HomeMy WebLinkAbout20161007 UC WS Minutes
UTILITY COMMISSION
WORK SESSION MINUTES
October 7, 2016
CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a Utility Commission work session of the City of Rosemount was
th
called to order on October 7, 2016 at 3:03 p.m. in the Conference Room of the City Hall, 2875 145 Street
West, Rosemount.
President Connolly called the meeting to order with Commissioners McDonald and Nelson, City
Administrator Johnson, Public Works Coordinator Watson, Public Works Interim Director John Morast,
and Recording Secretary Erin Fasbender attending.
Water, Sewer, Storm Water Rate Review
The Utility Commissions’ focus for this work session is to focus specifically on general costs; see what the
impact is on second water meters and getting clarification with sanitary sewer fees and how it ties into the
rate structure.
Of all the Rosemount households, fewer than 13% of users have a second meter. In the February Utility
Commission meeting there were several comments made regarding the second meters. The data from this
meeting shows that we are finding that second meters are not causing a significant spike in water usage
compared to single meter households.
Connolly raised a question of where are the two meter households located in the city. Are they located more
on the east side where there is newer construction? Utility Commission has requested from staff to create a
map that will show the locations of where the second meters are located. Johnson mentioned, one item to
take into consideration is that some developments require an irrigation system.
McDonald would like to know what the financial costs are and is there a revenue loss for the city over these
meters? Watson responded that there is a loss of revenue over single meters as we are not collecting certain
fees. Johnson clarified, we set the rates to get the revenues we need and the better way to question it is - are
some users making up the difference for the lost revenue? The high users who don’t have a second meter
end up paying less for sanitary and lower users pay more. McDonald also questioned, what is the cost to
replace the meters? Johnson responded that the service fees are not such to recoup the cost to replace the
meters and we don’t have a meter replacement fund as all fees get mixed into one water utility fund.
Connolly pointed out he compared our rates to a few other cities and Rosemount is lower than several of
those cities.
McDonald raised the concern of how do we educate people about water conservation. Watson offered the
suggestion of letting top users know where they are at for usage compared to an average user. In the past,
we discussed mailing a flier out to high end users showing the comparison. Also, including a monetary value
to those fliers could be even more effective.
McDonald would like to know how these meter billing and second meter changes were explained in the past
to residents? Approximately twenty years ago, the city went from Q1 billing to a full year. If we could look
back at minutes and determine how this was handled, it could be beneficial to how we may potentially
inform resident going forward with any changes we could make. Johnson’s concern is how we possibly
inform low water users that their bill is going to go up about 10%. Connolly’s point was if it goes that way
for the low users, it is being confident in knowing that this is right and fair to the greater community.
As Johnson mentioned earlier, some developments require an irrigation system; for example Glendalough.
Utility Commission would like staff to review this development and see how many of those residents have a
second meter. Of those who have second meter, what is their water usage compared to a single meter user.
Morast stated second meters are not the problem; it is the folks with the irrigation system that we as a city
need to educate more.
Utility Commission is requesting staff to provide the following prior to the Utility Commission regular
meeting in January:
Create a map of where all the second meters are located
Bigger sample size of Glendalough Developments and compare the second meters and their usage
Impact and change of revenue if we go with charging meters at higher rate
Look back at old council agendas and see what communication was sent to residents in the past
The number of low users that could potentially be affected
Action items for November’s regular Utility Commission meeting:
Water conservation education
o Clarity on who has responsibility commission wise, to promote education and making
decisions on what we will do.
o Who is in charge of updating utility commission policies?
ADJOURNMENT
Connolly adjourned the meeting at 4:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Erin Fasbender
Public Works Secretary