Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-19 Board Packet 1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISTRICT BOARDROOM 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY May 2, 2019 3:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA WORKSHOP 5. DISCUSSION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET KEY FIGURES AND AS- SUMPTIONS (BEACHEM) 6. ADJOURNMENT 2 All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the District’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability which would require accommodation in order to enable you to participate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on April 26, 2019, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 24 hours in advance of the special meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley, California on April 26, 2019. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Budget Workshop MEETING DATE: May 2, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Koeppen, Assistant Chief of Finance PROJECT: DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: (Chief) Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item to Present FY 2020 Budget Key Figures and Assumptions Impacting the Upcoming Budget Proposal GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: This is an informational item presenting the FY 2020 budget key figures and assumptions. PURPOSE: The purpose of this informational item is to present to the Board key figures and assumptions impacting the FY 2020 budget. BACKGROUND: Each year the District goes through a rate setting process with new challenges. The process begins in January and ends with the adoption of the next fiscal year budget in the May/June timeframe, and implementation of rates the following January. As part of the budget, staff presents the most realistic set of factors and assumptions based on information received from various sources including: the wholesale water suppliers, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the San Diego County Water Authority (CWA), and the City of San Diego (the City); vendors such as SDG&E, and an economic report prepared this year by the Xpera Group. Staff uses this information in conjunction with other economic indicators affecting taxes and revenues, such as inflation and interest rates, to prepare the budget. In prior years, staff held a single Budget Workshop in May. During that workshop staff presented several items pertaining to the budget to the Board. For FY20, to be responsive to the Board’s request, staff is modifying the budget process by splitting the Budget workshops into three presentations that will provide the Board greater opportunity to evaluate the overall budget. 2 The Economic Outlook presented at the April 3rd Board meeting was the first of the three presentations to the Board pertaining to the FY 2020 budget. This report is the second presentation during which we will review key assumptions and inputs used to prepare the budget. A final presentation will be held on June 5th to present the consolidated budget. At the June 5th Board meeting, staff will be presenting the consolidated FY 2020 budget and requesting the Board approve the following items: the FY 2020 Operating and CIP Budget, Interfund Transfers, and actions associated with recommended rate changes. Rate Strategy The culmination of the budget process is the recommendation of changes to water and sewer rates, which meet the following primary budget objectives: o Recommend rates that are compliant with the requirements of Proposition 218, o Maintaining targeted reserve levels based on the District’s Reserve Policy, o Result in debt coverage levels being above the target level of 150% excluding growth revenues and debt covenant requirement of 125% including growth revenue, o Support the Strategic Plan initiatives. As part of the analysis staff evaluates the ability to smooth the financial impacts on customers over a period of time. This might result in rate increases being shifted back or forward by a year to avoid a spike in rate increases. With sewer customers, they are primarily sensitive to the total monthly bill amounts, as this is what they see and pay. However, they can also be sensitive to rates. While the bill amount is simply the usage multiplied by the rate, it is different from water in that it is a fixed bill for the year based on the rate and the prior year winter average usage. Usage may vary year to year, and to compensate for this, the rate may swing in the opposite direction of the change in winter averages to maintain a steady and slightly increasing net revenue stream. This creates a difficult dynamic when there is a significant year over year winter average usage drop and when focused solely on the rates instead of the bill amount. Fortunately, sewer customers focus on the total bill amount, which for the average customer is typically held steady with a moderate increase. When winter average usage drops significantly, like this budget year, the rate must move significantly in the opposite direction. In this situation, even while most customers are focused on the bill amount, staff will be smoothing out the necessary 3 increases over the 6-year period to avoid a significant spike in rates. Proposition 218 The State of California has well-established legal constraints regarding utility rate setting, of which California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6 (commonly referred to as “Proposition 218”), is at the forefront. Proposition 218 requires that water and sewer utilities establish cost-based rates for the services provided. To comply with this requirement, the District performs periodic cost of service studies. A water cost of service study was completed and presented to the Board on April 17, 2017. Subsequently, a sewer cost of service study was completed and presented to the Board on March 7, 2018. Subsequent to the completion of the cost of service studies, Proposition 218 hearings were held on October 4, 2017 for water and October 3, 2018 for sewer. At the conclusion of the 218 hearings the Board approved the terms of the 218 Notice, which allowed for rate increases to pass-through 100% of cost increases from the District suppliers and up to 10% rate increases for internal costs for a period up to 5 years. The 5-year effective period for water expires in FY 2022, while the 5-year period for sewer expires in FY 2023. Staff will evaluate the cost benefit of bringing the two lines of business cost of service studies into alignment in 2022. Strategic Planning In addition to the budget and rate setting process, the District’s focus on strategic planning has played a positive role in the financial strength of the District. By managing staffing, automating processes, and implementing Best Management Practices, the District has become more efficient and cost effective. The Strategic Plan is foundational to the budget process as it drives many of the programs of the District which are funded through the budget process. FY 2020 Challenges CIP Inflationary Pressures Due to market conditions the costs of CIP projects are increasing significantly compared to prior year expectations. For projects continuing from the FY 2019 budget to the FY 2020 budget, the respective CIP budget has increased by $12.5 million, with individual projects increasing up to 30% or more. Further 4 discussion regarding these increases is included in the CIP section of this Staff Report. While not reflected in this figure, new projects added to the FY 2020 CIP budget are also impacted by the increasing construction costs. Water Sales Predicting changes in usage patterns due to weather patterns, political climate, and growth are key challenges of the budget process. In FY 2018, the District experienced a significant recovery in water sales volumes versus FY 2017, resulting in the potable and recycled volumes exceeding budget by 10% and 12%, respectively. For FY 2019, above average rainfall will result in water sales volumes being less than budget. Staff is estimating potable volumes will be 10.0% below budget and recycled volumes will be 5.0% below budget. Historically, staff has relied on long-range weather predictions as part of the process to budget water volumes. In preparing the FY 2019 budget, the National Weather Service predicted precipitation for the 2018/2019 winter would be comparable to 2017/2018. The actual precipitation for the 2018/2019 winter season has been more than four times the 2017/2018 precipitation, which has resulted in projected net revenues being an estimated $2.1 million less than budget. When considering savings initiatives implemented by staff, this shortfall has been reduced to an estimated $1.1 million. While the State is no longer considered to be in a drought and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has rescinded conservation mandates, the SWRCB has maintained water-use reporting requirements and prohibitions against wasteful practices. Beginning January 1, 2020, new shut-off regulations become effective, which increases the burden on staff for locking past due accounts. Also, there is a potential water tax, which is likely to become effective in the near future. The mechanics of the tax are still unclear, but this adds another fee to our customers and creates an additional reporting requirement for staff. Water Costs For FY 2020, the all-in potable rate (variable, plus fixed fees) is increasing 3.2% from $1,703 per AF in FY 2019 to $1,758 per AF in FY 2020. Based on the proposed budgeted units, this will increase the cost of water by $1.5 million. This increase is within the amount projected in the FY 2019 rate model for FY 2020. For the 5 6-year rate model, staff is projecting CWA rates will increase annually by an average of 5.6%. CWA also provides a projection of expected high and low future rates through 2023. CWA’s rate for FY 2020 is in the 20th percentile of the low projection. Over the 6-year period Otay’s projected annual increase of 5.6% results in a projected cost above the 90th percentile of CWA’s forecast. Staff believes this assumption is relatively conservative. If CWA’s rates remain at the 20th percentile for future years, the benefit will be incorporated into future rate recommendations. The recycled water rate from the City for FY 2019 is expected to remain at $1.73/HCF in FY 2020. A $150 thousand increase is anticipated in recycled purchase cost due to the take-or-pay contractual minimum volume increasing. In addition, it is estimated that the SDCWA and the Metropolitan Water Authority credits of $1.2 million per year will expire at the end of FY 2023, which will impact the projected rate increases over the next 6 years. Insurance Costs Overall insurance costs are expected to increase $260 thousand, with workers compensation increasing $140 thousand and general/liability insurance increasing $120 thousand. The increase in workers compensation is mainly due to an increase in the experience modification assigned to the District based on the District’s claim history. The experience modifier is increasing from 219% in FY 2019 to 294% in FY 2020, which accounts for the majority of the $140 thousand increase. SDRMA is also implementing a 5.0% workers compensation rate increase to all its clients, which is a smaller component of the overall workers compensation increase. The increase in general/liability insurance is based on the District’s recent claim history. Between 2013 and 2019 the District paid $4.3 million in premiums, while SDRMA has paid out $5.3 million in liability claims against the District. The claims were largely 3rd party damages related to main breaks. In light of this history, the increases are not surprising. Staff is working with SDRMA to gather the details on how the premiums are calculated and looking for any way to decrease our cost. Staff is also looking into optional deductible levels (currently not offered), and phasing in of higher insurance costs. Sewer Challenges The three primary challenges facing the sewer operation in FY 2020 are the reduced water usage on winter averages, the new debt coverage requirement that comes into play with the issuance of debt, and the Pure Water costs. 6 Sewer is impacted by the reduced water usage, because the variable component of the sewer bills are based on winter water usage from January through April. Through March the residential winter average usage compared to last year decreased 33.0%, which significantly reduces the average customer’s sewer bill and the overall sewer revenues. This drop in winter averages reduces annual sewer revenue by $266 thousand. Based on the 6-year CIP plan, staff is recommending a debt issuance for sewer, which is estimated to be up to $6.0 million to fund a portion of the sewer CIP, and anticipates the terms of the debt will include a debt coverage covenant of 125%. This new debt coverage requirement is expected to have an impact on rates over the next 6 years. When combined with the Pure Water Program impact the debt coverage percentage is estimated to be at 148%, which is $48 thousand above the 125% covenant. The City of San Diego’s Pure Water Program is the most significant cost increase facing the sewer customers over the next 6 years, and beyond. As mentioned in the April 3, 2019 Staff Report, Otay’s sewer customer’s share of Pure Water Phase I is estimated at $2.6 million and Phase II is estimated at $5.7 million. The combined effect on rates totaling 29% will need to be phased into rates over the next 15 years. Even though the City provided a funding requirement projection to the District over a year ago, the projection only provided cash flow information through 2022 and excluded cash flow projections for Phase II costs. There is still significant ambiguity on how these costs will affect our customers. The modification in capacity from 1.287 MGD to 0.38 MGD under the new Metro agreement, when fully executed, will likely reduce the future Pure Water allocation to the District. The City is seeking grant funding, which if obtained, may be a direct reduction in the overall Pure Water cost. The City has also applied for low cost State Revolving Fund (SRF) financing, but there is uncertainty as the City is still going through the SRF approval process. If debt financing is obtained, it would smooth out the cash flow requirements for Otay’s customers. Failure to obtain the projected SRF loan or grant funding could impact the projected Metro JPA fees. Over a year ago, the City provided a projection of the Phase I cash funding required by Otay’s sewer customers through 2022. Staff include these costs into the forecast; however, no new guidance has been provided since that time. Phase II is also impacting the 6-year rate model beginning in FY 2024. However, to date, the City has not provided detail annual cash flow projections for the Phase II costs. Staff have incorporated a District prepared cash flow 7 estimate of Phase II costs into the 6-year rate model, based on the Otay’s total obligation of $5.7 million and Phase II starting in FY 2024. Due to these factors, there is much uncertainty regarding the Pure Water costs; however, staff is expecting an updated long-range projection after the Metro JPA meeting in May. Staff will be incorporating any necessary changes into the FY 2020 rate model for the final budget presentation on June 5th. Changes in the presumed assumptions could impact the proposed sewer rate increases from FY 2020 to FY 2025. For the CIP component of Pure Water, staff is assuming a $50 thousand increase in the District’s Metro fees based on the City communicating that CIP spending will increase $5.0 million per year. The District currently represents approximately 1.0% of the Metro capacity, which equates to the $50 thousand annual increase. In addition to the capital cost funding requirements, staff has assumed, based on input from the City, 5.0% annual increases in operating costs for FY 2020 to FY 2024 and a one-time 10.0% increase in FY 2025 as Phase I becomes operational and Phase II advances. Based on these assumptions, total annual Metro fees are expected to increase from $733 thousand in FY 2020 to $1.2 million by 2025. Prior to Pure Water, annual Metro fees were approximately $600 thousand. There are some items that are offsetting the impact of the sewer challenges: o The CIP component of Pure Water costs, and the associated capacity rights, are considered an intangible asset under GASB 51, which allows this component of the Metro JPA fees to be capitalized and amortized over the life of the Metro agreement. This change in accounting will provide relief to the sewer operating budget by reducing the Metro JPA annual operating expense by an average of $250 thousand, which benefits sewer’s debt coverage ratio calculation. The CIP component of Pure Water will now be funded by replacement reserves and recovered over a longer period based on targeted reserve levels. o The District’s sewer operation is anticipating receiving a $200 thousand refund from the City of San Diego related to the annual Metro JPA true up for FY 2017. On an annual basis, the City reconciles the sewer costs to sewer revenues and refunds the Metro member agencies for any excess revenue collected. In FY 2019 the District received a refund of approximately $400 thousand related to FY 2016. While the District does anticipate future refunds, the amount and timing of the refunds 8 are unknown. Due to the timing and amounts being unknown staff has not included any additional future refunds in the 6-year rate model. Any refunds received will be added to the reserves in the year received and benefit the following year’s 6-year rate model. o The District receives approximately $24 thousand in miscellaneous revenues from the County for a shared facility owned and operated by the District. Historically, these revenues were treated similar to miscellaneous water revenues, which are not allowed to be included in the water debt service coverage calculation as they are non-operating rental revenues. Historically, sewer treatment of miscellaneous revenue has also excluded miscellaneous sewer revenue from the sewer debt service coverage calculation; however, due to the nature of these revenues being operating related, they are eligible revenues for the purpose of the debt service coverage calculation. Therefore, this represents a $24 thousand annual reduction in the retail customer revenues needed to meet the debt coverage covenant. o During FY 2018 the District completed an examination of sewer laterals connected to its sewer mains. As a result the District added approximately 25 customers during FY 2019 resulting in an additional $12 thousand of annual revenue. CalPERS and OPEB Update The District has taken measures to reduce the financial impact of the pension. Efforts include: staff reductions, reducing the benefit through PEPRA, and advanced funding of the District’s pension obligation. On August 15, 2018, the District made an advance payment of $31.8 million to CalPERS. At that time, staff estimated the District would save $16.4 million over a 25 year period. Based on the revised estimated UAL from CalPERS and the finalized debt terms, the District is estimating a savings of approximately $16.0 million. For the OPEB plan, the District has been fully funding the annual OPEB contribution while also paying the retiree cost without seeking reimbursement from the OPEB trust. This effort, causes an advance funding of OPEB, which has put the OPEB fund on track to be fully funded in FY 2021. The average annual advanced funding to the OPEB plan is $1.2 million. Like prior budgets, this budget shifts the $1.2 million funding to the pension after the OPEB plan is fully funded and continues until the pension is fully funded. Current estimates project that this additional funding to the pension will 9 save the District approximately $6.8 million through 2033, when the pension plan is projected to be fully funded. Major Assumptions Potable Sales Volumes Through March 31, 2019, actual potable water sales were 8.6 million units, which was 10.7% below the budget. For the FY 2020 budget staff is planning to use a three-year average volume as the basis for the volume assumptions, and increasing this average by the anticipated growth. This methodology is a change from the historic methodology where staff based volume assumptions on long-term weather forecasts, which have been historically inaccurate leading to actual volumes significantly varying from the budgeted amount. For the FY 2020 budget, the 3 year average of 11.68 million units was adjusted by 0.5% to 11.74 million units. The 0.5% adjustment is estimated growth. Water sales growth for new customers is based on the Economic Outlook Report prepared by Alan Nevin of the Xpera Group, and presented at the April 3rd Board meeting. For the FY 2020 budget rate model 6-year period, covering FY 2020 to FY 2025, the District is budgeting to sell 2,979 potable meters, which equates to annual average meter growth of approximately 1.0%. Based on future residential growth consisting of smaller footprints and efficient fixtures, the 1.0% growth was reduced to 0.5% for purposes of estimating future water volumes. The following table shows the historical water volumes from 2013 to 2019, along with the three and five year averages. Below are the projected unit sales assumptions proposed for the FY 2020 6-year rate model. The methodology used to prepare the potable volume component of the FY 2020 budget and 6-year rate model results in a 6-year average volume projection that is within 1.0% of the historic 3 and 5 year averages, and within 1.0% of the averages excluding the FY 2016 drought year. This volume is considered reasonable given the estimated 6.0% meter growth over the same 6-year period. Projected Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 3-Year 5-Year* 13,189,042 13,720,119 12,744,425 10,475,290 11,250,331 12,227,383 11,575,702 12,796,700 11,684,472 11,654,626 * Excluding the drought year, FY 2016, the average for the 4 remaining years was 11,949,460 Historical Unit Sales (in HCF) Actual FY 2019 Averages 10 Recycled Sales Volumes Through March 31, 2019, actual recycled water sales were 1.1 million units, which was 8.3% below budget. Similar to the potable water estimate, staff is using a 3-year average volume as the basis for its future volume assumption, plus 0.5% to adjust for growth. For the FY 2020 budget the 3-year average of 1.58 million units was adjusted by 0.5% for growth to 1.59 million units. For the FY 2020 budget rate model 6-year period, covering FY20 to FY25, the District is budgeting to sell 256 recycled meters, which equates to annual average meter growth of approximately 1.0%. Based on the assumption that future recycled areas would include more drought tolerant footprints the 1.0% growth was reduced to 0.5% for purposes of estimating future water volumes. The table below shows the historical water volumes from 2013 to 2019, along with the 3 and 5 year averages. Below are the projected unit sales assumptions used in the FY 2020 6-year rate model. The methodology used to prepare the recycled volume component of the FY 2020 budget and 6-year rate model results in a 6-year average volume projection that is within 1.0% of the historic 3 and 5 year averages. This volume is considered reasonable given the estimated 6.0% meter growth over the same 6-year period. FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 6-Year Average Annual Growth 11,739,145 11,797,841 11,856,830 11,916,114 11,975,695 12,035,574 11,886,867 0.50% Projected Unit Sales (in HCF) FY 2020 6-Year Rate Model Averages Projected Budget FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 3-Year 5-Year 1,293,936 1,944,845 1,734,408 1,491,677 1,530,088 1,739,741 1,484,061 1,565,300 1,584,630 1,595,995 * Actual Figures exclude Salt Creek golf course, which closed in FY 2018. ** Excluding the drought year, FY 2016, the average for the 4 remaining years was 1,622,074 Actual* FY 2019 Averages** Historical Unit Sales (in HCF) FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 6-Year Average Annual Growth 1,592,739 1,600,703 1,608,706 1,616,750 1,624,833 1,632,958 1,612,781 0.50% Projected Unit Sales (in HCF) FY 2020 6-Year Rate Model Averages 11 Power Costs Power costs of $3.3 million for water and sewer are budgeted to increase $15 thousand or 0.5% versus the FY 2019 budget. This is due primarily to a 6.0% anticipated rate increase from SDG&E, offset by reductions in volumes compared to the FY 2019 budget. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget As a component of the annual budget development process, the Engineering staff updates the CIP budget using the following process:  CIP projects are selected based on the Water Facilities Master Plan (WFMP), the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), Sub Area Master Plans (SAMP), Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP), Wastewater Management Plan (WWMP),the District’s Strategic Plan and other focused or specific planning documents and reports to manage growth, maintenance and the life extension of assets.  The CIP goes through an iterative process to meet the criteria of growth, service levels, supply targets, and system reliability.  CIP target expenditures for the next six years are refined and used in the rate model. The following general criteria are used to determine the reasonableness of a project before it is considered for inclusion within the CIP budget:  Safety and existing facility conditions.  Operating system conditions and energy improvements.  Water and sewer system deficiencies.  Regulatory and permitting requirements.  Developer driven requirements.  Economic outlook.  Growth projections.  Water supply diversification goals.  Board and management directives. This year, the total 6-year CIP budget of $88.3 million is decreasing by $4.5 million versus last year. The water total CIP budgets for the six-year period are $79.9 million, which is a $1.7 million decrease compared to FY 2019, while the sewer CIP of $8.4 12 million is decreasing $2.8 million compared to FY 2019. Staff is projecting the water fund will have adequate reserves to fund the water projects, while the sewer fund will need to borrow funds in FY 2020. The following schedule contains a roll-forward of the 6-year CIP budget followed by explanations for the roll-forward amounts. The $10.0 million in new projects consist mainly of the following: o $2.0 million meter replacement program budgeted to begin in 2023 with the majority of funds being spent in 2025. o $1.8 million for replacement of the Cottonwood sewer lift station. This is a shared facility with the County of San Diego; therefore, the District is also budgeting for half of this project to be funded by the County of San Diego. The County’s portion of the funding is reflected in other revenues. o $1.8 million for pipeline replacements in the La Presa area. o $1.5 million for the District’s capacity rights associated with the Metro Pure Water CIP program. o $600 thousand for modifications to the 832-1 pump station. o $375 thousand for replacement of backflow prevention devices on interconnections on Otay Mesa. The $1.1 million of completed projects represents projects completed and placed in service. The completed projects include: o $500 thousand for the relocation of appurtenances at Alta Road and Otay Mesa Road. The responsibility for this work was transferred to the developer for the Otay Crossing Commerce Park development. o $224 thousand for safety and security enhancements throughout the District. o $122 thousand related to closeout of multiple reservoir coating projects. o $70 thousand for trenchless sewer rehabilitation. o $60 thousand for a recirculation pipeline chemical supply and analyzer feed replacement at the 520 reservoir. FY19 6‐Year CIP 92.8$         New Projects 10.0$         Completed Projects (1.1)$          Deferred Projects (3.9)$          Ongoing Project Changes          Budget Adjustment 12.5$         Budged expenditures for ongoing projects in‐progress (22.0)$        FY20 6‐Year CIP 88.3$         13 o $50 thousand for vehicle charging stations at the administration building. The $3.9 million represents the deferral of projects included in the FY 2019 budget. It should be noted that the amount represents budgeted dollars and no funds were spent on these projects to date. Below is a listing of the applicable projects along with an explanation for the discontinuance or deferral. o $2.3 million related to a 20-inch pipeline replacement in the 711 zone on Otay Lakes Road at Santa Paula. This project was deferred due to the reduction of water demand in this pressure zone. o $1.5 million for the reservoir recoating and upgrades at the 520-2 reservoir which was discontinued. The 640-1&2 reservoirs will be used to serve this pressure zone to reduce reservoir maintenance costs and reduce energy costs for the 850-2, 803-1 and the 832-1 pump stations. o $140 thousand related to the deferral of a project to install an interconnection with Padre Dam at Dehesa Valley. This project was deferred until Padre Dam initiates construction of a pipeline closer to the District boundary. The $12.5 million increase for budget adjustments is related to increasing budgets for ongoing projects due to changing market conditions, as noted in a Staff Report presented to the Board on November 7, 2018. On several recent Staff Reports, staff has noted that in the current bidding climate, the number of bidding contractors has been reduced. During calendar year 2017, the District’s average number of bidders was 5.7 across seven (7) projects advertised for construction. The average number of bidders across ten (10) projects advertised for construction during calendar year 2018 was reduced to 2.6. When the number of construction projects available for bid grows regionally, the contractors can be selective on the projects they choose to bid. The District has seen a notable increase in the overall number of projects under construction within the District boundaries, including Village 3, Village 2, Millenia, Otay Crossings and the SR-11 freeway extension to the border. Material costs have also gone up. On June 1, 2018, the federal government imposed a 25% tariff on steel and a 10% tariff on aluminum imports. The Metropolitan Water District recently reported material costs have increased 5% to 10% since March 2018. Other local agencies are reporting increases to their construction costs as well. 14 In total, there were forty projects with budget increases totaling $15.7 million offset by nine projects that decreased a total of $3.2 million including: o $3.0 million (30%) increase for 711-2 pump station replacement and expansion (P2578) as a result of bids the District received for the 870-2 PS replacement project. o $2.1 million (145%) increase for the Heritage Road bridge replacement and utility relocation project (P2553) as a result of recent bids Caltrans received on the SR-11 pipeline replacement project and the recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $1.1 million (32%) increase for the 1655-1 reservoir project (P2040) as a result of design refinement of the access road to the future reservoir and results of recent construction bids the District has received. o $1.1 million (61%) increase in the project for a lower Otay Pump Station redundancy (P2619) as a result of design refinement of the project, the remote location of the project, the small working area at the site, and results of recent construction bids the District has received. o $1.0 million (83%) increase in the 12-inch pipeline replacement project in the 803 pressure at Vista Grande (P2615) as a result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road . o $850 thousand (131%) increase in the 624/340 PRS at Paseo Ranchero and Otay Valley Roads (P2616) as a result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $800 thousand (32%) increase in the 12-inch pipeline replacement, 978 zone, at Pence and Vista Sierra Drive (P2616) as a result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $710 thousand (47%) increase in the 12-inch pipeline replacement in the 978 zone on Hidden Mesa Drive (P2625) which was approved by the Board on November 7, 2018. o $400 thousand (29%) increase in the 944-1 cover/liner replacement project (R2121) as a result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $400 thousand (50%) increase the North District area cathodic protection improvements (P2646) as a result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $370 thousand (82%) increase to the 8-inch pipeline replacement, in the 850 zone, at Coronado Avenue (P2608) as a 15 result of recent bids the District received for pipeline replacement projects on Hidden Mesa and Vista Vereda Road. o $300 thousand (12%) increase for the Vista Diego hydro- pneumatic pump station replacement (P2639) as a result of recent construction bids the District has received. o $300 thousand (30%) increase for the central area cathodic protection improvements (P2647) as a result of design refinement of the project and results of recent construction bids the District has received. o $1.0 million (25%) decrease in SR-11 Utility Relocations to reflect changes in Otay Crossing Commerce Park development SAMP and the deletion of a Siempre Viva Road bridge waterline. The $22.0 million represents the net change in the 6-year forecast due to FY 2019 expenditures rolling off the 6-year budget and FY 2025 budget being added to the 6-year plan. The FY 2019 actual CIP spending rolling off for the FY 2020 budget is primarily comprised of the following items, which were included in the FY 2019 budget: o $7.9 million for the 870-2 pump station replacement (P2083). o $3.5 million for the Campo Road sewer main replacement (S2024). o $2.2 million for the 711-3 reservoir cover/liner replacement (P2561). o $1.9 million for the 12-inch pipeline replacement project in the 978 zone at Hidden Mesa Road (P2625). o $1.6 million for reservoir coatings and upgrades at the 803-2 (P2565) and 980-2 (P2546) reservoirs. o $1.3 million for the current AMR change-out program (P2604). o $1.1 million for the 12-inch pipeline replacement project in the 978 zone at Vista Vereda Road (P2574). o $1.1 million for phase three of the Calavo Basin Sewer rehabilitation. The budgeted amounts for FY 2019 ongoing projects continuing into FY 2025 primarily consist of the following: o $2.3 million for the Vista Diego hydro-pneumatic pump station replacement (P2639). o $915 thousand for the 1485-2 reservoir coating and upgrades (P2631) Financing Plan The District uses a comprehensive approach to financing. The Debt Policy provides guidance for debt issuance and refinancing. The Reserve Policy provides guidance on both fund transfers and reserve 16 balances. With these policies, a 6-year financing plan is formulated that identifies the timing and amounts of debt issuances, the level of rate increases, debt coverage ratios, reserve balances, and necessary transfers. Staff is proposing no debt issuance for water as part of the FY 2020 budget. To support sewer’s planned CIP expenditures, staff will proposing that sewer issue up to $6.0 million in 2020. Open Items Following is a list of items that are in process and will be presented at the final Budget Workshop on June 5th: o Overall budget summary o Rates and rate increases o Debt service coverage o Sewer annual and winter average updates o Labor and benefits o Materials and maintenance expense o Administrative and legal expense o Salary Schedule o Rate comparison o Budget approval FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer This is an informational item. Each one of the items discussed above will impact the proposed rate increases over the next 6-year period. Recommended changes to rates will be based on the District maintaining reserves at target levels and meeting its debt coverage covenants. To the degree that these targets and covenants are met, the financial impact of the items discussed in this Staff Report will be phased in over multiple years. For both water and sewer, staff is estimating that debt service coverages will be above targeted levels and that reserve requirements, as impacted by CIP, water sales, and Pure Water, will be the primary driver of rate recommendations over the next 6 years. STRATEGIC OUTLOOK: The District ensures its continued financial health through long- term financial planning and debt planning. 17 LEGAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: A) Presentation – FY 2020 Budget Workshop #1 OTAY WATER DISTRICT FY 2020 BUDGET WORKSHOP #1 MAY 2, 2019 1 Attachment A WORKSHOP AGENDA 2 Introduction and Objectives (Joe Beachem) Challenges and Strengths (Mark Watton) Strategic Plan Initiatives (Adolfo Segura) Key Assumptions (Kevin Koeppen) Capital Improvement Budget (Dan Martin) Conclusion (Kevin Koeppen) BUDGET PROCESS 3 6-Year Rate Model Year-end Balances Operating Budget Input 6-Year CIP Budget Input MWD/CWA & City Sewer Rates Strategic Plan Assumptions Interest Rates Inflation Growth Sales Targets Debt Coverage Reserve Levels Operating Budget CIP Budget Water & Sewer Rates BUDGET OBJECTIVES 4 Support Strategic Plan Objectives Support the operations of the District Maintain reserves at or above target Debt coverage target of 150%, excluding growth, for both water & sewer Fund the 6-year capital budget Establish rates that are compliant with Proposition 218 PROPOSITION 218 5 Water Water Cost of Service Study Performed - 2017 Prop 218 Hearing - October 4, 2017 Sewer Sewer Cost of Service Study Performed - 2018 Prop 218 Hearing - October 3, 2018 Board Approved Terms: 5-years (Water to 2022 and Sewer to 2023) 100% Pass-through of supplier related costs Up to 10% rate increases for internal costs RATE STRATEGY 6 Maintain strategic objectives Smoothing impacts Monthly bill impact Reserve rate ranking CHALLENGES & STRENGTHS (MARK WATTON) 7 CIP INFLATION $12.5 million increase in projects primarily due to market conditions: Bidding climate Labor shortages Tariffs 8 12,364 12,511  13,189 13,720 12,744 10,475  11,250  12,227 11,576 11,739  5,000  6,000  7,000  8,000  9,000  10,000  11,000  12,000  13,000  14,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Actual Actual Projected Budget POTABLE WATER VOLUMES 9 Unit Sales (in thousands) 10 1,576 1,553 1,779 1,945 1,734 1,492 1,530 1,740 1,484 1,593   ‐  500  1,000  1,500  2,000  2,500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Actual Projected Budget RECYCLED WATER VOLUMES Unit Sales (in thousands) * Actual figures exclude Salt Creek golf course, which closed in FY 2018. POLITICAL INITIATIVES Conservation Mandates New legislation with arbitrary residential GPCD goal of 55 vs. Otay at 81 Potential Water Tax State Water Fix Regulatory Fee Increases Across All Agencies Regulatory Agencies Modified Interpretation of Regulations (regulatory creep) Shut-off Regulations 11 CHALLENGES – SEWER 12 Reduction in winter averages City of San Diego Pure Water program Debt coverage covenants OTHER CHALLENGES 13 Water Costs All-in rate per AF increasing from $1,703 to $1,758 Cost impact = $1.5 million Insurance increasing $260,000 Workers Compensation increasing $140,000 General Liability increasing $120,000 CHALLENGE & STRENGTH –GROWTH Rapid rise in growth through 2018 14 Budget Projected Budget 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2019 2020 EDU's 246 407 424 343 1133 925 880 730 Actual STRENGTHS 15 Strategic Planning Process CWA diversification of regional supply (drought‐proofing San Diego) Efficiency Gains (Since 2007) 23% headcount reduction 36% increase in customers per FTE Proactive approach to funding PERS and OPEB Savings of $16.0 million over the next 25 years OPEB fully funded in 2021 Bond Rating S&P ‘AA’ rating Sound Financial Management Reserve, debt and investment policies STRATEGIC PLAN FY2019 – FY2022 (ADOLFO SEGURA) 16 OVERVIEW 17 Continuing with the closure of the FY15 – FY18 plan, the District has developed a new four‐year Strategic Plan (SP), FY19 – FY22, designed to address new initiatives, projects, and track essential day‐to‐day performance metrics. Key areas of focus are: Advancement of employee development programs Advancement of the Asset Management (AM) and Capital Improvement Project (CIP)  Programs Enhancement of customer engagement Enhancement of cybersecurity Long‐term business planning of the sewer and recycled water system Pension and OPEB liability financing Management of new water regulations SP: 19 strategies, 49 objectives, and 42 KPI’s MISSION 18 To provide exceptional water and wastewater services to its  customers and to manage District resources in a transparent  and fiscally responsible manner. VISION To be a model water agency by providing stellar service, achieving  measurable results, and continuously improving operational  practices. MISSION FINANCIAL INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES $ CUSTOMER BALANCE SCORECARD PERSPECTIVES LEARNING AND GROWTH “Alignment of the District’s mission, vision, and plan execution” 20 Enhancement and building of awareness and engagement among the District’s customers and stakeholders and within the San Diego Region of the District’s strategies, policies, projects, programs, and legislative/regulatory issues (3 objectives) Assessment and enhancement of communication tools and increase online presence and social media exposure (1 master objective, 12 sub) STRATEGIES: 2 CUSTOMER Execute and deliver services that meet or exceed customer expectations, and increase customer engagement in order to improve District Services.. TOTAL OBJECTIVES: 4 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs): 3 Answer Rate Technical Water Complaint Potable Water Compliance Rate 21 Integration of resource planning and facility optimization (3 objectives) Evaluation of key system alternatives and financial impact (2 objectives) Enhancement of business systems (4 objectives) Enhancement of the Asset Management (AM) and Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) (4 objectives) Development of alternative Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) financing strategy to fund ahead of PERS schedule (1 objective) Negotiation and implementation of new labor agreement and optimize employee benefit programs (2 objectives) FINANCIAL Plan and execute sound financial activities that are essential to running and sustaining District operations, with the lowest possible impact to customers..$ TOTAL OBJECTIVES: 16 STRATEGIES: 6 22 $ CIP Project Expenditures vs. Budget Construction Change Order Incidence O&M Cost per Account Billing Accuracy Overtime Percentage Sewer Rate Ranking Water Rate Ranking Water Debt Coverage Ratio Sewer Debt Coverage Ratio  Reserve Levels Account per Full‐Time Employee (FTE) Percent of Customers Paying Bills Electronically Distribution System Loss Planned Potable Water Maintenance Ratio in $ Planned Recycled Water Maintenance Ratio in $ Planned Wastewater Maintenance Ratio in $ Direct Cost of Treatment per MGD Leak Detection Program Injury Incident Rate FINANCIAL Plan and execute sound financial activities that are essential to running and sustaining District operations, with the lowest possible impact to customers.. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs): 19 23 Optimization of meter activity operations (3 objectives) Enhancement of customer experience (Customer Service & Communications) (2 objectives) Enhancement of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system services via SCADA roadmap project (1 objective) Enhancement of enterprise geographic data (4 objectives) Enhancement of maintenance and program standards (4 objectives) Enhancement of contracting and facility services (3 objectives) Enhancement of the Confined Space Program (1 objective) Evaluation and leveraging of the use of available Human Resources self-service and capital management technology solutions (3 objectives) Maintenance of a reliable, scalable, secure, and high-performing technology infrastructure to support current and future service needs (4 objectives) Optimization of the District’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) and Confined Space Emergency Response Team (1 objective) INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES Improve business services by continually improving essential processes, invest in strategic technology, and achieve new efficiencies. TOTAL OBJECTIVES: 26 STRATEGIES: 10 24 Enterprise Technology Services Availability Mark‐out Accuracy Project Closeout Time Annual Recycled Water Site Inspections Recycled Water Shutdown Testing Easement Evaluation and Field Inspection Recycled Water System Integrity Sewer Overflow Rate System Valve Exercising Program Potable Water Distribution System Integrity Emergency Facility Power Testing Potable Tank Inspection and Cleaning Main Flushing and Hydrant Maintenance Critical Valve Exercising Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed  (Fleet Maintenance) Percent of Preventative Maintenance  Completed (Reclamation Plant) Percent of Preventative Maintenance Completed  (Pump/Electric) INTERNAL BUSINESS PROCESSES Improve business services by continually improving essential processes, invest in strategic technology, and achieve new efficiencies. KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs): 17 25 Enhancement of leadership and employee training programs, and knowledge transfer process (2 objectives) LEARNING & GROWTH Provide hands-on leadership, support, and empowerment of staff, in order to maintain an accountable high-performing workforce.. TOTAL OBJECTIVES: 2 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIs): 3 Employee Voluntary Turnover Rate Training Hours per Employee Safety Training Program STRATEGY: 1 KEY ASSUMPTIONS (KEVIN KOEPPEN) 26 12,744 10,475  11,250  12,227 11,576 11,739 11,798 11,857 11,916 11,976 12,036  5,000  6,000  7,000  8,000  9,000  10,000  11,000  12,000  13,000 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Actual Projected Budget POTABLE WATER VOLUMES 27 Unit Sales (in thousands) 1,734  1,492 1,530  1,740 1,484 1,593 1,601 1,609 1,617 1,625 1,633   500  700  900  1,100  1,300  1,500  1,700  1,900 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Actual Projected Budget RECYCLED WATER  VOLUMES 28 Unit Sales (in thousands) Historical figures exclude Salt Creek golf course, which closed in FY 2018. POTABLE WATER  COST PROJECTION CWA ALL‐IN TREATED WATER COST PER AF 29 72 Actual Projected* * CWA’s provided a projection through 2023.  For 2024 and 2025, the CWA high and low forecasts were estimated by Otay staff using a 5.0% inflation factor. POWER COSTS 30 Power cost increase of $15,000 or < 1.0% vs FY 2019 budget Increase in SDG&E Rates offset by decrease in water volumes In FY 2019 the rate per kilowatt hour increased 5.7% In FY 2020 an additional 6.0% power rate increase RATE DRIVERS 31 Water No new debt issuances proposed for the next 6 years Stable debt coverage  Reserves driving rates Sewer $6.0 million debt issuance in 2020 Stable debt coverage above covenant and target Debt coverage and reserves driving rates 72 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY 2020-2025 (DAN MARTIN) 32 GROWTH PROJECTIONS1 33 FISCAL YEARS 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Single‐Family Dwelling Units 600 500 400 400 300 300 Condominium Units 1,200 1,000 800 600 500 400 Apartment Units 400 300 300 300 300 300 Non‐Residential2 (Permit valuation in millions of  dollars) $21.9 $21.9 $21.9 $21.9 $21.9 $21.9 1Source: The Xpera Group’s report February 12, 2019 (all dwelling units reflected above do not have a one‐to‐one ratio with an  EDU and are converted to EDUs for budget purposes) 2 Source: The Xpera Group’s report February 12, 2019 Non‐Residential Permit Valuations (Historic and Projected) Otay Water  District and San Diego County 2002‐2025 METER SALES AND GROWTH 34  ‐  200  400  600  800  1,000  1,200 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ED U ' s Fiscal Years Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's) ‐Actual and  Projected Actual Projected 2020 Projected 2019 FY 2019 Budgeted – 925 EDU’s FY 2019 Forecast – 880 EDU’s FY 2020 Projected – 730 EDU’s SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY CONSTRUCTION COST TREND 35 Source - SDCWA March 14, 2019 Presentation on Escalating Construction Costs and Impact on Capital Improvement Program – Materials, Equipment, & Labor CONSTRUCTION CLIMATE/MITIGATION Factors Influencing Construction Climate Shortage of Skilled and Unskilled Labor Regional Competition for Contracting Resources Materials cost escalation due to demand and Federal tariffs Mitigation Strategies Cost Estimate Preparation Value Engineering Grouping Projects to attract Bidders 36 CIP BUDGET GUIDELINES Growth is expected to continue for FY 2020 New development with multi-family in greater proportion to single-family dwellings In preparing the budgets for the individual CIP projects, the Engineering Department used recent construction and bidding data to adjust costs for each project Reprioritized projects based on District’s planning documents 37 CIP SIX‐YEAR BUDGET LOOK FORWARD ($ MILLIONS) 38 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 Totals $ 24.2 $ 18.4 $ 13.6 $ 10.7 $ 12.4 $ 13.5 Six‐Year  Total: $92.8 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Totals $ 17.2 $ 13.3 $ 16.3 $ 14.6 $14.7 $12.2 Six‐Year Total: $88.3 FY 2020 SIX-YEAR BUDGET DIFFERENCES FY 2019 vs. FY 2020 $ Millions (Negative Value) FY 2019 6‐year CIP Budget $ 92.8 New Projects 10.0 Completed Projects (1.1) Deferred Projects (3.9) Ongoing Project Changes Budget Adjustment Budget Expenditures for FY 2019 12.5 (22.0) FY 2020 Six‐Year  CIP Budget $  88.3 39 HIGH PROFILE CIP PROJECTS Fiscal Year 2020 ($ Millions) 870-2 PS Replacement (Complete in 2020, $18.2M) Temporary Lower Otay Pump Station Redundancy Campo Road Sewer Replacement (Complete in 2020, $10.5M) Other Pipeline Replacement Projects (11 Total) AMR Change Out 850-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating Other Coating/Cover/Liner Projects (10 Total) Portable Trailer Mounted VFD Pumps Vehicle Capital Purchases $ 4.7 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 Total Expenditure Projection $ 13.5 % of Total FY 2020 Budget 78% 40 HIGH PROFILE CIP PROJECTS Fiscal Year 2020 – 2025 CIP ($ Millions) 711-2 PS Replacement Various Waterline Replacements (11 Total) Reservoir Improvements Sewer Basin Improvements 870-2 PS Replacement $ 13.0 13.0 9.7 5.4 4.8 AMR and Meter Replacement 4.3 Total Expenditure Projection % of Total FY 2020 - 2025 Budget $ 50.2 57% 41 JUNE 5TH PRESENTATION 42 Budget Summary  Rate Recommendation Debt Coverage Projection Winter Average Update Labor and Benefit Costs 72 Admin & Material Costs Salary Schedule Rate Comparison Budget Approval 72 QUESTIONS? 43