HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/16/2007 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 118, 2007, BEING T ITEM NUMBER : 21
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE : October 16 , 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF : Darin Atteberry
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No . 118 , 2007, Being the Annual Appropriation Ordinance Relating to
the Annual Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2008 and Adopting the Budget for the Fiscal Years
Beginning January 1 , 2008 and Ending December 31 , 2009, and Fixing the Mill Levy for Fiscal
Year 2008 .
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
This Ordinance represents the annual appropriation for fiscal year 2008 , and adopts the total City
budget for fiscal year 2008 at $569 . 6 million and for fiscal year 2009 at $537 . 3 million. This
Ordinance also sets the City mill levy at 9 . 797 mills, unchanged since 1991 , for fiscal year 2008 .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Annual Appropriation Ordinance is presented for First Reading. This ordinance sets the City
Budget for the two year period 2008-2009 . The Ordinance is based on the City Manager' s
Recommended Budget, with several additions directed by City Council at its October 9, 2009 Work
Session. The additional offers total $ 1 ,038 ,916 in one-time General Fund expenditures and
$ 1249148 (2009 costs) in on-going General Fund offers . If approved on First Reading, these
additions to the Recommended Budget would be funded through the use of an additional $412,715
in General Fund Reserves and an increase in revenue from the Sales and Use Tax Vendor Fee of
$390,000 per year (on-going.)
These additions use all of the total available funds, including one-time Reserves and on-going
Vendor Fee revenue.
BACKGROUND
This biennial budget represents the work of many dedicated employees who have come together for
the second time to use the Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) approach to develop this
recommendation. Nearly 100 employees were involved in creating a recommended budget which
builds on the ideas of transparency in the budget process, clear choices for how to allocate limited
October 16 , 2007 -2 - Item No . 21
revenues and organizational accountability. These principles are the hallmark of the BFO process .
The purpose of utilizing the BFO approach is to :
• Identify what' s important to the community and develop a sound financial and service plan
to achieve those outcomes ;
• Allocate dollars based on current priorities and results, not simply increase last year' s
spending;
• Effectively deal with revenue limitations ; and
• Emphasize accountability, efficiency, innovation and partnerships
Using this approach, City Council and staff worked in close collaboration over the past two months
to build a financial plan, based on revenue available, that will achieve service outcomes which
matter most to our citizens and community. This work has resulted in the development of the Final
2008-2009 Budget. The approval of the Appropriation Ordinance on First Reading represents a
major milestone in this process .
The final budget is organized around seven Council approved Result Areas or Outcomes that
citizens want and need:
Economic Health Fort Collins has a healthy economy reflecting the values
of our unique community in a changing world.
Environmental Health Fort Collins creates, maintains and promotes a healthy
and sustainable environment with an adequate, high
quality water supply.
Safe Community Fort Collins is a safe place to live, work, learn and play.
Neighborhood Livability Fort Collins improves the livability, choices , and
affordability of our neighborhoods .
Cultural and Recreational Fort Collins provides diverse cultural and recreational
Opportunities opportunities that foster physical and mental well-being
for community members .
Transportation Fort Collins improves the safety and ease of traveling to,
from, and throughout the city.
High Performing Government Fort Collins is a model for an entrepreneurial, high
quality city government.
October 16 , 2007 -3 - Item No . 21
In developing the budget, City Council and staff has continued to use the BFO process because it
helps the City achieve a number of goals :
• Create clarity in the budget process for the community
• Allocate revenues to highest priorities and the outcomes citizens want and need
• Understand the trade-off between services funded and unfunded
• Emphasize accountability, efficiency, innovation and partnerships .
Budget Highlights
The 2008-09 Final Budget is a financial and service plan linked to the seven key outcomes and
results that matter most to our citizens . Some key highlights of the City Budget include :
1 . The total budget for all City funds for 2008 is $569 . 6 million and $ 537 . 3 million for 2009 .
(The total budget is lower in 2009 because of a major one-time expense in 2008 for the
Mason Corridor Project.)
2 . The budget includes no tax increase.
3 . The tax revenue projections for 2008-09 are based on formulas developed and reviewed with
City Council in May 2006 . Sales and use taxis projected to increase by 2 . 03 % in 2008 and
2 . 63 % in 2009 .
4. Minor inflation oriented fee adjustments are included for several programs . For example,
the Recreation Division will make its typical market oriented inflationary adjustments to its
user fees to reflect increased costs for hourly employees and supplies .
5 . Wastewater rates will increase 12% in 2008 and 11 % in 2009 . Electric rates are projected
to increase 2 . 3 % to 2 . 7% in response to increases from Platte River Power Authority.
6 . The recommended budget includes no reductions in force . Several vacant positions were
eliminated as departments worked to develop offers which were lean, efficient and targeted
at the services citizens want and need.
Budget Assumptions
Net Operating • • -
•
ML2007 mZO08 % Changegomn2009 % Change
et Operating $ 320 . 1 $ 338 . 1 5 . 6 % $ 351 . 5 4 . 0 %
ebt $ 24 . 3 $23 . 9 - 1 . 6 % $ 26 . 2 9 . 6 %
apital $ 33 . 0 $ 105 . 7 220 . 3 % $ 58 . 6 -44 . 60/
otal Net City $ 377 . 4 $467 . 7 23 . 9 % $436 . 3 -6 . 7 %
nternal Transfers $ 95 . 1 $ 101 . 9 7 . 2 % $ 101 . 0 -0 . 9 %
Total City Budget $472 . 5 $ 569 . 6 20 . 6 % $ 537 . 3 -5 . 7 %
October 16 , 2007 -4- Item No . 21
As the budget development process began in early 2007 , City Council and staff met on several
occasions to outline goals and assumptions for developing the recommended budget. Council also
reviewed the Key Outcomes during the first Council goal setting retreat in April.
Some of the key assumptions used in developing the Final Budget include :
1 . Limited revenue growth for 2008 and 2009
The local economy has improved throughout 2007, and staff continues to plan for a limited
amount of sales tax revenue growth through 2008 and 2009 .
2 . Use of reserves
With new retail development under construction, staff expects that sales tax revenues will
improve significantly in 2010 . To bridge the gap between our current sales tax level and an
expected improvement in 2010, the recommended budget used limited available reserves to
eliminate the need to reduce services in the short-term. Approximately $3 million in General
Fund reserves was used to balance the 2008-09 Recommended Budget. In the 2010- 11
Budget, the City expects that sales tax revenues will improve as new retailers are open and
generating new sales tax revenue. Staff discussed the use of reserves with the City Council
at its April 2007 retreat and received Council ' s consent to develop a recommended budget
based on this assumption.
At its October 9 Work Session, Council gave staff direction to include an additional amount
of resources from General Fund reserves in the appropriation ordinance being considered on
First Reading. By using an additional $400,000 in Reserves, the balance in the General Fund
Reserve accounts would remain above the recommended level of 60 days Reserve ( 16 . 67%
of General Fund expenditures . Council further agreed to formally review a General Fund
reserve policy at an upcoming work session.
3 . Vendor Fee Policy Change
The Appropriation Ordinance is based on the assumption that the City will modify its
Vendor Fee, thus yielding additional sales tax revenue that can be applied to General Fund
purposes. The Vendor Fee is paid to vendors who collect sales and use taxes on behalf of
the City. Currently, approximately $700,000 is kept each year by businesses as a vendor fee .
Staffproposed that the Vendor Fee could be reduced from 3 % to 1 %, yielding approximately
$390 ,000 of additional revenue available to the City General Fund.
The proposed vendor fee would allow vendors to keep 1 % ($45) of the first $4, 500 in tax
collected. Vendors would keep approximately $310,000 annually, which would result in the
City realizing a greater share of the actual sales and use tax collected. This does not change
the sales tax rate that residents pay, but rather recoups a greater amount of it from the
vendors who collect the taxes on the City' s behalf.
Council directed staff to include this revenue increase in the Final Budget Appropriations
Ordinance . To implement this change in the Vendor Fee for Collection of Sales Tax, an
Ordinance will be presented for First Reading on November 6 . Second Reading will be
October 16 , 2007 -5- Item No . 21
scheduled for November 20 to coincide with the Second Reading and final adoption of the
2008 -09 Budget.
4. New facilities must be operated and maintained
In 2007 , three new facilities will open: the new Police Services building, the new Northside
Aztlan Community Center, and Spring Canyon Community Park. While the capital funds
for these projects were provided through debt financing and voter approved capital
programs, the resources to operate and maintain them must be provided through existing
General Fund sources .
5 . Public Safety needs and environmental issues are funding priorities
As initial revenue allocations between the various Budget Outcomes were made, new
resources were allocated to these priorities to enhance these services based on feedback
provided to staff at the City Council retreat.
6 . Employee salary adjustments are planned for in 2008 and 2009
A basic assumption was made that employee salary adjustments would be funded. As a
basic cost of doing business, it is essential to ensure that these cost increases are funded
before making any decisions about additional services or enhancements .
7 . Economic health programs are vital to future revenues
Investing in the local economy continues to be a priority for long-term financial stability, so
economic health programs are a high priority.
As staff developed the recommended budget, one of the messages sent to both our
employees and residents is that 2008-09 are not expected to be "rebuilding years . " The City
saw significant budget cuts in 2006-07 , including a large number of layoffs due to slow
revenue growth. For 2008 -09, the budget is aimed at fine tuning our service level and
addressing a limited number of emerging issues and high priority services with neither
significant cuts nor enhancements expected. A limited number of enhancements which
address the goals outlined above were included in approved offers . Though many appealing
service enhancement offers were submitted by departments, Council found that they could
fund only a limited number, given limited revenue growth.
Adjustment to Recommended Budget
During September and October, 2007, City Council and staff met in work sessions to review the City
Manager' s Recommended Budget in detail. At its October 9 Work Session, Council gave staff
general direction to include a number of additional offers in the appropriations ordinance to be
considered on First Reading on October 16 . (See Offer Descriptions, Attachment 1 ) These included
the following items :
City Council Possible Funding List
October 9, 2007 Work Session
October 16 , 2007 -6- Item No . 21
Ongoing 2008 2009
167 . 1 HPG Sustainable City Government $ 67, 151 $ 69 , 048
TBD Envir. Air Quality Monitoring $ 20 , 000
211 . 2 Neigh Neighborhood Services—Grant Enhancement $ 5 , 000 $ 500
211 . 3 Neigh Neighborhood Services-Code Enforcement $ 17 , 500 $ 17 ,500
213 . 1 HPG Development Review Center-Innovative Tech $ 12.600
Ongoing Total $ 89 , 651 $ 124, 148
One time
30 . 4 HPG Network Services-Equipment (Voice over $ 39 , 974 $ 37 , 342
IP) * *
213 . 1 HPG Development Review Center-Innovative Tech $ 1211600
203 . 3 Neigh Enhancement of Human Services Grant $ 1009000 $ 1001000
Program
TBD Envir Air Quality Monitoring $ 30 , 000
126 .2 Transp. Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update $ 100 , 000
TBD Envir. Hazardous Waste Study $ 50 , 000
TBD Econ NCEDC Contribution $ 30 , 000 $ 30,000
203 .2 Neigh Partial Restoration of Affordable Housing Fund $ 200,000 $ 200,000
One time total $ 6715574 $ 3679342
"Note: Offer 30. 4 partially funded through Telecommunications Fund
In order to fund these desired services, additional resources beyond those included in the 2008-09
City Manager' s Recommended Budget will be required to balance the Appropriation Ordinance .
Council provided staff with direction to bring forward a proposal that includes the use of an
additional $400,000 in General Fund Reserves and a change to the Sales and Use Tax Vendor Fee
which would result in an additional $390,000 in sales tax revenue. In order to balance the
appropriation to these desired purchases, the use of General Fund Reserves was increased slightly
beyond the amount directed by Council to total $412,715 . The Partial Restoration of Affordable
Housing Fund was also adjusted to be $200,000 in each year for a total of $400,000 in funds
restored.
In total, $ 1 ,252 , 715 in additional offers are included in the Final Budget. Of these offers,
$ 1 ,038 ,916 fund one-time expenditures and $ 124, 148 (2009 costs) fund on-going programs .
Conclusion
October 16 , 2007 -7 - Item No . 21
The 2008 -2009 Final Budget is a sound financial plan to deliver the services we believe our citizens
value most. The budgeting process has enabled us to focus and apply the resources available to key
community outcomes . Citizens will receive excellent value for their tax dollars .
Any final amendments agreed to by Council will be included in the second (and final) reading of
the budget ordinances on November 20, 2007 . By Charter, the budget must be adopted and
appropriations for the 2008 fiscal year must be approved by November 30.
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Offer Descriptions : Additional Offers to Fund in 2008-09 Final Budget.
2 . City Council Offers for Funding Consideration: October 9 , 2007 Work Session (Revised)
Attachment 1
Offer Descriptions
Additional Offers to Fund in 2008-09 Final Budget
October 9, 2007 Work Session
30.4 Network Equipment(Voice over IP)
This offer requests funding for equipment to upgrade the City's fiber coax hybrid
network necessary to continue the migration to Voice Over IP as well as to provide
broadband capacity necessary to meet the needs of the organization
126.2 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update
The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan was last updated in 2002. It focused on
identifying transit needs, opportunities and constraints and developing an operating
plan to support the strategic plan. The plan also laid out a four-phased approach to
transition the existing circuitous transit network to a grid system by 2010. Based on
the City's financial conditions, the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan implementation
schedule fell behind. At present day, the City currently should be in Phase 3 of
implementation as approved by City Council, but is still fixed in Phase 1 due to lack
of funding sources. This offer would update the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
to reflect its existing condition and provide a strategic operational and financial plan,
which will also identify potential new funding sources to carry the plan through full
implementation.
167.1 Sustainable City Government
This offer adds a new 0.5 FTE Environmental Planner to help green the operations of
City government by working with departments on existing City sustainability goals
such as paper reduction, solid waste reduction, promoting behaviors and polices that
conserve energy, encouraging more sustainable employee commuting habits,
promoting green purchasing and raising employee awareness of sustainable practices
at the office and at home. In addition to work on sustainability goals, this new
position will also provide needed help to coordinate assessments of City facilities
and assist with implementation of Climate Wise program recommendations for the
municipal government.
203.2 Partial Restoration of Affordable Housing Fund
This is an enhancement offer to increase the amount of funding in the City's
Affordable Housing Fund. The requested increase would add a total of $500,000
over the next two years, $250,000 per year in 2008 and in 2009. The Fund currently
provides $133,000 per year that is distributed through the Competitive Process for the
production of new affordable housing units for families below 80% of the Area
Median Income (AMI).
203.3 Enhancement of Human Services Program
This is an enhancement offer to increase the amount of funding in the Human
Services Program. The requested increase would add $210,000 per year to the
program that currently provides $345,934, distributed through the Competitive
Process, to non-profit human/social service agencies that provide services to
families below 80% of the Area Median Income. Services provided include such
things as employment training, day-care, home-ownership education, and
emergency shelters. The Competitive Process involves reviews of applications by
the Community Development Block Grant Commission and a final decision on
funding by the City Council. This enhancement was submitted in response to a
Council request.
211.2 Neighborhood Services - Grant Enhancement
This offer is an enhancement to the Neighborhood Quality, Maintenance and
Innovative Code Compliance Offer in order to increase the service provided to
neighborhoods wishing to utilize the Neighborhood Grant program. Grants are used
for neighborhood projects including clean-up, Neighborhood Night Out social
events and neighborhood signs.
211.3 Neighborhood Services - Code Enforce Enhancement
In order to enhance our current level of service, we would need to add a seasonal,
hourly inspector to help enforce the Weed Ordinance from early May to September
1 st. Of the 22,000 plus inspections we performed in 2006, over a quarter of the cases
were for weed violations requiring approximately 6,436 inspections. Clearly, weed
violations are the overwhelming daily service demand faced by code enforcement
staff during the summer months, limiting available resources to enforce other codes.
213.1 Development Review Center- Innovative Technology
This offer is for the acquisition and implementation of technologies specifically
related to development review and construction plan submittal processing. This
technology would enable staff to create a project-specific online information center
where applicants, owners, developers, citizens, and staff would have online access to
all project information, communications and workflow processes. This would
greatly increase project coordination and collaboration between the participants, and
potentially decrease the amount of time required to process applications. Automated
notification features can be utilized to alert participants of various items, alleviating
the need to routinely check on status. The ability to check required changes on
resubmitted documents is facilitated through document overlay or side by side
comparison features that highlight the differences, thereby increasing efficiency for
the staff reviewer. As well, this technology would give staff a better and more
comprehensive way to track pertinent data related to these review processes.
TBD Additional Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
This offer would add additional air quality monitoring equipment for particulates
Capital costs are estimated at $30,000 and annual operating costs range from
$10,000 - $20,000. Real-Time Particulate Monitoring would involve ongoing
operation of an existing real-time particulate monitor and publication and
distribution of hourly air quality data. It could include participating in AIRNOW, an
existing cross-agency Air Quality reporting Web site that can provide up-to-date
info, via pager or email, on EPA's Air Quality Index (with health advisories), PM
concentration, Ozone, current air quality conditions and yesterday's summary.
TBD NCEDC Contribution
Funding is provided to support NCEDC programs and services that assist the City in
implementing the Economic Action Plan, including the following:
• Business retention and expansion
• Clean Energy Cluster support
• Technology Incubator support
• Regional Economist support
• Ongoing support for managing site selection inquires and State of Colorado
incentives
TBD Hazardous Waste Disposal Study
This offer would fund a feasibility study for a disposal site for household
hazardous waste. The offer of $50,000 would include one-time funds for
the study only, with no funding for implementation.
ttachment
City Council Offers for Funding Consideration
October 9, 2007 Work Session (Revised)
Request
Ongoing or
Offer # Result Area Offer Name 2008 Cost 2009 Cost One-time
One Time Only
166. 1 Environmental West Nile--fully fund $ 149156 ongoing partially funded in 2008 only; 2009 funded
127.3 Transportation Enhanced Travel Corridor--North College $ 200,000 one time
126.2 Transportation Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update $ 1005000 one time Either year, prior to Transportation Master Plan
138 . 1 Transportation eCommerce Implementation--Parking Service $ 445000 one time
221 . 1 Neighborhood Eastside/Westside Neigh.Plan updates $ 1715000 one time
TBD Environmental Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility (Estimate ONLY ) $ 200,000 ?? Staff does not have an estimate of either the one-time or ongoing cost
TBD Econ. NCEDC Contribution $ 30,000 $ 305000 one-rime, 2 years
30.4 High Per£ Govt. Network Services--Network Equipment(Voice overIP) $ 88,850 $ 83 ,000 one time 2 one-time offers, partially funded thru Telecomm. Fund
$ 848,006 $ 113 ,000
One Time Possible
203 .3 Neighborhood Enhancement of Human Services Grant Prog. $ 1005000 $ 1009000 ongoing partial, total request = $210,000 year
186. 1 Safe Community Traffic Calming (fund pilot?) $ 550,000 $ 550,000 ongoing Fund a pilot project?
184.2 Transportation Sign Replacement Program $ 389000 ongoing Ongoing project, first year funding included in 2009 Rec.Budget
88 . 16 Transportation Street Design & Const. Stds Suppt. & Maint. $ 5 ,000 $ 5 ,000 ongoing
88.6 Transportation Pedestrian Access--Enhancement $ 2755000 $ 3259000 ongoing
203 .2 Neighborhood Partial Restoration of Affordable Housing Fund $ 250,000 $ 2005000 ongoing Can be funded at any level desired by Council
211 .2 Neighborhood Neighborhohood Sevices--Grant Enhancement $ 51000 $ 5 ,000 ongoing
$ 15223 ,000 $ 1 , 1859000
Ongoing
139.8 Safe Community PFA South Battalion $ 6645616 $ 5069424 ongoing 180k one time capital, balance ongoing, 3-6 mon lead time
TBD Environmental Air Quality Monitoring $ 305000 $ 20,000 one time plus ongoing
TBD Safe Community Police staffing $ 29000,000 $ 2,000,000 ongoing
167. 1 High Per£ Govt. Sustainable City Government $ 675151 $ 69,048 ongoing
213 . 1 High Per£ Govt. Development Review Center--Innovative Tech $ 1215600 $ 12,600 ongoing
211 .3 Neighborhood Neighborhood Services--Code Enforcement $ 179500 $ 17,500 ongoing
93 . 1 Neighborhood Neighborhood Parking Pilot program $ 289735 $ 21 ,205 ongoing
$ 25929,602 $ 216469777
Grand Total $ 59000,608 $ 319449777
ORDINANCE NO. 118, 2007
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
BEING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE
RELATING TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2008; ADOPTING THE BUDGET
FOR THE FISCAL YEARS BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2008,
AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2009; AND FIXING THE MILL
LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008
WHEREAS,the City Manager has,prior to the first Monday in September,2007,submitted
to the Council a proposed budget for the next ensuing budget term, along with an explanatory and
complete financial plan for each fund of the City, pursuant to the provisions of Article V, Section
2, of the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, within ten days after the filing of said budget estimate, the Council set
September 18 and October 2, 2007, as the dates for the public hearings thereon and caused notice
of such public hearings to be given by publication pursuant to Article V, Section 3, of the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, the public hearings were held on those dates and persons were given the
opportunity to appear and object to any or all items and estimates in the proposed budget; and
WHEREAS, Article V, Section 4, of the City Charter requires that, before the last day of
November of each fiscal year, the Council adopt the budget for the ensuing term by ordinance and
appropriate such sums of money as the Council deems necessary to defray all expenditures of the
City during the ensuing fiscal year; and
WHEREAS,Article V, Section 5,of the City Charter provides that the annual appropriation
ordinance shall also fix the tax levy upon each dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property
within the City, such levy representing the amount of taxes for City purposes necessary to provide
for payment during the ensuing fiscal year for all properly authorized expenditures to be incurred by
the City; and
WHEREAS, Article XII, Section 6, of the City Charter permits the City Council to fix,
establish, maintain, and provide for the collection of such rates, fees, or charges for water and
electricity, and for other utility services furnished by the City as will produce revenues sufficient to
pay into the General Fund in lieu of taxes on account of the City-owned utilities such amount as may
be established by Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. Budget
a. That the City Council has reviewed the City Manager's 2008-2009
Recommended Budget, a copy of which is on file with the office of the City Clerk,
and has approved certain amendments thereto.
b. That the City Manager's 2008-2009 Recommended Budget, as
amended by the Council, is hereby adopted, in accordance with the provisions of
Article V, Section 4, of the City Charter and incorporated herein by reference;
provided,however,that the comparative figures contained in the adopted budget may
be subsequently revised as deemed necessary by the City Manager to reflect actual
revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year 2007.
C. That the adopted budget,as amended,shall be maintained in the office
of the City Clerk and identified as "The Budget for the City of Fort Collins for the
Fiscal Years Ending December 31,2008,and December 31,2009,as Adopted by the
City Council on November 20, 2007."
Section 2. AAvlropriations. That there is hereby appropriated out of the revenues of the
City of Fort Collins, for the fiscal year beginning January 1,2008, and ending December 31,2008,
the sum of FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED NINETY THOUSAND
ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($569,590,155)to be raised by taxation and otherwise,
which sum is deemed by the City Council to be necessary to defray all expenditures of the City
during said budget year, to be divided and appropriated for the following purposes, to wit:
GENERAL FUND $107,690,574
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Golf $2,717,381
Light & Power
Operating Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,288,372
Capital:
Service Center Additions 4,482,904
Southwest Enclave Annexation 800,000
Substation Improvements 5,222,621
Wi Fi 50,000
Capital Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,555,525
Total Light& Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,843,897
-2
Storm Drainage
Operating Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,859,110
Capital:
Basin Master Planning 90,000
Canal Importation Basin 5,000,000
Cooper Slough-Boxelder 400,000
Developer Repays 75,000
Drainage System Replacement 365,000
Dry Creek Basin 1,600,000
Service Center Improvements 81,775
Capital Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,611,775
Total Storm Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,470,885
Wastewater
Operating Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,607,768
Capital:
Collection System Replacement 1,110,000
Collection System Study 50,000
Mulberry WRF Improvements 6,150,000
Northwest Trunk Sewer Expansion 2,000,000
Service Center Improvements 69,571
Sludge Disposal Improvements 150,000
Treatment Plant Improvements 750,000
Water Reclamation Replacement Program 3394,000
Capital Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,073,571
Total Wastewater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,681,339
Water
Operating Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,432,962
Capital:
Cathodic Protection 50,000
Distribution System Replacement 755,000
Halligan Reservoir Expansion 190,000
Master Plan Facilities 750,000
Meter Conversion Program 920,000
Service Center Improvements 136,006
Southwest System Improvements 50,000
Treatment Facility Improvements 75,000
Water Production Replacement Program 1,160,000
Water Supply Development 100,000
Capital Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,186,006
Total Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,618,968
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS $ 183,332A70
-3-
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Benefits $20,793,276
Communications 2,384,802
Equipment 10,906,771
Self Insurance 3,352,985
Utility Customer Service & Administration 14.464,156
TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS $ 51,901,990
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Capital Improvement Expansion Fund $ 459,981
Capital Leasing Corporation Fund 5,726,331
Cemeteries 629,884
Cultural Services &Facilities 5,008,662
Debt Service 1,352,038
General Employees' Retirement 2,684,342
Natural Areas Fund 9,225,217
Perpetual Care 70,438
Recreation 7,850,915
Sales and Use Tax 78,137,453
Street Oversizing 5,279,837
Transit Services 11,026,076
Transportation Services 28,503,751
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE &DEBT SERVICE FUNDS $155,954,925
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS
General City Capital
City Bridge Program $ 300,000
Police Facility 674,429
Railroad Crossing Replacement 100,000
TOTAL GENERAL CITY CAPITAL $1,074,429
1/4 Cent - Building on Basics
Administration $ 58,889
Bicycle Program Plan Implementation 125,000
Intersection Improvements and Traffic Signals 2,506,052
Library Technology 744,000
North College Avenue Improvements 1,063,490
-4-
Pedestrian Plan and ADA Improvements 300,000
TOTAL 1/4 CENT - BUILDING ON BASICS $ 4,797,431
1/4 Cent BCC -Streets and Transportation
Mason Street Transportation Corridor $ 61,508,488
TOTAL 1/4 CENT STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION $ 61,508,488
Conservation Trust Fund
Administration $ 242,389
Fossil Creek Trail 50,000
Open Space Acquisition 10,000
Trail Acquisition, Development&Repair 350,000
Transfer to General Fund-Parks Maintenance 687,496
Tri-City Trails 30,000
TOTAL CONSERVATION TRUST FUND $1,369,885
Neiyhborhood Parkland Fund
Administration $ 419,963
Cottonwood Glen Park 150,000
Golden Meadows Park 175,000
Maple Hill Park 150,000
New Park Site Acquisition 400,000
New Park Site Development 150,000
Old Fort Collins Heritage Park 100,000
Park Site Equipment 15,000
Provincetowne Park 200,000
Registry Ridge Park 200,000
TOTAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARKLAND FUND $1,959,963
TOTAL CITY FUNDS $569,590,155
Section 3. Mill Levy
a. That the 2008 mill levy rate for the taxation upon each dollar of the
assessed valuation of all the taxable property within the City of Fort Collins as of
December 31,2007, shall be 9.797 mills,which levy represents the amount of taxes
-5-
ITEM NUMBER : 22
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE : October 16 , 2007
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF : Brian Janonis
Terri Bryant
Bill Bray
SUBJECT
Items relating to Utility Rates and Charges for 2008 .
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading.
Electric Board recommends adoption of the monthly electric rates and electric development fees
ordinances .
Water Board recommends adoption of the monthly wastewater rates and water, wastewater, and
stormwater plant investment fee ordinances .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The rate Ordinances are projected to increase the annual operating revenues of the Wastewater Fund
by 12% and the Light and Power Fund by approximately 2 .3 % . No increases are proposed for water
and stormwater monthly rates . The combined utility fees for a typical single family residence will
increase $3 . 34 per month.
Proposed water, wastewater and stormwater plant investment fees (PIFs) are updated to reflect a
new customer' s impact on the system and maintain existing customers ' equity in the system.
Proposed electric development fees and charges cover costs of new commercial and residential
development. The financial impacts vary by the size and nature of the development. If the proposed
fees are adopted, water, wastewater and stormwater plant investment fees, and electric development
fees and charges will increase . The combined utility development fees for a typical single family
residence (exclusive of raw water requirements which are not changing) will increase from $9 ,213
to $ 10,639 or 15 . 5 % .
The proposed fees will be effective January 1 , 2008 .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A . First Reading of Ordinance No . 119, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise
Water Plant Investment Fees and Raw Water Requirements.
B . First Reading of Ordinance No . 120, 2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating
to Wastewater Rates and Charges .
October 16 , 2007 -2 - Item No . 22
C . First Reading of Ordinance No . 121 , 2007 , Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise
Sewer Plant Investment Fees .
D. First Reading of Ordinance No . 122, 2007 Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating
to Electric Rates and Charges .
E . First Reading of Ordinance No . 123 , 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise
Electric Development Fees and Charges .
F . First Reading of Ordinance No . 124, 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code to Revise
Stormwater Plant Investment Fees ,
G. First Reading of Ordinance No . 125 , 2007, Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Relating
to Utility Connection Fees and Miscellaneous Charges.
Ordinance No. 120, 2007 and Ordinance No. 122 , 2007 establish monthly wastewater and electric
rates for 2008 as follows :
% Increase
Wastewater 12
Electric 2 .0 - 2 . 6
The electric rate Ordinance also includes a housekeeping change to the power adjustment clause.
Ordinance No . 125 , 2007 , updates utility connection fees and miscellaneous charges for returned
items and turn-off notices to recover the cost of these services .
Ordinances Nos. 1191 1211 123 , and 124, 2007, adopt revised water, sewer and stormwater plant
investment fees and electric development fees . The fees are one-time charges paid by developers
or builders for the cost of the utility infrastructure needed to serve new development. Per Council
direction, plant investment fees are reviewed on an annual basis and revised during the biennial
budget cycle . Plant investment fees (PIFs) for water, wastewater and stormwater were updated with
the 2006-2007 budget. Electric development fees and charges are updated annually.
BACKGROUND
PLANT INVESTMENT FEES
• WATER
The water plant investment fees are developed to recover the current value of past investment and
the current value of future growth-related investment through 2040 . This method includes
calculating net water system equity, capacity units, and determining the net system equity per unit.
Water system assets are valued at replacement costs adjusted by the construction cost index as
published by Engineering News Record. Net system equity is determined by subtracting outstanding
debt principal from the total replacement costs plus estimated future growth related to capital
projects . That result is then divided by the future total plant capacity to determine unit cost. The
October 16 , 2007 -3 - Item No . 22
unit cost is applied to an estimated representative annual usage for each customer class to determine
the proposed water PIF .
The following schedule details PIFs for the various customer classes .
WATER PLANT INVESTMENT FEES BY CUSTOMER CLASS
2006 PIFs 2008-2009 Proposed
Peak Day Current Peak Day Proposed
Customer Class/Meter Size Usage d Charge Usa e d Charge Change
Unit Fee ($ per gallon) $3.69 $4.03 9 .2°/
esidentiah
Single Family
Inside Use 191 $ 710 181 $ 730 3 °/
Outside Use - $/S . Ft. 86 $ 0.37 770 $ 0.36 -3°/
Multi-Family (per unit)
Inside Use 133 $ 490 122 $ 490 0°/
Outside Use - $/S . Ft. 263 $ 0.28 232 $ 0.27 -4°/
Non-Residential (meter size)
3/a inch 19800 $ 69640 19730 $ 69970 5°/
linch 59230 $ 1 %300 59110 $ 209590 7°/
1 'h inch 109470 $ 389630 109300 $ 419510 7°/
2 inch 169710 $ 619660 169210 $ 659330 6°/
3 inch 339240 $ 1225660 35 ,370 $ 1429540
> than 3 inches Based on specific customer requirements
*differences due to rounding
The impact to a typical single family residence (8 , 600 sq. ft. lot) is a decrease of $66 from $3 , 892
to $3 , 826. The decrease is due to a reduction in average usage by the residential class .
Other
In addition to updating the wastewater PIF charges, the Ordinance revises Section 26- 149 of the City
Code which describes Raw Water requirements for non-residential service. The revision clarifies
that the customer is required to provide Raw Water equal to 1 . 92 times the customer' s estimated
peak annual use. The revisions apply ( 1 ) to a customer with two or more meters and (2) to a
customer who increases their annual allotment. An additional change is to correct a spelling error
wherein Raw Water Requirements are currently referenced as "RVR" and that is corrected to be
"RNM„
• WASTEWATER
The wastewater plant investment fees are developed using a method which assesses new customers
based on an allocation of the costs of the existing facilities and the projected growth-related
improvements . The utility foresees a significant amount of growth-related treatment plant projects
on the planning horizon. The 2005 study of the wastewater plant investment fees recommended a
174% increase. Due to the magnitude of the proposed increase, Council directed a three-year phase-
October 16 , 2007 -4- Item No . 22
in of the fees which was implemented beginning January, 2006 . The final phase of the 3 -phase
implementation is included in the proposed 2008 wastewater PIFs .
The proposed fees are shown in the following tables :
WASTEWATER PLANT INVESTMENT FEES
Customer Class/Meter Size Existing 2007 Proposed 2008
Volume Current Volume Proposed
G d Charge G d Charge Change
Single Family 340 $ 2,223 321 $ 3 , 194 43 .7%
Multi-Family 236 $ 15583 208 $ 29069 30.7%
Non-Residential (meter size)
3/4 inc 709 $ 4,749 624 $ 69206 30.7%
1 inch 1 , 814 $ 12, 151 19644 $ 169361 34.6%
1 '/z inc 3 ,279 $ 21 ,965 29854 $ 289396 29. 3%
2 inch 5 , 802 $ 38,865 55122 $ 505963 31 . 1 %
3 inch 12, 105 $ 819086 129209 $ 121 ,484 49 . 8%
4 inch and above assessed on individual basis
Wastewater plant investment fees for a typical single-family residence in 2008 would increase from
$2 ,223 to $3 , 194, or 43 . 7% .
• STORMWATER
Plant investment fees for stormwater are adopted on a citywide basis . All new development must
provide on-site detention as specified in the master plan. Regional elements are sized to handle
existing flows and to work in coordination with on-site detention in new developments . Stormwater
PIFs pay for a developer' s proportionate share of the system infrastructure as it exists at the time
they develop.
The unit of measure used to allocate the value of the existing system between new customers and
existing customers is acres of developed land, adjusted with a runoff coefficient (a measure of how
water runs off various surfaces) . Proposed development fees are calculated by dividing the value
of the current system, less outstanding debt, by the total acres of land (existing developed and
developable) in the service area. This number is then adjusted by the average runoff for the system.
The result is the unit value of the existing system per acre of developed land.
2008 %
2006 Proposed Change
Fees Fees
$3 070 $4 420 43.97%
The significant increase in fees is due to the large investments in stormwater infrastructure over the
last few years.
0 ELECTRIC
October 16 , 2007 -5- Item No . 22
Electric development charges include the allocated and actual costs to the utility for each
commercial or residential development. The two components of these charges are the Electric
Capacity Fee for the off-site electric system, and the Building Site Charge for the on-site electric
costs . The electric development charges are typically increased annually to adjust for inflation and
cost increases . Increases range from 12% for residential and 20% for commercial development.
The increases are due primarily to the significant increases experienced in the cost of transformers,
metals and other construction materials .
The following tables compare current fees with proposed fees for residential and commercial
development:
ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT FEES & CHARGES
RESIDENTIAL
Category Charge 2007 2008 % diff.
Per square foot $0.04215 $0.04731 12%
Per lineal front fool $7 .90 $9 .53 21 %
150A Single
t7 Fa $ 19078 $ 1 , 177 9%
Electric
CD
Capacity 200A Single
Fee as Fa $ 1 , 806 $ 19991 10%
150A Multi
Fa $719 $785 9%
200A Multi
Fa $ 19267 $ 19399 10%
1 / $585 $625 7%
CnLn
0 4/ $756 $787 4%
Building 350 kC $732 $873 19%
Site
Charges 1 /0 mobil $458 $490 7%
4/0 mobil $5931 $623 5%
October 16 , 2007 -6- Item No . 22
ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT FEES & CHARGES
COMMERCIAL
Category Charge 2007 2008 % diff.
Per square foot $0.04215 $0.04731 12°/
Per lineal front fool $29 . 83 $35 . 52 19°/
208V 1 -Ph $946 $ 19146 21 °/
Electric 240V 1 -P $ 19091 $ 1 ,323 21 %
Capacity Service
Fee Entrance 208V 3 -Ph $ 1 ,638 $ 1 ,985 21 °/
(per 100
amps)
240V 3 -Ph $ 1 ,890 $29291 21 °/
480V 3 -Ph $3 ,779 $49581 21 %
Primary Circuit ( I -phase) $7 .20 $8 .78 22°/
Building Primary Circuit (3 -phase $ 13 . 10 $ 17.72 35 %
Site Transformer Installation - 1
Charges phase $ 1 , 119 $ 19148 3 %
Transformer Installation -3
phase $2,097 $29132 2%
The impact to a typical single family residence (8 ,600 sq. ft. lot, 150 amp service) is an increase
of $298 from $2 , 578 to $2 , 876, or 12% .
SUMMARY OF PIF CHANGES AND COMPARISONS
The following table shows the overall impact of the proposed Plant Investment Fees and Electric
Development Charges on a typical single family residence.
Impact on Single Family
Current Proposed Chan e
Water* $ 35892 $ 39826 -2% $ 66
Raw Water* * $ 5 ,203 $ 5 ,203 0% $ 0
Wastewater $ 25223 1 $ 31194 44% $ 971
Stormwater* $ 520 $ 743 43 % P$ 2
Electric * $ 2 ,578 $ 2, 876 12% 98
Total $ 14,416 1 $ 15,842 10 % $ 1 ,426
*Typical, based on lot size
* *No increase for Raw Water
Comparison to other utilities is difficult due to differences in customer use patterns, the unique
capital needs of each utility, and different policy direction from governing bodies . The question
of how Fort Collins compares to other area utilities often arises. The graph below compares
water, wastewater, and stormwater PIFs and raw water requirements for a single family
residence for some neighboring communities .
October 16 , 2007 -7 - Item No . 22
Wastewater, Stormwater and Water Plant Investment Fees
( Including Cash in Lieu of Raw Water Fees )
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Fort Collins Fort Collins -
2007 Proposed Boulder Greeley Longmont Loveland Windsor
2008
C Raw Water Fees 5203 .09421 5203 .09421 0 7505 . 7 7957 .33 6487 .8567 15000
a Water PIF 3892 3826 9710 9500 7856 5340 6725
Storm Drainage PIF 516 . 741047 743 . 972452 2002 227 650 489 632
[] Wastewater PIF 2223 3194 1855 3900 3000 2360 3700
❑ Wastewater PIF E Storm Drainage PIF 0 Water PIF ❑ Raw Water Fees
MONTHLY RATES
Wastewater
The Ordinance increases the City ' s wastewater rates by 12% . The increase is applied "across the
board" to all customers . With the proposed rate, a typical single family residential customer' s
monthly bill will increase from $ 19 . 70 to $22 . 07 or $2 . 37 per month in 2008 . This is based on a
system average of 5 ,200 gallons per month winter quarter average (WQA) water use . The
wastewater rate increase is needed to generate sufficient revenue to fund the wastewater operations
and meet the increase in long-term debt service obligations for a major capital project to replace the
trickling filter, make odor control improvements and prepare for future regulation-based
improvements at the Mulberry facility.
The Mulberry plant was built in 1946 with upgrades in 1958 and 1972 . In the past two years, the
treatment performance of the plant's 60-year old trickling filter (which provides first-stage secondary
treatment for the plant flow) has degraded several times requiring it to be taken off-line, cleaned and
restarted. Failure of the trickling filter creates a significant increase in odors until it has been
cleaned. Even after restarting, the trickling filter's effectiveness has not recovered to its past
efficiency. In late 2006, a study by MWH Consulting Engineers was commissioned to determine
the best solution for the long-term use of the Mulberry plant. Upgrading the plant's secondary
treatment processes by removing the trickling filter and its associated facilities and installing a new
aeration basin and associated facilities is the most cost-effective solution. Because the trickling
filter is already recommended for replacement, odor control improvements will also take place.
October 16 , 2007 -8 - Item No . 22
Upgrading the facility will also allow the Utilities to prepare for future regulation-based
improvements . The improvements, including design and construction, are projected to cost $31 . 8
million and will be funded by debt.
An 11 % increase is proposed for 2009, 10% for 2010, and 9% for 2011 to maintain reserve
requirements, meet debt service, and continue operations and maintenance functions .
As shown in the graph below, the City' s wastewater rates remain comparable to those of other local
utilities :
Wastewater Rate Comparisons - WQA5, 200 gallons
Data July25 , 2007
MR $30
1W
$25 $24.65
$22.07
$20 $ 17 . 67 $ 18. 38 $ 18 . 94 $ 19 . 70 $ 19 . 70 $20 . 00
L L
O
4� E
o $ 15
o $ 10. 14
E U $ 10
a�
$5
L
m
>
Denver Longmont Greeley Boulder Ft . Collins Loveland NAndsor Ft .C- Co.Sprs
2007 Proposed
2008
October 16 , 2007 -9 - Item No . 22
Electric
The Utilities are proposing an electric rate increase averaging 2 . 3 % in 2008 and 2 . 7% in 2009 . The
rate increase is wholly due to the increases in purchase power costs from Platte River Power
Authority, the City' s wholesale energy supplier. On September 27 , 2007 , Platte River' s Board
adopted a 3 % wholesale rate increase for 2008 and projects a rate increase of about 3 . 5 % in 2009 .
Platte River' s increases are due to several factors :
• Increased coal and rail costs at Rawhide and Craig power plants
• Increased purchased power costs from WAPA (Western Area Power Administration)
• Mercury mitigation costs
• Expanded energy efficiency programs ( I % of revenues per PR' s 2007 Integrated Resource
Plan)
• Capital expenditure increases (new projects & increased material costs for existing projects)
• Reduction in surplus sales revenues
The proposed 2 . 3 % increase in 2008 will vary slightly by rate class . Residential rates will increase
2 . 0%-2 .2%, commercial rates will increase 2 .2%-2 . 3 %, and industrial rates will increase
approximately 2 . 6%. For a typical residential customer using 700 kilowatt-hours per month, the
monthly bill will increase 97 cents per month from $48 . 43 to$49 .40 .
The following chart compares average monthly residential electric rates with other front range
utilities :
Electric Rate Comparison - 700 kWh per Month
$80
1W $ 70 $65.88
: $60 $54.43 $56 . 70 $56.95
$47.41 $48 .43 $49 .40
oc $ 50 $42.82
L
o ~ $40
--
W L
E E $ 30
N $20
2 v $ 10
W
> $-
Q Lorgmit Loveland R. Col ins 2007 R.CProposed Xcel - Nd nter Xcel - SJmrer Co. ors P.V.REA
2008 8/ 1/ 2007
October 16 , 2007 -10- Item No . 22
Other
In addition, the electric rate Ordinance includes a housekeeping change to the Power Factor
Adjustment clause of the commercial and industrial rate classes to reflect the changes in technology.
Prior to the capabilities of modern metering equipment, special recording equipment was
periodically installed on services to measure power factor. Meters now collect the data necessary
to make these calculations each month so periodic testing is no longer required.
Monthly Rate Summary
The following table summarizes the impact of the proposed rate increases on a typical single family
residential customer' s monthly utility bill. In total, a "typical" customer' s bill will increase $3 . 34
per month.
Typical Residential Customer — Monthly Utility Bill
Current Proposed $ %
2007 2008 Increase Increase
Electric
700 kWh per month $ 48 .43 $ 49.40 $0. 97 2%
Wastewater
5 ,200 gallons/month
winter quarter use $ 19.70 $ 22.07 $2 .37 12%
Stormwater
8,600 s .ft. lot, light runoff $ 14.26 $ 14.26 $0.00 0%
Water
January 5,000 gallons $ 22 .56 $ 22 . 56 $0.00 0%
July 21 ,000 gallon $ 60.90 $ 60. 90 $0.00 0%
Total January Monthly Utility Bill $ 104.95 1 $108.29 1 $3.34 3 %
Total June Monthly Utility Bill $ 143.29 $146.63 $3.34 2 %
October 16 , 2007 -11 - Item No . 22
The following charts compare water, wastewater, stormwater and electric utility costs for eight front
range cities . They include the recommended 2008 increases for wastewater and electric for Fort
Collins . Projected rate adjustments for the other cities are unknown at this time.
Residential Utilities 2007 Rate Comparison
January Water Use - 5 , 000 Gallons
$ 140
$ 120
$ 100
$80
$60
$40
$20
$ Boulder Co.Sprs Denver Greeley Windsor
(Xcel) (812007) (Xcel) Ft. Collins '07 Ft. Collins '08 (Xcel) Longmont Loveland (PVREA)
■ Stormwater $6.75 $6.00 $7.40 $14.26 $14.26 $4.30 $7.13 $10.39 $3.89
O Wastewater $18.94 $24.65 $10.14 $19.70 $22.07 $18.38 $17.67 $19.70 $20.00
■ Water $17.95 $16.54 $12.47 $22.56 $22.56 $18.70 $14.95 $13.75 $28.94
■ Electric $54.43 $56.95 $54.43 $48.43 $49.40 $54.43 $42.82 $47.41 $65.88
Residential Utilities 2007 Rate Comparison
July Water Use 21 ,000 Gallons
$180
$160
$140
$120
$100
$80
$60
$40
$20
Boulder Co .Sprs Denver Ft. Collins Ft. Collins Greeley Vundsor
(Xcel) (8/2007) (Xcel) 107 108 (Xcel) Longmont Loveland (PVREA)
EStomrvteter 6.75 6 7.396 14260176 14260176 4.3 7.13 1D.39 3.892
❑Wastew"er 18.94 24.65073119 1D.14 19.69904 22.07 1B.384 17.67 19.702 20
EVVater 52.7234 76.51B2371 57.19 60.90442 60.90442 54.38 60.11 39.35 80.58597554
Electric 56.705 56.95U%7 56.7015 48.43 49.4 56.70t 42.822 47.407 65.875
CUSTOMER SERVICE FEES AND CHARGES
October 16 , 2007 -12- Item No . 22
The Utilities is proposing increasing the turn-off notice fee from $7 . 00 to $ 10 . 00 and the return item
fee (returned checks, electronic transfers , credit card payments) from $ 15 to $25 . The increases are
necessary to offset the associated costs and align with current business practices .
WATER BOARD AND ELECTRIC BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
The Water Board reviewed the 2008-2009 water utilities ' budgets, water, sewer and stormwater
plant investment fee changes, and monthly wastewater rate increases at the August 23 , 2007 Board
meeting. The Board voted 8 to 1 approving the proposed budget and fee changes with an amended
motion encouraging City Council to increase the appropriation for water conservation and demand
management.
The Electric Board reviewed the 2008-2009 Light and Power budget and the proposed increases to
the electric rates and development fees and charges at its meeting on August 15 , 2007 . The Board
unanimously approved a motion supporting the proposed budget and fee changes .
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Water Board Minutes — excerpt from August 2007 meeting relating to budget, rates and
PIFs .
2 . Electric Board Minutes — excerpt from August 2007 meeting relating to budget, rates, and
electric fees .
for Citypurposes necessary to provide for payment during the aforementioned budget
year of all properly authorized expenditures to be incurred by the City.
b. That the City Clerk shall certify this levy of 9.797 mills to the County
Assessor and the Board of Commissioners of Larimer County, Colorado, in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law, as required by Article V, Section
5, of the Charter of the City of Fort Collins.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 16th day of
October,A.D. 2007,and to be presented for final passage on the 20th day of November,A.D.2007.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 20th day of November, A.D. 2007.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-6-