Laserfiche WebLink
5 <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he thinks the water conservation program is a good one, but he <br />supports evaluating it because he thinks it should be justified. Mr. Lynch said he hoped <br />that the City/ County water cost allocation would have been addressed by now. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati proposed adding language to 1b of resolution "C," and Mr. Lynch <br />and Mr. Schilling accepted the amendment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he hopes that the water conservation program is eval uated every <br />year. Mr. Caravati said he would like to encourage Albemarle County to also join in the <br />study. <br /> <br /> Resolution "C," as amended, was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. <br />Caravati, Mr. Cox, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Schilling. Noes: None. <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> , this Council is committed to exploring a variety of water rate <br />structures and believes there is a need for research and study of the possibility of <br />designing a water utility rate structure that rewards water conservation by consumers; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> , this C ouncil has before it an ordinance proposing to increase water <br />utility rates, within the City's existing structure, and there is a need to move forward in <br />order to maintain city water services; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> , this Council wishes to immediately initiate a st udy of its water <br />utility rate structure, so that the planning process for future rate - setting initiatives may be <br />commenced; <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY CITY COUNCIL, AS <br /> <br />FOLLOWS: <br /> <br />1. Staff is directed to immediately commence study of the following issu es: <br /> <br />a. The potential of using the City's water/wastewater utility rate structure to <br />reward water conservation through the use of equitable variable pricing <br />and/or base monthly fee pricing. City staff is directed to provide Council <br />with a comprehensive study of the feasibility of utilizing graduated water <br />rates which encourage water conservation, so that City customers who <br />minimize their water usage will benefit financially from a reduced water <br />rate. The study wills et forth the advantages and disadvantages of the <br />alternative rate structures, including an assessment of any costs, software <br />requirements, or other resources that would be needed to implement each <br />alternative, and the potential impacts of the various rate structures on <br />different groups or classes of City water consumers. <br /> <br />b. Any rate or fee incentives (1) for the installation or retrofitting of <br />individual rather than master water meters, which will promote water <br />conservation, and (2) for the construction of affordable housing for low <br />income residents. <br /> <br />c. The evaluation of city/county cost allocation as it applies to current and <br />future water rates, in relation to city/county projected growth and based <br />upon past city/county financial contributions to the existing system. <br /> <br />d. The evaluation of the existing wat er conservation budget and program, in <br />light of the following: <br /> <br />1. Reduced usage leads to higher cost <br />2. Is increased conservation necessary at this time? <br />3. There is a 15% drop in projected sales <br />4. We propose to spend millions in the near future to increase the <br />regi onal supply <br />5. City water usage is not expected to increase significantly. <br />