered for any more permanent IQR program. DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D8C6668-88A8-48D3-9A57-875DF8EF0E96 ATTACHMENT 7 3.7 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Water Board memo (4537 : IQR) x The pilot program should be evaluated in terms of increased water use, cost of the bill discounts, and other factors at the household level. As a type of water conservation program, a Cost-Benefit Analysis should be performed comparing the cost effectiveness of a discounted utility bill versus incentivizing more efficient water and electric usage with rebates or direct installs. This is important to do at the household level, and the pilot program should require that IQR program participants allow Utilities to collect, monitor, and publicize (for reports, using normal protections for privacy) household specific data. In this way, Utilities provides the benefit of a discounted bill in exchange for data that will go towards the public good of understanding the issues and solutions. x Utilities might also consider whether a more aggressive graduated block (or tiered) rate structure would achieve the same goals as the IQR program. The two goals of reduced water use and lower monthly bills could be provided by making the lowest tier less expensive and higher tiers more expensive. x The pilot program might further incentivize water conservation by requiring IQR program participants to participate in existing Utilities water conservation programs, such as rebates for low water use fixtures. x Beyond the pilot program, a more permanent IQR program should probably focus on meeting the most basic household water uses, and not people with large lawns and landscapes. The IQR program should focus on meeting “tier 1” water uses and not discount bills for high outdoor water uses. Data should be collected during the pilot program to better identify how participants are benefitting. x The IQR program is currently planned to be coordinated with the LEAP program, to save costs and make enrollment easier and more efficient. There is likely to be confusion because the Utilities service area does not align with the LEAP program area. At this time, it is unclear if the other two water districts serving Fort Collins would be interested in an IQR program, and perhaps results of this study should be shared with these other water districts. x Any discussion about utility rates needs to be as transparent as possible. Ratepayers should understand their monthly bill, and the details of what they are paying for. This could connect to water budget rate structures, tiered rate structures, fixed cost payments, etc. The IQR program could be a small piece of a broader effort to make all “costs” more transparent on the utility bill. This type of transparency could also help to understand differences between water costs (bills) for the three water districts serving the Fort Collins area. x City staff should identify the costs and source of funds for the IQR program, addressing items such as “the pilot program will be paid for with…” and “the program will result in rate increases for most customers, and we would expect this rate increase to be…” x There is a basic question of whether income inequality concerns are really in the purview of Fort Collins Utilities? DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D8C6668-88A8-48D3-9A57-875DF8EF0E96 3.7 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Water Board memo (4537 : IQR) I hope these comments prove helpful during your discussion of the IQR Program. Please contact the Water Board with any clarifying questions or follow-up comments. DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D8C6668-88A8-48D3-9A57-875DF8EF0E96 3.7 Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Water Board memo (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 1 06.14.16 Utilities Income Qualified Rate Lisa Rosintoski, Customer Connections Manager Randy Reuscher, Pricing Analyst 1 ATTACHMENT 8 3.8 Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 2 City Council Outcomes Direction sought and questions to be answered: 1. Does City Council support the concept of an Income-Qualified Rate as presented? 2. Are there areas of concern staff has not addressed? 2 3.8 Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 3 3 2004 Payment Assistance Fund Established 2012 Medical Assistance Program 2014 Comprehensive Review of Low- Income Assistance 2015 Implementation Strategy of Low- Income Assistance Program 2016 Implement Low-Income Assistance Program Portfolio with Income-Qualified Rate Low-Income Program Evaluation 3.8 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 4 Our Role as a Utility 4 Efficiency and Conservation Education Rates Funding Administration Efficiency and Conservation Education Funding Rates Develop Income- Qualified Rate Enhance Payment Assistance Fund Ongoing Temporary 3.8 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 5 5 Low-Income Assistance Integrated Approach 3.8 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 6 Data: Community Need Approximately 16% or 9,000 customers Area Median Income ~ $64,000 6 3.8 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 7 2.0% 1.3% 1.3% 0.7% 1.3% 0.6% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 165% FPL AMI % of Income Income Threshold Utility Costs as % of Income Electric Water Wastewater Avg Bill ~$48 Avg Bill ~$62 Avg Bill ~$30 Avg Bill ~$32 Avg Bill ~$34 Avg Bill ~$32 Data: Utility Costs 2.6% 4.6% Reduce percentages to align with AMI 7 3.8 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 8 Rate Implementation Strategy Income-Qualified Rate (IQR) • Proposed utility rate discounts • Customers at or below 165% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL) • Electric – 35% discount • Water – 45% discount • Wastewater – 50% discount • Rate design objective – lower the utility costs for these customers to align with the % of income spent on utilities as the area median income (AMI) household • Customers must apply for discount annually and meet qualifications for Low-income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP) 8 3.8 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 9 Data: Utility Costs $335,271 $670,542 $1,005,813 $1,341,084 $57,679 $115,358 $173,037 $230,716 $96,309 $192,618 $288,926 $385,235 $‐ $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 25% 50% 75% 100% Fund Impact Enrollment % Potential $ Impact by Fund Electric Water Wastewater $489,259 $978,518 $1,467,776 $1,957,035 ~0.28% of revenue ~0.55% of revenue ~0.83% of revenue ~1.14% of revenue Based on other community’s enrollment levels and IQR planned outreach strategy, enrollment is expected to peak at 60-70% Estimated overall impact of ~$1.3M Estimated overall impact of ~$1.3M 9 3.8 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 10 Community Outreach • Mass Communication • Traditional execution • Targeted Communication • Deliberate outreach (letters, presentations, etc.) • Stakeholder Collaboration • Social Sustainability and Neighborhood Services • Government Partners • Nonprofits • Education and Direct Installs • Larimer County Conservation Programs • Neighbor to Neighbor Homeowner Education 10 3.8 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 11 Plan, Do, Check, Act Staff Commitment: 1. Two Year Pilot - 2017 through 2018 2. 2019 present results to City Council 3. Measures for success a. Participation b. Efficiency Projects c. Conservation 11 3.8 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) 6/8/2016 12 City Council Outcomes Direction sought and questions to be answered: 1. Does City Council support the concept of an Income- Qualified Rate as presented? 2. Are there areas of concern staff has not addressed? 12 3.8 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) Next Steps • Prepare rate ordinance for consideration at the August 16 City Council meeting as part of the consent calendar. • If the rate ordinance is approved, launch community outreach campaign. 13 3.8 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (4537 : IQR) any free off-street parking ؘ Less attractive for short-term parkers Boulder Missoula Eugene Fort Collins Sioux Falls Fort Collins, Missoula, MT Boulder, CO Eugene, OR Sioux Falls, SD CO Other Strategies to be Considered with On-Street & Garage Parking: Expand Enforcement To Evenings and Weekends Manage Employee Parking Options / incentives to move employees off-street. Residential Parking Permit Program Reduce spillover impact on neighborhoods. Enhanced Communication, Education and Wayﬁnding Help customers ﬁnd parking quickly and easily. Alternative Funding Options • Parking District • Impact Fee Transportation Circulation Options • Circulator Shuttle • Bike Share Increase Supply • Parking Garages • Surface Lots Park & Ride • Max L o n g - T e r m S h o r t - T e r m L e n g t h O f S t a y On-Street Garage One-Stop Shop Quick Lunch Shopping Around Long Dinner Employees 2.1 Attachment: Community Dialog (4532 : Downtown Parking Community Dialogue)