HomeMy WebLinkAbout7 - Final recommendation regarding the 2010 Utilities Budget including the 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) & Monthly Utility Rates
CITY OF BOULDER
WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: June 15, 2009
AGENDA TITLE: Staff Presentation and Board Final Recommendation regarding the 2010
Utilities Budget (Water, Wastewater and Stormwater/ Flood Management) including the 6-year
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Monthly Utility Rates.
PRESENTERS:
Ned Williams, Director of Public Works for Utilities
Bob Harberg, Utilities Planning & Project Management Coordinator
Carol Linn, Utilities Financial Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As part of the city's annual budget process, Utilities develops a six-year planning budget, this
year for the time period of 2010 through 2015. Utilities staff has formulated revenue and
expenditure projections for each of the three utility funds through the year 2015. Within the
budget process Council approves and appropriates funds only for the first year, 2010.
At the May 18, 2009 WRAB meeting, staff presented the preliminary 2010 utilities budget
including the six-year capital improvement program and options for revenue increases from
monthly utility rates. Since that time, the operating budget (e.g. personnel), transfers and
projected interest earnings have been updated and incorporated into the fund financials per the
city's budget guidelines. The projected interest earnings rate has been revised downward, which
has impacted revenue projections, most significantly in the water fund. Additional revenue
options of water 4%, wastewater 1% and stormwater/flood management 1% have also been
developed per WRAB's request. No modifications have been made to the 2010-2015 capital
improvement program (CIP). With these changes and further review of the budget, the staff-
proposed revenue increases for 2010 are water 3%, wastewater 2% and stormwater/flood
management 1
Attached is information concerning the Proposed 2010 Utilities Budget and the 2010-2015
Utilities Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Attachments A through C are the fund
financials and CIP for each utility. Attachment D is a listing of Tier 1 Peer Review Items.
Attachment E shows staffing levels by program. Attachment F is an overview memo of the
Utilities CIP. Attachment G is a comparison of water and wastewater bills for Front Range
communities.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 1
Fiscal Impacts: The following percentage increases in additional revenue from the monthly
utility fees are being proposed by staff for 2010 to fund the preliminary Utilities budget and
capital improvements program. Staff has tried to minimize utility increases particularly given
the current economic environment. Projected revenue increases for 2010 as part of the last
year's 2009 budget development are included in parenthesis.
Water 3%(5%)
Wastewater 2%(6%)
Stormwater/ Flood Management 1%(3%)
Board Feedback: The preliminary 2010 Utilities budget and 2010-2015 CIP were presented to
the WRAB on May 18, 2009 which included three packages of revenue options. At the meeting
WRAB requested that additional revenue options (water 4%, wastewater 1%; stormwater/flood
management 1 be developed for consideration. Staff is asking that WRAB review the revenue
options and 2010-2015 CIP and provide a board recommendation on the proposed plan.
Public Feedback: A public hearing is scheduled for the June 15 meeting.
Staff Recommendation: Approval of a motion for the proposed 2010-2015 CIP as presented in
the 3% (water), 2% (wastewater) and 1% (stormwater/ flood management) revenue options.
REVENUE OPTIONS:
The Utilities Division's mission is to provide quality water services, as desired by the
community, in a manner which emphasizes efficient management of fiscal and natural resources,
and protects human and environmental health. Each of the city's three utilities (water,
wastewater and stormwater/flood management) is a separate enterprise fund established to
finance and account for the acquisition, operation and maintenance of each utility's facilities and
services while maintaining designated reserves and meeting debt service requirements. The
utility funds receive the majority of their revenues from monthly utility charges.
At the May 18 WRAB meeting, three packages of revenue options were presented. The revenue
options represent the amount of additional revenue to be generated from the monthly utility
charges. The three packages presented were:
• Option A: 5% water; 2% wastewater and 2% stormwater/flood management
• Option B: 3% water, 2% wastewater and 2% stormwater/flood management
• Option C: 0% for all three utilities
At the meeting, WRAB requested that additional revenue options (water 4%, wastewater 1%;
stormwater/flood management 1%) be considered. These options have been developed and
related information is included in this packet. All of the fund financials reflect current financial
information and have been adjusted to reflect lower interest earnings per the city's budget
guidelines. The water fund financial has also been adjusted to reduce the transfer amount from
the general fund for the fire training center. Originally this transfer was estimated at $130,000
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 2
for 15 years. Based on the current property appraisal of $971,000 and approximately a 5% rate
of return, the transfer is revised to $92,785 for 15 years.
The following revenue options have been developed for 2010:
Water 5% 4% 3% 0%
Wastewater 20/o 11% 0%
Stormwater/ Flood Management 1% 0%
At the May WRAB meeting, a 2% option for stormwater had also been presented, but after
incorporating information from the budget guidelines (primarily projected personnel costs) this
option has been withdrawn as the 1% option provides adequate funding for the utility.
The following table shows the estimated annual impact on a typical residential customer's
utili bill b utility for each revenue option.
5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0%
Water $18.71 $15.03 $10.47 $0.00
Wastewater $5.04 $2.52 $0.00
Stormwater/ Flood Management $0.84 $0.00
FUNDING LEVEL OPTIONS:
The following three tables summarize the major program funding levels for 2009 and for 2010
under each revenue option. The numbers in parentheses are the amounts to be reduced from the
5% water option and the 2% wastewater option as revenue decreases.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 3
Water Utility Fund
2009 Funding 2010: 5% 2010: 4% 2010: 3% 2010: 0%
Programs Level Funding Funding Funding Funding
Level Level Level Level
Administration $878,106 $875,849 $860,849 $860,849 $835,849
($15,000) ($15,000) ($40,000)
Planning & $571,134 $583,766 $563,766 $563,766 $533,766
Project ($20,000) ($20,000) ($50,000)
Management
Water Resources $1,969,183 $2,008,858 $2,008,858 $1,978,858 $1,913,858
& Hydro ($30,000) ($95,000)
Operations
Water Treatment $4,178,500 $4,318,261 $4,268,261 $4,268,261 $4,233,261
$50,000 $50,000 $85,000
WQES and $1,254,115 $1,305,129 $1,289,129 $1,264,129 $1,239,129
Conservation $16,000 $41,000 $66,000
System $3,063,574 $3,170,074 $3,170,074 $3,170,074 $3,155,074
Maintenance $15,000
Tier 1 Items $0 $132,700 $92,700 $52,700 $0
$40,000 $80,000 $132,700
CIP $10,079,050 $4,791,600 $4,791,600 $4,791,600 $4,141,365
$650,235
Other (debt, WG, $10,544,720 $10,174,298 $10,174,298 $10,174,298 $10,174,298
transfers, etc
Total Uses of $32,538,382 $27,360,535 $27,219,535 $27,124,535 $26,226,600
Funds $141,000 $236,000 $1,133,935
Future Capital $0 $2,500,000 $1,900,000 $1,200,000 $1,100,000
Project Reserve $600,000) $1,300,000 $1,400,000
For the 4%, 3% and 0% options reductions in the operating budget include reducing consultant
services for studies and analysis, trimming facility operation and maintenance activities and
reducing water conservation efforts. In addition for the water utility there are three Tier 1 peer
review items that require additional resources. Under the 4% option, funding would be reduced
for inspection of the high pressure pipeline right-of ways. The 3% option would further reduce
funding for the pipeline inspection and eliminate funding the two items related to safety. The
0% option would not provide any funding for the Tier 1 Peer Review items that require
additional resources. The Tier 1 peer review items are discussed in more detail in its respective
section later in the memo.
There are no proposed reductions to the CIP except under the 0% option. In that option funding
for Betasso Water Treatment Facility Improvements, Boulder Feeder Canal, Distribution Water
Quality and Kohler Storage Tank are reduced.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 4
All options establish a "Future Capital Project Reserve" that would be available to fund or offset
funding for future capital projects that could require bonding. This is in accordance with Peer
Review Item 42 that states "that the outstanding debt is rather high. Boulder should look for
more ways to "pay as you go" until bond retirement dates are nearer." The funding amount for
this reserve varies depending on the available revenue.
Wastewater Utility Fund
2009 Funding 2010: 2% 2010: 1% 2010: 0%
Programs Level Funding Funding Funding
Level Level Level
Administration $490,123 $531,605 $521,605 $516,605
($10,000) ($15,000)
Planning & $356,220 $362,102 $352,102 $342,102
Project ($10,000) ($20,000)
Management
Wastewater $5,336,769 $5,519,332 $5,482,332 $5,439,332
Treatment ($37,000) ($80,000)
WQES - WW $968,353 $992,593 $992,593 $992,593
Lab
System $1,658,602 $1,704,161 $1,684,161 $1,684,161
Maintenance ($20,000) ($20,000)
Tier 1 Items $0 $32,900 $9,400 $0
($23,500) ($32,900)
Budget $0 $52,766 $32,766 $26,766
Supplementals ($20,000) ($26,000)
CIP $2,825,340 $9,566,978 $9,551,978 $9,516,978
($15,000) ($50,000)
Other (debt, $5,050,361 $5,538,625 $5,538,625 $5,538,625
transfers, etc)
Total Uses of $16,685,768 $24,301,062 $24,165,562 $24,057,162
Funds ($135,500 $243,900
Under the 1% and 0% revenue options most of the reductions in the operating budget include
consultant services for studies and analysis and facility operation and maintenance activities.
There are two Tier 1 peer review items for the wastewater utility that need additional resources:
Item # 5 Improve safety & health programs and Item #7 senior management needs to actively
promote a safety culture. Under the 1% option, Item 95 would not be funded and neither item
would be funded in the 0% revenue option. Both of these items may result in future savings, but
the estimated amount has not been determined. The reductions to budget supplementals would
result in progressively less funding for regulatory support and an equipment replacement
program for the wastewater laboratory. Under the 1 % and 0% revenue options, the annual
funding for sanitary sewer rehabilitation would be reduced in the CIP.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 5
Stormwater/Flood Management Fund
2009 Funding 2010: 1% 2010: 0%
Programs Level Funding Funding
Level Level
Administration $389,723 $412,935 $412,935
Planning & $969,620 $997,174 $997,174
Project
Management
SW Contract $47,993 $48,473 $48,473
Mgnt
WQES incl $886,746 $901,158 $901,158
SW Permit
Compliance
System $771,010 $741,365 $741,365
Maintenance
Tier 1 Items $0 $4,200 $4,200
Budget $0 $42,168 $42,168
Supplementals
CIP $2,350,000 $1,681,090 $1,681,090
Other (debt, $1,271,558 $1,501,153 $1,501,153
transfers, etc
Total Uses of $6,686,650 $6,329,716 $6,329,716
Funds
The 0% revenue option would not result in any reductions to the 2010 proposed budget, but
would reduce funding to the South Boulder Creek Project in 2012 by $250,000.
Staff Recommendation
For 2010 staff is recommending the following revenue increases: 3% water; 2% wastewater and
I% stormwater/ flood management. This allows for an inflationary increase in revenues to cover
projected personnel expenses (including health insurance costs), increases to nonpersonnel items
such as chemicals, power and other purchased materials, funding for the Peer Review Tier 1
items as well as other enhancements (supplementals, reallocations and reductions) that have been
identified by staff.
For the wastewater and stormwater/flood management utilities these revenue adjustments will
fund the 2% (wastewater) and 1% (stormwater/flood management) associated funding levels
listed in the tables above. For the water utility a 3% revenue increase will fund the 4% funding
level listed above and incorporate the associated reductions/efficiencies. This will be achieved
through reductions, use of reserves and future consideration of a 4% revenue increase for 2011
and 2012. The table below summarizes the efficiency savings 2010:
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 6
Program Savings Comments
Administration $15,000 Reduce administrative support ($8,376) and
consultant services ($6,624
Planning & Project Mngmnt $20,000 Reduce travel and training ($2,000),
temporaries and interns ($3,000) and funding
for misc. studies and small construction
projects ($15,000)
Water Treatment $50,000 Defer optimization evaluations for new
treatment processes and strategically schedule
use of the Boulder Reservoir Treatment
Facility to incur savings for power, chemicals
and staff overtime.
WQES - Water Efficiency $16,000 Eliminate funding for the water efficiency
Program program.
Tier 1 Items $40,000 Reduce funding for high pressure pipeline
right-of-way inspection to $59,800
Total Ongoing Savings $101,000
Future Capital Project Reserve $600,000 Funding level for 2010 would be $1,900,000
The proposed 2010 revenue increases (3%-2%-1%) would increase a typical residential
customer's annual utility bill by approximately $17.00, or an increase of approximately $1.40
per month.
PEER REVIEW ITEMS
All of the Tier 1 items have been incorporated into the preliminary 2010 budget with revenue
increases of 3%-2%-1%. As stated in the April 20, 2009 WRAB agenda item regarding the Peer
Review, of the 30 Tier 1 items, 26 may be funded within the existing 2009 budget or draft 2010
budget. These items include those that have savings (9 items) and those that are preferable to
continue and do but that do not have savings (17 items). The remaining four Tier 1 items in the
following table are partially funded through the existing 2009 budget or draft 2010 budget, but
require additional resources in order to evaluate and implement. These four items may result in
future savings, but the estimated amount has not been determined. All of the Tier 1 items are
listed in Attachment D.
One adjustment to the peer review items has been made since the May WRAB meeting. After
these adjustments, the funding amount for the regular inspection and maintenance of high
pressure pipeline right-of-ways was reduced from $149,800 to $99,800 in the 5% revenue option
and does not include an additional staff person. These changes are reflected in the following
table.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 7
Peer Review Tier 1 Items Requiring Additional Resources
Item # Water Wastewater Stormwate Total
r/ Flood
Enhance Safety & Health 5 $23,500 $23,500 $3,000 $50,000
Program - hire a consultant (one-time (one-time (one-time
to perform a safety and expense) expense) expense)
health analysis for the entire
division.
Senior Management to 7 and 8 $9,400 $9,400 $1,200 $20,000
Actively Promote a Safety
Culture - in addition to
more internal staff time
focused on this area,
additional funding would be
used for training by an
outside consultant.
Regular Inspection and 10 $99,800 $99,800
Maintenance of high
pressure pipeline right-of-
ways - Establish regular
inspection and maintenance
program for treated water
transmission line right-of-
ways.
Total $132,700 $32,900 $4,200 $169,800
All of these Tier 1 items are currently incorporated into the fund financials and would be funded
as part of the proposed revenue increases (3%-2%-1%). However the funding level for
inspection and maintenance of high pressure pipelines has been reduced to $59,800 in the 3%
water option.
BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS
The following enhancements or budget supplemental requests were submitted by staff and are
incorporated into the preliminary 2010 budget. Since the May WRAB meeting, the budget
supplemental request to fund a pilot program to offer water monitors at a reduced rate to
customers has been withdrawn after reducing the revenue projections for interest earnings and
transfers. In addition other requests will be funded through budget reallocations and will not
require additional funding. These are discussed in the "Budget Reallocation" section of the
memo. Proposed budget enhancements for 2010 are summarized in the following table.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 8
2010 Budget Supplemental Requests
Stormwater
Water Wastewater / Flood Total
Household Hazardous Waste $26,766 $28,168 $54,934
Program - rising costs due to
increased citizen participation and the
possibility of the city's general fund
contribution ($17,665) being
eliminated.
Regulatory Support - Consultant $16,000 $4,000 $20,000
support for the 2010 Basic Standard
for aquatic life and nutrient criteria
and other ongoing hearing and special
water ualit studies.
Replacement Program - For WQES $10,000 $10,000 $20,000
laboratory and office areas, including (in 2010, (in 2010, (in 2010,
replacement of laboratory equipment. $10,000 $4,000 $14,000
Additional money in 2010 will fund ongoing) ongoing) ongoing)
the immediate replacement of the
Spectrophotometer used for particulate
analysis.
Total $0 $52,766 $42,168 $94,934
All of these budget enhancements are currently incorporated into the fund financials and would
be funded as part of the proposed revenue increases (3%-2%-1%).
BUDGET REALLOCATIONS
Since the May WRAB meeting staff has identified the following budget reallocations to fund
operational enhancements, without requesting additional dollars.
Water Fund
1. A reallocation of $35,000 from the water efficiency program is proposed for the following
items (the water efficiency program has an annual budget of $51,000 and provides matching
dollars to city departments for water efficiency improvements):
• Hydroelectric Equipment Rehabilitation - $10,000. The current budget of $50,000 is
inadequate given the age of the facilities.
• Water Quality Laboratory - $10,000. This will create and fund an equipment
replacement program for the laboratory.
• Valve Operations Testing Program - $15,000. This will be used to hire temporary
personnel to assist with preventative maintenance on water valves and will provide
additional safety measures by having two staff work together.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 9
Wastewater Fund
1. Reallocate $20,000 from the Biosolids Composting area to the Wastewater Fund's share of
the County's Household Hazardous Waste Program. The funds previously allocated for
composting are no longer needed due to recent facility improvements that improve
dewatering and utilize contract hauling. This reallocation will offset increased costs for the
city's share of the program due to increased citizen participation and the proposed
elimination of the general fund's contribution to the program. The remaining additional
costs for the program will require new funding and are included as part of the budget
supplemental requests ($26,766).
2. A one-time reallocation from savings in Marshall Landfill Operations ($10,000) and
Biosolids Recycling ($25,000) to replace the spectrophotometer in the wastewater laboratory
that is used for particulate analysis. The Marshall Landfill project continues to slow down as
long-term closure approaches and thus a budget reallocation is appropriate at this time. New
vendor bids for contract hauling and polymer chemicals have resulted in savings in the
Biosolids Recycling area.
Stormwater/ Flood Management Fund
1. Reallocate $15,000 from stormwater maintenance to the Stormwater Fund's share of the
Household Hazardous Waste Program. Review of the stormwater maintenance budget has
shown that annual maintenance activities and program efficiencies have resulted in budget
savings consistently over the last few years. This reallocation will offset increased costs for
the city's share of the program due to increased citizen participation and the proposed
elimination of the general fund's contribution to the program. The remaining additional
costs for the program will require new funding and are included as part of the budget
supplemental requests ($28,168).
STAFFING LEVELS
The Utilities Division currently has 156.23 budgeted full -time equivalent (FTE) employees.
There are 75.67 that support the water utility; 58.81 in wastewater; 20.95 in stormwater/flood
management and .80 in transportation (transportation contributes to storm sewer maintenance).
A listing of FTEs and positions by workgroup is included in Attachment E. There are no
additional FTEs being requested for 2010 and a .33 administrative specialist will be reduced.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 10
DEBT OBLIGATIONS
The table below summarizes the debt obligations of the utilities, the year the debt is retired and
the average annual debt payment. Items shown in italics are projects that are anticipated to be
funded by issuing bonds.
Year Debt Approximate Annual
utility Projects is Retired Debt Payment
Water Boulder Reservoir WTP Imp 2016 $850,000
Multiple Projects including Silver 2019 $2,500,000
Lake Pipeline, Barker Purchase
Lakewood Pipeline 2021 $2,200,000
Wastewater Marshall Landfill 2012 $170,000
WWTP Improvements 2025 $3,500,000
UV Disin ection (2010) 2030 $395,000
Biosolids Digester (2010) 2030 $355,000
Storm/Flood Multiple projects including Goose 2018 $500,000
Creek Improvements
South Boulder Creek Imp. (2012) 2032 $270,000
The water utility also pays a portion of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District's debt
related to the Windy Gap project. This debt will be retired in 2017 and Boulder's annual debt
payment is approximately $1,650,000.
HIGHLIGHTS OF PROPOSED 2010-2015 CIP
Please refer to Attachment F, the Utilities CIP overview memo for highlights of the proposed
2010-2015 CIP.
BILL COMPARISON
In April 2009, a survey of annual water and sewer bills was conducted for Front Range
Communities. The bills were for a typical single-family, inside city residential customer with
average winter water consumption of 5,000 gallons, total annual water consumption of 120,000
gallons, a lot size of 9,000 sq. feet and irrigable area of 5,200 sq. feet.
Of the fifteen communities surveyed, Boulder, based on 2009 rates, has the fifth lowest annual
water-only bill; the fifth highest annual sewer-only bill and has the sixth lowest combined water
and sewer bills. If the proposed rates (3%-2%-1%) were adopted, Boulder would still have the
fifth lowest annual water-only bill; the fourth highest annual sewer-only bill and would be in the
middle for combined water and sewer bills (seventh lowest), assuming the other communities do
not adjust rates for 2010. The survey is shown in Attachment G.
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 11
BUDGET SCHEDULE
The current schedule of major budget milestones is provided below. Elements involving the
WRAB are highlighted in bold italics.
Milestone Date
Proposed Budget Submittal to City Manager June 11, 2009
Public Hearing/ WRAB Recommendation on CIP/Budget June IS, 2009
Departmental Budget Review by City Manager June 12-July 10, 2009
CIP Submitted to Planning Board July 2, 2009
Planning Board CIP Hearing July 16, 2009
City Council Study Session on Budget (CIP & Utility Rates) July 28, 2009
City Council Study Session on Budget Aug. 25, 2009
City Council Study Session on Budget (if needed) Sept. 8, 2009
City Council Consideration/Adoption of Budget Oct. 6 and 20, 2009
NEXT STEPS
The WRAB's recommendation concerning the proposed 2010-2015 CIP and 2010 revenue
increases will be forwarded accordingly to the City Manager, Planning Board and City Council.
Attachment A-1: Water - Fund Financial
Attachment A-2: Water - Capital Improvement Program
Attachment B-1: Wastewater - Fund Financial
Attachment B-2: Wastewater - Capital Improvement Program
Attachment C-1: Stormwater/ Flood Management - Fund Financial
Attachment C-2: Stormwater/ Flood Management Capital Improvement Program
Attachment D: Tier 1 Peer Review Items and Budget Supplemental Requests
Attachment E: Staffing Levels by Program
Attachment F: Utilities CIP Overview Memo
Attachment G: Comparison of Utility Bills for Front Range Communities
AGENDA ITEM # 7 PAGE 12
Attachment A-1
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R
CITY OF BOULDER 15-Jun-09
2010 FUND FINANCIAL Draft -
WATER UTILITY FUND
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ACTUAL REVISED RECOMMENDED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE
Beginning of Year Fund Balance $47,758,924 $47,717,621 $33,580,257 $32,291,485 $30,475,836 $30,708,615 $31,536,608 $33,585,882
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Operating—
Sale of Water to General Cust $18,965,952 $18,615,656 $20,171,468 $20,817,963 $21,6937779 $22,606,451 $23,331,010 $24,078,800
31 Projected Rate Increase $0 4% $1,489,252 8% $605,144 3% $832,719 4% $867.751 4% $678,194 3% $699,930 3% 5722,364
3%
Bulk/Irrigation Water Sales $139,468 $99,950 $118,550 $116,050 $119,050 $121,150 $124,150 5126,150
Hydroelectric Revenue $1,932,085 $1,895,000 $1,890,000 $1,785,000 $1,785.000 $1,785,000 $1,785,000 $1,7857000
Miscellaneous Operating Revenues $55,829 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
TOTAL OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $21,093,334 $22,124,858 $22,810,162 $237576,731 $24,490,581 $25,215,794 $25,965,091 $26,737,314
_TF
Non-Operating--
Plant Investment Fees $4,193,395 $2,500,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000
21 Connection Charges $144,209 $165,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000
Special Assessments $6,306 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
Interest on Investments $1,923,390 $1,284,765 $654,815 $807,287 $9147275 $921,258 $946,098 $1,007,576
Rent, assessments and other misc revenues $23,333 $104,719 $18,000 $18,500 $19,000 $19,500 $20,000 $20,500
Sale of Real Estate - Yards Masterplan $26,422 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Transfer from General Fund - Fire Training Center $0 $92,785 $92,785 $92,785 $92,785 $92,785 $92,785 $92,785
29 TOTAL NON-OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $6,317,055 $4,402,269 $3,020,600 $3,173,572 $3,281,060 $3,703,543 $3,728,883 $3,790,861
37 TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $27,410,389 $26,527,127 $25,830,762 $26,750,303 $27,771,641 $28,919,338 $29,693,974 $30,528,175
USES OF FUNDS
Operating Expenditures--
Administration $1,082,181 $878,106 $875,849 $902,124 $929,188 $957,064 $985,776 $1,015,349
36 Planning and Project Management $555,660 $571,134 $583,766 $601,279 $619,317 $637,897 $657,034 $676,745
Water Resources and Hydroelectric Operations $2,046,176 $1,969,183 $2,008,858 $2,069,124 $2,131,197 $2,195,133 $2,260,987 $2,328,817
Water Treatment $4,122,965 $4,178,500 $4,318,261 $4,447,809 $4,581,243 $47718,680 $4,860,241 $5,006,048
Water Quality & Environmental Svcs $772,801 $802,192 $861,637 $887,486 $914.111 $941,534 $969,780 $998,873
Water Conservation $371,822 $451,923 $443.492 $456,797 $470,501 $484,616 $499,154 $514,129
System Maintenance _ $2,898,341 $3,063,574 $3,170,074 $3,265,176 $3,363,132 $3,464,025 $3,567,946 $3,674,985
Windy Gap Payment $2,266,168 $2,457,567 $2,479,532 $2,500,539 $2,523,910 $2,546,836 $2,593,250 $2,726,004
43 Proposed Tier 1 Items $0 $0 $92,700 $95,481 $98,345 $101,296 $104,335 $107,465
Proposed Reductions $0 $0 ($101,000) ($101,000) ($101,000) (5101,000) ($101,000) ($101,000)
Nederland WWTP Operations $0 $0 $0 $17,300 $177819 $18,354 $18,904 $19,471
Emergency Reserve $0 $360,000 $0 $0 50 $0 $0 $0
79- SicklVacation Accrual $34,505 $100,000 $100,000 $103,000 $106.090 $109,273 $112,551 5115,927
TOTAL OPERATING USES OF FUNDS $14,150,619 $14,832,179 $14,833,169 515,245,115 $15,653,853 $16,073,708 $16,528,958 $17,082,813
Debt--
BRWTP 1996 Revenue Bond; Refunding in 2005 $845,302 $843,810 $844,505 $848,752 $854,690 $854,438 $856,594 $857,709
Refunding of the 1999 and 2000 Revenue Bonds $3,258,354 $3,257,654 $3,253,354 $2,507,921 $2,506,088 $2,511,421 $2,523,521 $2,522,054
Lakewood Pipeline 2001 Revenue Bond $2,178,969 $2,180,202 $2,174,452 $2,171,885 $2,172,302 $2,175,502 $2,176,142 $2,182,416
Arbitrage Payment $1,678 $13,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE $6,284,303 $6,295,018 $6,272,311 $5,528,558 $5,533,080 $5,541,361 $5,556,257 $5,562,179
62 Transfers Out--
CostAllocation _ $1,149,406 $1,133,776 $1,118,145 $1,229,960 $1,352,955 $1,488,251 $1,637,076 $1,800,784
IS Planning & Development Services $178,019 $183,359 $188,860 $194,526 $200,361 $206,372 $212,563 $218,940
Other Transfers $15,000 $15,000 $15,450 $15,914 $16,391 $16,883 $17,389 $17,911
TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT $1,342,425 $1,332,135 $1,322,455 $1,440,399 $1,569,708 $1,711,506 $1,867,029 $2,037,635
Capital Improvements Program--
69 CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $5,708,850 $10,079,050 $4,791,600 $6,454,881 $4,888,311 $4,874,042 $3,805,008 $7,479,504
_TT
76- ENCUMBRANCES, CARRYOVERS & MID-YR ATB's $0 $8,586,109 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $27,486,197 $41,124,491 $27,219,535 $28,668,953 $27,644,952 $28,200,616 $27,757,251 $32,162,131
-IT
Emergency Reserve Adjustment $0 $360,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
81 Sick/Vacation Accrual Adjustment $34,505 $100,000 $100,000 $103,000 $106,090 $109,273 $112,551 $115,927
FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR $47,717,621 $33,580,257 $32,291,485 $30,475,836 $30,708,615 $31,536,608 $33,585,882 $32,067,854
Designated Reserves -
Bond Reserves $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830 $3,068,830
Lakewood Pipeline Remediation Reserve $16,256,744 $16,646,086 $17,050,884 $17,569,502 $16,847,149 $17,359,571 $17,766,371 $18,306,752
Lakewood/USFS Damage Claims Reserve $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1007000 $0 $0 $0
89 Future Capital Projects Reserve $0 $0 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $1,900,000
Vacation/Sick/Bonus Liability $647,902 $667,339 $6877359 $707,980 $7297219 $751,096 $773,629 5796,838
Pay Period 27 - 2013 Reserve $75,708 $126,708 $177.708 $228,708 $279.708 $330,708 $381,708 $432,708
TOTAL RESERVES $20,149,184 $20,608,963 $22,984,781 5237575,020 $22,924,906 $23,410,205 $23,890,538 $24,505,128
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) vs. DESIGNATED RESERVE, $27,568,437 $12,971,294 $9,306,705 $6,900,815 $7,783,708 $8,126,404 $9,695,344 $7,562,726
TJT OPERATING RESERVE (Goal: 25% of Operating) $3,873,261 $4,041,079 $4,038,906 $4,171,378 $4,305,890 $4,446,303 $4,598,997 $4,780,112
96 CAPITAL RESERVE (Goal: $2,000,000) $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000
SURPLUSI(DEFICIT) vs. ALL RESERVES $21,695,176 $6,930,216 $3,267,799 $729,437 $1,477,818 $1,680,100 $3,096,347 $782,614
Reserve levels are based on industry standards and are maintained for revenue bonds, revenue fluctuations (weather and water usage impacts) and the capital intensive nature of
the utilit,.
Attachment A-2
A B C D E F G H I J K
15-Jun-09
Assumed Inflation Rate 3.00% ESTIMATED 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
PROJECT NAME 2008 COST ACTUAL REVISED ECOMMENDE PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
Treated Water Pressure Reducing and Hydroelectric Facilities
Maxwell Hydro/PRV Station 411342 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Kohler Hydro/PRV Station 411376 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sunshine Hydro/PRV Station 411328 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Orodell Hydro/PRV Station 411331 $4,392 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sunshine Hydro/PRV Station 411347 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Pearl Street Hydro/PRV Station $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Treated Water Pressure Reducing and Hydroelectric Facility Rehabilita, $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $65,463
11 Subtotal - Treated Water PRV and Hydro $4,392 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $65,463
18
Water Treatment Facilities
Betasso WTP 411947 $191,475 $420,892 $2007000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $0 S978,580
Betasso WTP - Bond Proceeds $7,500,000 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($0) $D
Bond Issuance Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SD
Boulder Reservoir WTP 411652 $3,000,000 $300,001 $3,890,447 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $0
Boulder Res WTP - Bond Proceeds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Water Treatment Facility Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
26 Subtotal - Water Treatment Facilities $491,476 $4,311,339 $300,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $50,000 $978,580
28 Treated Water Pump Stations
Cherryvale Pump Station 411010 $500,000 $20,790 $553,610 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Boulder Reservoir High Service Pump Station 411011 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
-ST Iris Pump Station 411012 $1,000,000 $44,071 $1,574,415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
3TJ Treated Water Pump Station Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
33 Subtotal - Treated Water Pump Stations $64,861 $2,128,025 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Treated Water Storage Tanks
Kohler Storage Tank 411671 $920,000 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $113,148 $1,131,484
Chautauqua Storage Tank 411672 $785,000 $287,119 $0 $85,779 $857,791 $0 $0 $0 SO
39- Maxwell Storage Tank 411673 $920,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
39 Betasso Storage Tank $250,000 $0 $0 $265,225 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
1 Gunbarrel Storage Tank 411670 $250,000 $64,156 $8,667 $0 $0 $0 $289,819 $0 $0
Devil's Thumb Storage Tank 411674 $350,000 $42,163 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
42 Boulder Reservoir Storage Tank $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Booten Storage Tank $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Treated Water Storage Tank Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $161,132
45 Subtotal - Treated Water Storage Tanks $393,438 $8,667 $351,004 $857,791 $0 $289,819 $113,148 $1,292,616
Treated Water Distribution System
48 Zone Isolation Valves 411390 $2,652 $4,346 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Cathodic Protection 411387 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Waterline Replacement 411389 $2,029,353 $3,395,867 $2,227,890 $2.294,727 $2,361569 $2,434,476 $2.507,510 $2,582.735
51 Subtotal - Treated Water Distribution System $2,032,005 $3,600,213 $2,227,890 $2,294,727 $2,363,569 $2,434,476 $2,507,510 $2,582,735
Treated Water Transmission System
54 Boulder Canyon - Fourmile to Pearl 411666 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sunshine Transmission Pipe 411006 $800,000 $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $927,419 $0 $0
Betasso to Orodell Transmission Pipe $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
57 Zone 1 Transmission Facilities 411002 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Zone 2 Transmission Facilities 411004 $500,000 $2,114 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Zone 3 Transmission Facilities 411005 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $597,026 $0
60 Boulder Canyon - Orodell to Fourmile $500,000 $D $0 $0 $546,364 $0 $0 $0 $0
Zone 2 / Zone 3 Pressure Modifications 411003 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
62 Subtotal - Treated Water Transmission System $2,114 $200,000 $0 $546,364 $0 $927,419 $597,026 $0
63
_BT Source Water Transmission System
65 Lakewood Pipeline 411780 $155,287 $103,559 $100,000 $0 $1,238,060 $0 $119,405 $0
66 Lakewood Pipeline - Non-Conforming Pipe Cap 411788 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
_BT Lakewood Pipeline - Non-Conforming Pipe Ope 411790 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
68 Lakewood Pipeline Welds 411792 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
69 Lakewood Pipeline Settlement/ Litigation 411795 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Silver Lake Pipeline 411640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
71 Source Water Transmission Pipe Inspections 411775 $0 $80,000 $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $0 $0
72 Subtotal - Source Water Transmission System $155,287 $183,559 $100,000 $0 $1,318,060 $0 $119,405 $0
74 Barker Water System
75 Barker Gravity Pipeline Repair 411106 $20,000,000 $687,896 $413,981 $371,315 $382,454 $393,928 $405,746 $417,918 $922,405
Barker-Kossler Penstock Repair 411107 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
77 Barker Dam Outlet 411109 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S804,336
78 Barker Dam Outlet - Bond Proceeds $7,055,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO
19 Barker Dam 411110 $350,000 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $430,456
80 Barker Hydro System Integration 411111 $112,515 $740 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
81 Barker Relicensing 411112 $126,030 $1,145,297 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
_BT Barker Instream Flow Release 411114 $0 $152,949 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
83 Betasso Penstock 411940 $749,300 $2,682,157 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
84 Barker Source Water Protection $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Kossler Reservoir 1,200,000 $0 $0 $360,706 $939,745 $0 $0 $0 $0
86 Subtotal - Barker Water System $1,675,741 $4,395,124 $732,021 $1,442,200 $393,928 $405,746 $417,918 $2,157,197
87
88 Raw Water Storage Reservoirs
89 Albion Dam $3,075,000 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,241
90 Silver Lake Dam $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
91 Island Lake Dam 411626 $105,000 $0 $108,150 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
92 Green Lake 1 Dam $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
93 Green Lake 2 Dam 411627 $3,875,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $86,946 $0 $0
94 Green Lake 3 Dam $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
95 Goose Lake Dam 411612 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
96 Boulder Reservoir $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
97 Lakewood Reservoir 411981 $102,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
98 Skyscraper Dam 125,D00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
99 Wittem er Ponds 4,000,000 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
100 Subtotal - Raw Water Storage Reservoirs $0 $108,150 $0 $0 $0 $86,946 $0 $92,241
101 _
102 Other Raw Water Facilities
103 Farmer's Ditch 411550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
104 Anderson Ditch 411883 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
105 Watershed Improvements $440,500 $0 $0 $0 $317,437 $0 $0 $0 $92,241
106 Nederland WWTP 411565 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
107 Instream Flow Structures and Gaging 411549 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
108 Como Creek Diversion Structure 411548 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
109 Lakewood Diversion Structure $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
110 Silver Lake Diversion Structure $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
111 NCWCD Conveyance - Boulder Feeder Canal 411546 $283,000 $19,432 $321,321 $300,235 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
112 NCWCD Conveyance - Carter Lake Pipeline 411547 $225 $1,118,525 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
113, NCWCD Conveyance - Bond Proceeds $25,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
114 Subtotal - Other Raw Water Facilities $19,657 $1,739,846 $300,235 $367,437 $0 $0 $0 $92,241
115
116 Source Water Pressure Reducing, Pumping and Hydroelectric
117 Lakewood Hydroelectric 411801 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Attachment A-2
A B C D E F G H I J K
15-Jun-09
Assumed Inflation Rate 3.00% ESTIMATED 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
PROJECT NAME 2008 COST ACTUAL REVISED ECOMMENDE PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
Silver Lake Hydroelectric 411970 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Boulder Reservoir Intake and Pumping 411655 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Betasso Hydro PRV Station 411974 $0 $215,826 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Barker Dam Hydro $3,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO
Boulder Canyon Hydro $4,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Source Water Pressure Reducing, Pumping and Hydroelectric Facility F $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $218,432
Subtotal - Source Water PRV, Pumping and Hydro $0 $315,826 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $218,432
126 Water Distribution System Expansion
Annexation Related Water System Expansion 411433 $0 $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Zbj Subtotal -Water Distribution System Expansion $0 $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
291
130 Water System Monitoring and Metering
Automated Meter Reading 411454 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $530,450 $546,364 $562,754 $579,637 $0 $0
Water System Security Upgrades 411440 $164,343 $101,438 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0
Distribution System Water Quality 411425 $186,130 $192,600 $150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
Data Communications System 411435 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Yards Master Plan Implementation 411039 $477,448 $242,387 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Utility Billing Computer System Replacement 411453 $41,958 $39,550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Water System Monitoring and Metering $869,879 $1,075,975 $780,450 $796,364 $662,754 $579,637 $0 $0
138
TOTAL CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $5,708,850 $18,591,724 $4,791,600 $6,454,881 $4,888,311 $4,874,042 $3,805,008 $7,479,504
Attachment B-1
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R
CITY OF BOULDER 15-Jun-09
2010 FUND FINANCIAL -Draft-
WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ACTUAL REVISED RECOMMENDED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE
Beginning of Year Fund Balance $22,576,055 $14,724,357 $10,589,196 $9,592,080 $8,587,696 $7,143,839 $6,554,244 $6,572,662
-IT SOURCES OF FUNDS
Operating--
SewerChargestoGeneralCustomers $12,404,751 $12,709,892 $13,372,078 $13,666,798 $14,104,956 $14,557,161 $15,169,726 $16,112,069
31 Projected Rate Increase $0 3% $635,495 5% $267,442 2% $410,004 3% $423,149 3% $582,286 4% $910,184 6% $966,724 6%
Surcharge/ Pretreatment Fees $131,862 $131,000 $133,000 $133,000 $133,000 $133,000 $133,000 $133,000
Cogeneration Revenues $39,721 $0 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 $0
7 6- TOTAL OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $12,576,334 $13,476,387 $13,772,519 $14,209,802 $14,661,104 $15,272,447 $16,212,909 $17,211,793
Non-Operating--
fg- Investment Fees $778,234 $500,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000
Connection Charges $6,987 $11,500 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
Special Assessments $3,671 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5;000 $5,000
23 Interest on Investments $848,546 $389,575 $206,489 $239,802 $257,631 $214,315 $196,627 $197,180
Rent and other miscellaneous revenue $84,343 $29,500 $29,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500
Sale of Real Estate - Yards Masterplan $0 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0
Transfer from Other Funds $120,000 $230,000 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 $0
Projected Bonds $0 $0 $8,605,438 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL NON-OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $1,841,781 $1,290,575 $9,456,427 $856,302 $874,131 $980,815 $963,127 $963,680
29
0 TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $14,418,115 $14,766,962 $23,228,946 $15,066,104 $15,535,235 $16,253,262 $17,176,037 $18,175,473
USES OF FUNDS
Operating Expenditures—
Administration $490,560 $490,123 $531,605 $547,553 $563,980 $580,899 $598,326 $616,276
Planning and Project Management $370,887 $356,220 $362,102 $372,965 $384,154 $395,679 $407,549 $419,775
Wastewater Quality & Environmental Svcs $885,992 $968,353 $992,593 $1,022,371 $1,053,042 $1,084,633 $1,117,172 $1,150,687
System Maintenance $1,642,852 $1,658,602 $1,704,161 $1,755,286 $1,807,944 $1,862,183 51,918,048 $1,975,590
Wastewater Treatment $5,357,251 $5,336,769 $5,519,332 $5,684,912 $5,855,459 $6,031,123 $6,212,057 $6,398,418
Proposed Tier 1 Items $0 $0 $32,900 $9,682 $9,972 $10,272 $10,580 510,897
,TT Proposed Budget Supplementals $0 $0 $52,766 $54,349 $55,979 $57,659 $59,389 $61,170
WWTP Biosolids Digester Improvements $0 $0 $0 $65,000 $66,950 $68,959 $71,027 $73,158
Emergency Reserve $0 $265,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sick/Vacation Accrual $19,916 $75,000 $75,000 $77,250 $79,568 $81,955 $84,413 $86,946
TOTAL OPERATING USES OF FUNDS $8,767,458 $9,150,067 $9,270,459 $9,589,368 $9,877,049 $10,173,360 $10,478,561 $10,792,918
Debt--
WWTP Improvements 2005 Revenue Bond $3,565,944 $3,557,523 $3,556,583 $3,550,367 $3,546,533 $3,544,883 $3,543,496 $3,519,913
2M_
49 2005 Refunding of the 1992 Marshall Landfill Bond $170,057 $170,331 $165,456 $165,568 $175,454 $0 $0 $0
Arbitrage Payment ($13,070) $3,907 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Projected Bond - WWTP UV Disinfection $0 $0 $393,865 $393,865 $393,865 $393,865 $393,865 $393,865
Projected Bond - WWTP Biosolids Digester $0 $0 $356,187 $356,187 $356,187 $356,187 $356,187 $356,187
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE $3,722,931 $3,731,761 $4,472,091 $4,465,987 $4,472,039 $4,294,935 $4,293,548 $4,269,965
57 Transfers Out--
Cost Allocation $787,268 $794,683 $802,099 $882,309 $970,540 $1,067,594 $1,174,353 $1,291,788
Planning & Development Services $178,560 $183,917 $189,435 $195,118 $200,972 $207,001 $213,211 $219,607
TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT $965,828 $978,600 $991,534 $1,077,427 $1,171,512 $1,274,595 $1,387,564 $1,511,395
Capital Improvements Program--
TOTAL CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $2,882,277 $2,825,340 $961,540 $1,014,957 $1,538,060 $1,181,921 $1,082,359 $2,548,585
64
BOND-WWTP IMPROVEMENTS $5,951,235 $173,650 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PROJECTED BOND-BIOSOLIDS DIGESTER $0 $0 $4,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PROJECTED BOND-UV DISINFECTION $0 $0 $4,434,562 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
BOND - ISSUANCE COSTS $0 $0 $170,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
CARRYOVERS, ENCUMBRANCES & MID-YR ATB! $0 $2,382,705 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $22,289,729 $19,242,123 $24,301,062 $16,147,738 $17,058,659 $16,924,812 $17,242,032 $19,122,863
721-
Emergency Reserve Adjustment $0 $265,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
rg- SickNacation Accrual Adjustment $19,916 $75,000 $75,000 $77,250 $79,568 $81,955 $84,413 $86,946
FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR $14,724,357 $10,589,196 $9,592,080 $8,587,696 $7,143,839 $6,554,244 $6,572,662 $5,712,218
Designated Reserves -
Bond Reserves $170,250 $170,250 $170,250 $170,250 $0 SO $0 $0
SickNacation/Bonus Liability $663,552 $683,459 $703,962 $725,081 $746,834 $769,239 $792,316 $816,085
Pay Period 27 - 2013 Reserve $57,598 $93,598 $129,598 $165,598 $201,598 $237,598 $273,598 $309,598
-ST TOTAL RESERVES $891,400 $947,307 $1,003,810 $1,060,929 $948,432 $1,006,837 $1,065,914 $1,125,683
SURPLUSI(DEFICIT) vs. DESIGNATED RESERVI$13,832,957 $9,641,889 $8,588,270 $7,526,767 $6,195,407 $5,547,408 $5,506,748 $4,586,535
OPERATING RESERVE (Goal:25% of Operating) $2,433,322 $2,532,167 $2,565,498 $2,666,699 $2,762,140 $2,861,989 $2,966,531 $3,076,078
CAPITAL RESERVE (Goal: $500,000) $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000
SURPLUSI(DEFICIT) vs. ALL RESERVES $10,899,636 $6,609,722 $5,522,772 $4,360,068 $2,933,267 $2,185,419 $2,040,217 $1,010,457
Reserve levels are based on industry standards and are maintained for revenue bonds, revenue fluctuations (weather and water usage impacts) and the capital intensive nature of the
utility.
Attachment B-2
A C D E F G H I J K
1 CITY OF BOULDER 15-Jun-09
2 2010 - 2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
3 WASTEWATER UTILITY FUND
Assumed Inflation Rate ESTIMATED 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
PROJECT NAME 2008 COST ACTUAL REVISED RECOMMENDEE PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
Wastewater Treatment
WWTP Pumps $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $0 5150,000 $0 $150,000
WWTP Permit Improvements $572,876 $345,859 $0 $0 $0 $0 $115,927 $0
21 WWTP Permit Improvements - Projected Bon $10,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
31 WWTP Laboratory $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Lower Boulder Creek Enhancement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP Headworks $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1.560,661
16 WWTP Headworks - Projected Bond $12,320,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
_TT WWTP Instrumentation/Control $0 $0 $75,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
WWTP Activated Sludge $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,531 $0 $0
WWTP Primary Clarifiers $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0
21 WWTP Secondary Clarifiers $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP UV Disinfection $0 $443,456 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP UV Disinfection - Projected Bond $4,180,000 $0 $0 $4,434,562 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP Permit Improvements - Bond Proceeds $5,951,235 $173,650 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Wastewater Treatment Rehabilitation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Bond Issuance Costs $0 $0 $170,876 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal -Wastewater Treatment Plant $6,524,111 $1,462,965 $4,680,438 $250,000 $300,000 $317,531 $215,927 $1,810,661
Marshall Landfill
Marshall Landfill $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Marshall Landfill $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Biosolids Recycling
Valmont Butte $282,049 $434,940 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Biosolids Handling & Dewatering $698,495 $106,270 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $0
,TT WWTP Biosolids Digester $0 $983,074 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP Biosolids Digester - Bond Proceeds $7,370,000 $0 $0 $4,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
WWTP Cogeneration $0 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 S168,826 $0 $0
WWTP Digester Complex $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
401 WWTP Digester Cleaning $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
1 41 Subtotal - Biosolids Recycling $980,544 $1,774,284 $4,150,000 $0 $0 $168,826 $150,000 $0
Wastewater System Monitoring and Metering
Yards Master Plan Implementation $238,785 $121,215 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Automated Meter Reading $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Utility Billing Computer System Replacement $10,920 $69,284 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Monitoring and Metering $249,705 $190,499 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
48
Collection and Conveyance System Rehabilitation
Collection System Monitoring $0 $0 $0 $53,045 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation $914,904 $803,946 $530,450 $546,364 $562,754 5579,637 $597,026 $614,937
Sanitary Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation $164,248 $100,000 $106,090 $109,273 $112,551 $115,927 $119,405 $122,987
IBM Pump Station $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $56,275 $562,754 $0 $0 $0
Tier 1 Boulder Creek 2 Master Plan Project S733,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 1/1A Master Plan Project $1,203,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 3 Master Plan Project $482,000
Tier 1 Goose Creek 5 Master Plan Project $2,559,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 1 Master Plan Project $1,653,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 3 Master Plan Project $1,939,000
Tier 2 Boulder Creek 4 Master Plan Project $12,356,000
Tier 2 Goose Creek 4 Master Plan Project $3,928,000
_BT Tier 2 Gunbarrel 1 Master Plan Project $1,116,000
_BT Tier 2 Gunbarrel 2 Master Plan Project $939,000
Tier 2 South Boulder Creek 1 Master Plan Prc $733,000
Subtotal - Sewer System Rehabilitation $1,079,152 $903,946 $636,540 $764,957 $1,238,060 $695,564 $716,431 $737,924
Wastewater System Expansion
Annexation Related WW System Expansion $0 $717,893 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Wastewater System Expansion $0 $717,893 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
77
TOTAL CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $8,833,512 $5,049,587 $9,566,978 $1,014,957 $1,538,060 $1,181,921 $1,082,359 $2,548,585
Attachment C-1
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R
CITY OF BOULDER 15-Jun-09
2010 FUND FINANCIAL Draft -
STORMWATER/FLOOD MANAGEMENT UTILITY FUND
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ACTUAL REVISED RECOMMENDED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE
Beginning of Year Fund Balance $10,753,587 $12,777,970 $5,008,892 $5,014,468 $4,609,660 $3,344,113 $3,473,297 $3,651,248
SOURCES OF FUNDS
iT. Operating_
Service Charge Fees $4,920,892 $4,812,655 $4,966,949 $5,026,652 $5,187,806 $5,354,127 $5,525,781 $5,702,937
Projected Rate Increases $0 3% $144,380 3% $49,669 1% $150,800 3% $155,634 3% $160,624 3% $165,773 3% °
171,088 3/0
14 TOTAL OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $4,920,892 $4,957,035 $5,016,619 $5,177,451 $5,343,440 $5,514,751 $5,691,554 $5,874,025
75-
NNon-Operating--
_f T Investment Fees $656,811 $500,000 $600,000 $650,000 $700,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000
flT Urban Drainage District Funds $861,776 $250,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000
Colorado Dept of Transportation Funds $1,265,759 $1,985,241 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
State & Federal Grants $24,891 $24,973 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
21 Interest on Investments $439,292 $153,100 $97,673 $125,362 $138,290 $100,323 $104,199 $109,537
Intergovernmental Transfers (KICP Program) $117,324 $123,600 $135,000 $145,000 $150,000 $154,500 $159,135 $163,909
Rent and other miscellaneous revenue $51,577 $31,000 $36,000 $36,000 $36,000 $36,000 $36,000 $36,000
Miscellaneous nonrecurring revenue $104,290 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sale of Real Estate - Yards Masterplan $0 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Projected Bonds $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,085,000 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL NON-OPERATING SOURCES OF FUNDS $3,521,720 $3,192,914 $1,268,673 $1,356,362 $4,509,290 $1,590,823 $1,599,334 $1,609,447
29
-ST TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $8,442,612 $8,149,949 $6,285,292 $6,533,813 $9,852,730 $7,105,575 $7,290,888 $7,483,472
USES OF FUNDS
Operating Expenditures--
34 Administration $341,163 $389,723 $412,935 $425,323 $438,083 $451,225 $464,762 $478,705
-ST Planning and Project Managemenl $1,011,535 $969,620 $997,174 $1,027,089 $1,057,902 $1,089,639 $1,122,328 $1,155,998
Stormwater Contract Management $33,333 $47,993 $48,473 $49,927 $51,425 $52,968 $54,557 $56,193
Stormwater Quality and Education $815,779 $886,746 $901,158 $928,193 $956,039 $984,720 $1,014,261 $1,044,689
System Maintenance $658,161 $771,010 $741,365 $763,606 $786,514 $810,110 $834,413 $859,445
Proposed Tier 1 Items $0 $0 $4,200 $1,236 $1,273 $1,311 $1,351 $1,391
Proposed Budget Supplementals $0 $0 $42,168 $37,253 $38,371 $39,522 $40,707 $41,929
Emergency Reserve $0 $93,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
21 Sick/Vacation Accrual ($39,193) $50,000 $50,000 $51,500 $53,045 $54,636 $56,275 $57,964
TOTAL OPERATING USES OF FUNDS $2,820,778 $3,208,092 $3,197,473 $3,284,127 $3,382,651 $3,484,131 $3,588,654 $3,696,314
44
7215- Debt--
Goose Creek/BVRC 1998 Revenue Bond $806,273 $810,029 $1,126,036 $493,531 $491,872 $494,288 $490,726 $491,393
Projected Bond - South Boulder Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $268,910 $268,910 $268,910 $268,910
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE $806,273 $810,029 $1,126,036 $493,531 $760,782 $763,198 $759,636 $760,303
b1l Transfers Out--
Cost Allocation $189,861 $192,674 $195,486 $215,035 $236,538 $260,192 $286,211 $314,832
Planning & Development Services $107,626 $110,855 $114,181 $117,606 $121,134 $124,768 $128,511 $132,367
Other Transfers $15,000 $15,000 $15,450 $15,914 $16,391 $16,883 $17,389 $17,911
55- TOTAL TRANSFERS OUT $312,487 $318,529 $325,117 $348,554 $374,063 $401,843 $432,111 $465,110
Capital Improvements Program--
TOTAL CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $2,439,498 $2,350,000 $1,681,090 $2,863,909 $3,568,826 $2,381,855 $2,388,810 $2,795,368
PROJECTED BOND - SOUTH BOULDER CREEK $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0
PROJECTED BOND - ISSUANCE COSTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,000 $0 $0 $0
-GT ENCUMBRANCES, CARRYOVERS & MID-YR ATBS $0 $9,375,377 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $6,379,036 $16,062,027 $6,329,716 $6,990,121 $11,171,323 $7,031,026 $7,169,212 $7,717,094
Emergency Reserve Adjustment $0 $93,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sick/Vacation Accrual Adjustment ($39,193) $50,000 $50,000 $51,500 $53,045 $54,636 $56,275 $57,964
FUND BALANCE • END OF YEAR $12,777,970 $5,008,892 $5,014,468 $4,609,660 $3,344,113 $3,473,297 $3,651,248 $3,475,589
11
Designated Reserves -
Bond Reserves $824,715 $824,715 $824,715 $824,715 $824,715 $824,715 $824,715 $824,715
Post Flood Property Acquisition $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000
75- Sick/Vacation/Bonus Liability $84,833 $87,378 $89,999 $92,699 $95,480 $98,345 $101,295 $104,334
Pay Period 27 Reserve $17,453 $28,453 $39,453 $50,453 $61,453 $72,453 $83,453 $94,453
TOTAL RESERVES $1,977,001 $1,990,546 $2,004,167 $2,017,867 $2,031,648 $2,045,513 $2,059,463 $2,073,502
-IT
SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) vs. DESIGNATED RESERVE' $10,800,969 $3,018,346 $3,010,301 $2,591,793 $1,312,464 $1,427,785 $1,591,785 $1,402,088
'IT -ST OPERATING RESERVE (Goal: 25% of Operating) $783,316 $881,655 $880,647 $908,170 $939,179 $971,493 $1,005,191 $1,040,356
CAPITAL RESERVE (Goal: $200,000) $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000
-ST SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) vs. ALL RESERVES $9,817,653 $1,936,691 $1,929,654 $1,483,622 $173,286 $256,291 $386,594 $161,732
FST1
Reserve levels are based on industry standards and are maintained for revenue bonds and the capital intensive nature of the utility
Attachment C-2
A C D E F G H I J K
1 CITY OF BOULDER 15-Jun-09
2 2010-2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - Draft -
3 STORMWATER AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT UTILITY FUND
4
5
Assumed Inflation Rate ESTIMATED 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
7 PROJECT NAME 2008 COST ACTUAL REVISED RECOMMENDEE PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
8
Major Drainageways
10 Elmer's Twomile Creek $1,711,285 $5,140,417 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
11 Goose Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
South Boulder Creek $10,252 $442,075 $0 $300,000 $1,250,000 $0 $0 $0
13 South Boulder Creek - Bond Proceeds $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0
14 Bond Issuance Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,000 $0 $0 $0
Skunk Canyon Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
16 Sunshine Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
17 Twomile Canyon Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
-TT Bluebell Canyon Creek - King's Gulch $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
19 Viele Channel $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
20 Four Mile Canyon Creek $4,585,000 $51,467 $1,335,095 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $120,096
21 Bear Canyon Creek $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
22 Gregory Canyon Creek $0 $0 $25,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
23 Boulder Creek $99,999 $100,001 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Wonderland Creek $19,536,000 $11,108 $819,410 $250,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $837,852
25 Preflood Acquisition $0 $1,499,700 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $515,000
26 Greenways Program $168,980 $645,270 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $154,500
Subtotal - Major Drainageway Improvements $2,053,091 $9,981,968 $1,225,000 $1,950,000 $5,735,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,627,448
28 _
29 Miscellaneous
Yards Master Plan Implementation $238,175 $134,642 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
31 Utility Billing Computer System Replacement $8,400 $33,053 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
32 Subtotal - Miscellaneous Drainage Improvements $246,575 $167,695 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
33
34 Stormwater Management
35 Upper Goose Creek $10,700,000 $0 $0 $100,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $552,983
Stormwater Quality Improvements $0 $50,000 $53,045 $54,636 $56,275 $57,964 $59,703 $61,494
37 Broadway Storm Sewer $0 $900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
38 Storm Sewer Rehabilitation $0 $50,000 $53,045 $109,273 $112,551 $173,891 $179,108 $245,975
39 Boulder Transit Village $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
40 Boulder Transit Village - Bond Proceeds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
41 BVRC Redevelopment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Transportation Coordination $139,832 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $307,468
43 Subtotal - Localized Drainage Improvements $139,832 $1,250,000 $456,090 $913,909 $918,826 $981,855 $988,810 $1,167,919
44
TOTAL CAPITAL USES OF FUNDS $2,439,498 $11,399,663 $1,681,090 $2,863,909 $6,653,826 $2,381,855 $2,388,810 $2,795,368
46
6
LIST OF TIER 1 BUDGET PRIORITIES Attachment D
Ite Opportunity for Improvement Priority Business Costs Within Existing Budget Additional Resource Costs Savings Reflected in Budget
in # Level Plan Water L«N' Fund SN'P'/FM Water Fund N'tW Fund SW/FM Water WNN' Fund SW/FM
Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund
16 Consider conducting an energy audit to review 1-Savings Essential $0 $38,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S13,000 $0
new electrical demands as well as review current w/resources Service
sources and uses of energy - Energy audit wil be within budget
completed at ff,W7P.
23 Operations staff appears heavy at WTP. 24/7 1-Savings Essential $2,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S80,000 $0 $0
monitoring of distribution system by dedicated w/resources Service
operator seems excessive -An evaluation will be within budget
done. (related to 424)
24 Business case for night monitoring of distribution 1-Savings Essential $39,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S80,000 $0 $0
system, and both plants from Betasso should be w/resourrces Service
developed - Staff will evahiate. (Related to 423) within budget
12 Digitize project records to ensure information is 1-Savings Essential $13,000 $13,000 S6,500 $0 $0 $0 520,000 $20,000 $10,000
not lost and provide methods to easily access this w/resources Service
information. -A project tracking database and within budget
procedures has been implemented.
19 Management needs to make a business case for 1-Savings Essential $0 $1,440 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,000 $0
purchasing of environmental lab equipment and w/resources Service
continue to review analytical request to ensure within budget
only necessary and relevant work is completed -
"business case evahuation"will be done for metals
analysis work to see if in-house or outsourced.
22 Maintenance Computerized Maintenance and 1-Savings Essential $17,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 55,000 $0 $0
Management System (CMMS) not happening - w/resourrces Service
Staff started using system in Dec. 2008. within budget
26 Corrosion resistant bolts not always used on 1-Savings Essential $10,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 52.500 $0 $0
buried applications - city's design standards need w/resourrces Service
to be edited so new installations have this within budget
requirement.
9 Flexibility in replacement of lines should be used 1-Savings Desirable S8,000 $8,000 S4,000 $0 $0 $0 $16,000 516,000 58,000
to establish priorities - Implement improvements t w/resources Service
decision tool used to prioritiLe. within budget
11 Produce as-built drawings in a tinnelier nnanner so 1-Savings Desirable $13,000 $13,000 S6,500 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 $10,000
GIS maps can be accurately updated with new w/resources Service
facilities- staff has several ideas to address issue. within budget
A decision will be made during 1st quarter of
2009.
6 Supervisors need to observe practices of 2-No Essential $8,122 $8,122 $1,037 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
subordinates - consider increasing resources for additional Service
Health and Safety program. savings
13 Develop and implement procedure to ensure 2-No Essential $480 $480 $240 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
management and the public information office is additional Service
informed of shut-off, sewer overflows, breaks and savings
other emergency problems.- Staff will establish
procedures and write a Utilities Division policy.
15 Provide a system to include field collected data 2-No Essential $740 $5,180 $1,480 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
into the analysis and prioritization of line additional Service
replacement or rehabilitation.- Implement savings
separate asset management system which Utilities
Maintenance staff will provide data to mak
replacement decisions.
17 Integration of work groups will provide greater 2-No Essential $0 $17,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
effectiveness in operating the plant - Consider additional Service
teambirilding skills and training and cross- savings
workgroi p collaboration.
18 Plant management is working to establish goals 2-No Essential $0 $960 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
and a mission statement for the plant - additional Service
goals/mission statement has been completed savings
21 Limited conmrninication between maintenance sta 2-No Essential $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
and operations management - Consider additional Service
communication training and additional resources. savings
27 Field reports not recorded in electronic 2-No Essential $2,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
records/maps - June 2008, the Utilities Program additional Service
Planner started to scan all submitted "utility field savings
reports. "
29 Group needs to objectively make a business case 2-No Essential $4,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
for new programs/projects - staff will do additional Service
cost/benefit analysis to determine if in house or savings
out-sourced Currently analyzing source water
nutrient (related to 919)
4 Enact policy to adopt "near OSHA" standards - 2-No Essential $1,128 $1,128 $144 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Proposed that city adopt written policy that additional Service
utilities establish a goal of conforming to all savings
OSHA standards.
20 Reallocation of staffing roust be considered in 2-No Essential $0 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
order to operate the process economically and additional Service
effectively. - Staffing levels will be evaluated in savings
2009-2010 to determine optimal staffing for
Resources Recovery functions.
'Dollars in bold are considered ongoing. Red font is for savings that will reduce future budgets and no change in color is for savings that reduces the existing budget.
LIST OF TIER 1 BUDGET PRIORITIES Attachment D
Ite Opportunity for Improvement Priority Business Costs Within Existing Budget Additional Resource Costs Savings Reflected in Budget
m # Level Plan Water L«N' Fund SN'P'/Fl%l Water Fund N'tW Fund SW/FM Water WR' Fund SW/FM
Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund
14 Develop and implement procedure to ensure 2-No Essential $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
management and the public information office is additional Service
informed of shut-offs, SSOs, breaks and other savings
emergencies- Staff will establish procedures for
communicating urgent/emergency issues and
write a Utilities Division policy. (related to 413)
1 Full staff meetings are held annually with upper 2-No Desirable $192 $192 S96 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
management. It may be of value to all employees additional Service
to attend fall staff meetings semi-annually - Will savings
expand to semi-annual.
2 The roles and responsibilities for WRAB and 2-No Desirable $480 $480 $240 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
utility staff need to be better defined - review city additional Service
code responsibilities as to appropriate scope and savings
balance of board activities.
25 Field's new GIS is slow, hard to read and not 2-No Desirable $960 $960 $480 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
accurate. The older system is static and very additional Service
accurate - staff will evaluate ways to improve savings
speed and readability ofsystem.
28 Group needs to objectively analyze existing work 2-No Desirable $7,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
load as to what needs to be accomplished and what additional Service
is desirable to be done. - Through WQES, savings
program will develop work-plan in 2009.
43 Some work groups consistently over-nin thew 2-No Desirable $360 $360 $180 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
budgets. It is suggested these work groups be additional Service
required to stay in budgeted amounts or provide savings
written justification on why the budget must be
exceeded - Staff will develop a procedure in 2009
or reporting budget status and projected year-
end status.
3 Expand use of employee development plan within 2-No Discretion 5480 $480 $240 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
the evaluation system. -detail development plan additional ary Service
in the employee's 2009 annual Performance savings
Evaluation.
5 Improve safety & health program within all 3-Probable Essential $2,256 $2,256 $288 $23,500 $23,500 $3.000 $0 $0 $0
divisions - City's risk manager is working with his savings, but Service
staff to schedule training opportunities for need
speck work-groups. resources
7 Senior management needs to actively promote a 3-Probable Essential $2,707 $2,707 $346 $9,400 $9,400 $1,200 $0 $0 $0
safety culture - Currently, supervisors actively savings, but Service
spend time infield and attend safety trainings need
with staff. May need consider increasing resources
resources to Health and Safety program and hold
more conferences, seminars, and workshops.
10 High pressure pipeline right-of-ways not regularly 3-Probable Essential $900 $0 $0 $149,800 $0 $0 $195,750 $0 $0
inspected & maintained - Maintenance of water savings, but Service
transmission pipelines should be assigned to one need
group with resources. An O&Mplan for treated resources
water transmission pipelines should be developed.
8 Trainers need to be well versed and experienced in 3-Probable Essential $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
their subjects. Topics should be varied to ensure savings, but Service
all aspects are covered - Need to ensure that all need
training is done in professional manner and need resources
to continue to update list of available trainers.
TOTAL $137,005 $128,745 $21,770 $182,700 $32,900 $4,200 $419,250 $149,000 $28,000
*Dollars in bold are considered ongoing. Red font is for savings that will reduce future budgets and no change in color is for savings that reduces the existing budget.
City of Boulder Staffing Levels by Fund and Program Attachment E
TITLE FTE TITLE FTE TITLE FTE
Water Fund Wastewater Fund Stormwater/ Flood Fund
Administration 2.50 Administration 1.35 Administration 1.15
Director of Public Works 0.40 Director 0.35 Director 0.25
Financial Manager 0.35 Financial Manager 0.35 Financial Manager 0.30
Admin Specialist II 0.35 Admin Specialist II 0.35 Admin Specialist II 0.30
Project Admin. 0.40 Project Admin. 0.30 Project Admin. 0.30
Rate/Data Analyst 1.00
Billing Services 2.85 Billing Services 1.66 Billing Services 1.24
Supervisor 0.54 Supervisor 0.27 Supervisor 0.19
Representative 2.00 Representative 1.17 Representative 0.83
CIS Support 0.31 CIS Support 0.22 CIS Support 0.22
Support Services 0.76 Support Services 0.48
Communication Specialist 0.20 Communication Specialist 0.14 Support Services 0.53
Communication Coordinator 0.14 Communication Coordinator 0.10 Communication Specialist 0.16
Administrator 0.30 Administrator 0.15 Communication Coordinator 0.10
Admin Specialist II 0.12 Admin Specialist II 0.09 Administrator 0.15
Planning & Proj Management 5.76 Planning & Proj Management 1.95 Admin Specialist I 0.12
Draftsperson II 0.60 Draftsperson II 0.20
Engineering Project Manager 2.50 Engineering Project Manager 0.75
Admin Specialist I 0.29 Admin Specialist I 0.16 Planning & Proj Management 4.50
Admin Specialist II 0.19 Admin Specialist II 0.12 Draftsperson II 0.20
Admin Supervisor 0.18 Admin Supervisor 0.07 Engineering Project Manager 0.75
Senior Engineering Tech 2.00 Senior Engineering Tech 0.65 Greenways Coordinator 1.00
Water Resources Operations 2.00 Admin Specialist I 0.21
Water Resources Coordinator 1.00 Wastewater Quality Operations 4.12 Admin Specialist II 0.14
Water Source Specialist 1.00 Water Quality Planner 0.10 Admin Supervisor 0.10
Watershed Operations 2.00 Laboratory Supervisor 1.00 Senior Engineering Tech 0.35
Water Source Manager 1.00 Water Quality Coordinator 0.20 Flood Management Program 0.50
Water Source Operations 1.00 Laboratory Aide 0.50 Civil Engineer 0.75
Hydroelectric Operations 3.00 Water Quality Analyst 0.70 Maintenance Person II 0.50
Hydro Tech. II 2.00 Lead Water Quality Analyst 0.80
Hydroelectric Manager 1.00 Admin. Specialist I 0.20 Stormwater Quality Operations 3.72
Betasso WTP Operations 13.75 Analytical Chemist 0.50 Water Quality Planner 0.10
Industrial Mechanic 2.00 Watershed Educations Specialist 0.12 Water Quality Coordinator 0.20
Treatment Plant Supervisor 1.00 Water Quality Analyst 0.30
Plant Operator A 2.00 Industrial Pretreatment 3.66 Stormwater Quality Specialist 1.00
Industrial Mechanic 1.00 Water Quality Planner 0.10 Lead Water Quality Analyst 0.20
Admin. Specialist I 0.75 Pretreatment Inspector 1.00 Water Quality Inspector- Storage 1.00
Chief Plant Operator 5.00 Pretreatment Specialist 1.00 Admin. Specialist I 0.20
Process Optimization Specialist 1.00 Water Quality Coordinator 0.20 Analytical Chemist 0.30
Lead Mechanic 0.50 Admin Specialist I 0.20 Watershed Outreach Coor. 0.42
Treatment Plant Coor. 0.50 Watershed Out Reach Coor. 0.16
Bldr Res WTP Operations 9.25 Field Specialist 1.00 Stormwater Permit Compliance 1.76
Industrial Mechanic 1.00 Collection System Maintenance 13.95 Watershed Outreach Coor. 0.26
Chief Plant Operator 2.00 Maintenance Person I 3.00 Watershed Educations Specialist 1.50
Treatment Plant Supervisor 1.00 Maintenance Person II 1.00
Admin. Specialist I 0.25 Maintenance Person IV 1.80
Plant Operator D 1.00 Maintenance Person III 4.00
Lead Mechanic 0.50 Utility Maintenance Coor. 0.15 Storm Sewer Maintenance 4.75
Plant Operator A 2.00 Program Planner 0.55 Maintenance Person I 1.00
Treatment Plant Coordinator 0.50 Standby Utility 0.50 Maintenance Person II 0.40
Process Optimization Specialist 1.00 Maintenance Supervisor 0.80 Maintenance Person III 0.30
System Controls 3.00 Utility Locator 0.50 Maintenance Person IV 0.70
Electronics Tech II 2.00 TV Operator 1.00 Maintenance Supervisor 0.10
SCADA System Admin. 1.00 Material Supply Specialist 0.10 TV Operator 1.00
Water Quality Operations 6.83 Admin Specialist II 0.40 Utility Maintenance Coor. 0115
Water Quality Planner 0.10 Program Admin MGR 0.15 Program Planner 0115
Water Quality Project Manager 1.00 Meter Operations 0.64 Utility Locator 0.50
Water Source Operations Manager 2.00 Meter Service Tech. 0.48 Material Supply Specialist 0.10
Water Quality Coordinator 0.20 Meter Service Op Assistant 0.08 Admin. Specialist II 0.15
Drinking Water Quality Lab 1.00 Shop Water Meter Service Tech 0.08 Program Admin. MGR 0.15
Water Quality Inspector 1.00 Program Planner 0.15
Admin. Specialist I 0.20 Wastewater Operations 16.00
Laboratory Supervisor 1.00 Chief Plant Operator 5.00
Analytical Chemist 0.20 Treatment Plant Coordinator 1.00
Watershed Educations Specialist 0.13 Plant Operator A 4.00 Flood Channel Maintenance 2.55
Water Conservation 1.66 Plant Operator C 1.00 Maintenance Person II 1.05
Water Quality Planner 0.10 Plant Operator D 1.00 Maintenance Person III 0.50
Water Quality Coordinator 0.20 Admin. Specialist I 1.00 Maintenance Person IV 0.50
Program Specialist 1.00 Treatment Plant Supervisor 2.00 Maintenance Supervisor 0.50
Admin. Specialist I 0.20 Process Optimization Specialist 1.00
Watershed Outreach Coor. 0.16
Distribution System Maint 14.95 WWTP Maintenance 9.00 Flood Management 0.75
Maintenance Person I 1.00 Plant Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 Flood Mangmnt Program Manger 0.50
Maintenance Person II 2.00 Industrial Mechanic 2.00 Civil Engineer II 0.25
Maintenance Person III 3.00 Maintenance Person I 1.00
Maintenance Person IV 3.20 Maintenance Person II 2.00
Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 Maintenance Person III 2.00 Total Stormwater/Flood Utility 20.95
Utility Maintenance Coor 0.20 Electronics Tech. II 1.00
Program Planner 0.60 Cogeneration 1.00 TITLE FIE
Standby Utility 0.50 Cogeneration Tech 1.00
Utility Locator 1.00 Biosolids Recycling 1.25 Transportation
Material Supply Specialist 0.80 Resource Recover Specialist 0.25 Storm Sewer Maint - Trans. 0.80
Valve Operator 1.00 Lead Resource Recovery Operator 0.25 Total Transportation 0.80
Admin. Specialist II 0.45 Resources Reccovery Operator 0.75
Program Admin. MGR 0.20
Meter Operations 7.36 I Biosollds Processing 3.75 TOTAL STAFF
Meter Service Tech 5.52 Resource Recovery speclfist 0.75 FOR UTILITIES 156.23
Meter Service Operations 0.92 Lead Resource Recovery Op 0.75
Shop Water Meter Service Tech 0.92 Resource Recovery Operator 2.25
Total Water Utility 75.67 Total Wastewater Utility 58.81
Attachment F
SUMMARY OF THE 2010-2015
UTILITIES DIVISION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
June 10, 2009
OVERVIEW
The overall program and funding priorities are reflected in the staging and timing of projects
over the 6 year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) time period. The following primary factors
were considered in determining the overall program and funding priorities:
Water and Wastewater Utility
1. Reliability of water and wastewater collection, delivery and treatment
2. Water quality and other environmental regulations
3. Worker health and safety
4. Opportunity to collaborate with other city projects, i.e., transportation
5. Potential for operation and maintenance cost savings
6. Accommodating new growth and development
Stormwater and Flood Management Utility
1. Life safety (high hazard) mitigation
2. Flood emergency response capability
3. Critical facility (vulnerable population) hazard mitigation
4. Property damage mitigation
5. Collaboration with other Greenways Program Objectives
6. Potential for operation and maintenance cost savings
7. Accommodating new growth and development
No effort has been made in developing the CIP to target improvements in a certain geographic
area.
This overview memo is consistent with the Utilities Division preliminary budget
recommendations.
POLICY ISSUES
There are no policy issues related to the CIP this year.
HIGHLIGHTS
Highlights of the proposed CIP are as follows:
Water Utility
1. Funding for the next phase of improvements to the Betasso Water Treatment Facility
(WTF) has been delayed until the 2015-2016 time period. Water demands have not
1
increased significantly and the existing treatment processes should be adequate to meet
water demands in compliance with federal Safe Drinking Water Act regulations until that
time.
2. Funding for waterline replacement has been reduced. A recent staff analysis indicates
that a funding level of $2,100,000 (2008 dollars) should be sufficient to maintain the
current service level, as defined by water main breaks, over the next decade. Funding has
been adjusted to reflect anticipated construction costs inflation of 3 percent each year.
The replacement program is coordinated with the Transportation Division street overlay
and reconstruction program.
3. Funds have been budgeted for inspection and possible repair and rehabilitation of the
Lakewood Pipeline. Costs would be covered from the Lakewood Pipeline Remediation
Reserve.
Based on observations made during five internal inspections of Lakewood Pipeline Phase
III, immediate and/or extensive repair/remediation efforts are not necessary and
monitoring and internal inspections will occur at two-year intervals. The next internal
inspection of the pipeline is scheduled for the fall of 2009. Staff is also in the process of
developing repair, rehabilitation and replacement alternatives and formulating
recommendations concerning a long range plan. Reports on the 2009 inspection and the
alternatives analysis will likely be completed in early 2010. The budget
recommendations reflect a possible remediation project in 2012 of $1.2 million. This
anticipates that the work in 2009 (corrosion rate study, pipe inspection and review of
rehabilitation technologies) may result in a project to plan and design in 2010-2011 and
construct in 2012. The most likely pilot remediation plan would involve relining the
pipeline rather than removal and replacement.
4. Barker Gravity Pipeline is a critical component of the city's source water system because
it conveys the city's Barker Reservoir/Middle Boulder Creek water to Betasso WTF.
Stored water from Barker Reservoir and direct flows from Middle Boulder Creek are
used to meet approximately 35 percent of the city's annual water needs. The city has, as
part of an ongoing maintenance effort, already replaced and rehabilitated segments of the
11-mile Barker Gravity Pipeline that showed the most degradation or highest likelihood
of failure. The city should continue its annual maintenance program, prioritizing based on
the most critical needs, and also consider providing enough cover to protect the pipeline,
and anchor the pipeline in areas prone to landslides or other damaging events. Section
replacement or lining are options that may each work well in different parts of the
pipeline. The city should coordinate with the USFS concerning maintenance activities on
federal land. The projected funds will allow for continued minor rehabilitation efforts
(repair of leaks, siphons, etc, as has been done over the past several years) and an
evaluation of a pilot replacement/lining project through 2014. In 2015 when additional
funds are available, the city can potentially begin a full scale replacement/lining
project.
2
5. The Barker Dam outlet works should be replaced within the next seven to 10 years as
recommended in the S WMP to eliminate the need to empty the reservoir for gate
inspection. A design for outlet works replacement was completed by GEI, and initial bids
were received in 2002. The cost of the outlet works replacement could be substantially
reduced by eliminating one of the proposed microtunnels.
6. Funding for construction of the proposed Carter Lake Pipeline has been delayed until the
2016-2017 time period. Funding of the pipeline in the nearer term without Federal
funding assistance would have a significant impact on water rates. Staff continues to
recommend the pipeline as the best long-term solution to water quality, operational and
security vulnerability issues related to drawing water directly from the Boulder Feeder
Canal and Boulder Reservoir. By delaying the schedule for pipeline construction, more
time is available to secure Federal funding assistance.
7. Funding for the automated meter reading project is recommended for the accelerated
replacement of the meter's transponders. The original transponders are not lasting as
long as originally projected. The recommended funding is $500,000 for 5 years 2009-
2013.
8. A "Future Capital Project Reserve" is reflected in the staff-recommended Water Fund
Financial in an amount of $1.9 million. This reserve would be available to fund or offset
funding for future large capital projects that would likely require the issuance of bonds.
Wastewater Utility
1. Funding for the 75th Street Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) Ultraviolet (UV)
Disinfection project has been maintained at $4,400,000 in the 2010 CIP. The UV
disinfection project will replace the plant's gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide systems,
representing a significant safety upgrade. The UV Disinfection system design was
originally a component of the 2006/2008 WWTF Liquid Stream Upgrades project.
Because of funding limitations, the city was not able to award that bid item in the
construction contract. Funds have been budgeted during the 2009-2010 time period for
the design and construction phases respectively. It is anticipated that bonds will need to
be issued to fund the construction of this project.
2. Funding for the 75th Street WWTF Biosolids Digester project has been reduced from
$7,800,000 to $4,000,000 in the 2010 CIP. The plant's digestion process is old and is
experiencing various problems and limitations associated with the following: capacity,
poor mixing, poor operational flexibility, lack of redundancy, and aging electrical and
mechanical facilities. Carollo Engineers recently completed a comprehensive digester
evaluation which presented various digester process modifications ranging in cost
between $2,000,000 and $10,000,000. City staff is evaluating the various alternatives to
determine which improvements will best address the plant's critical needs over both the
short-term and long-term. The digester alternatives will also be evaluated relative to
other high priority WWTF needs including UV Disinfection and Headworks
improvements. Funds have been budgeted during the 2009-2010 time period for the
3
design and construction phases respectively. It is anticipated that bonds will need to be
issued to fund the construction of this project.
3. Funding for the 75th Street WWTP Headworks Improvements project has been pushed
back one year from 2014/2015 to 2015/2016 because of funding limitations in the 6-year
CIP. The CIP currently has design and construction funds of $1,560,000 and
$15,600,000 identified in 2015 and 2016 respectively for a new headworks facility. The
headworks facility is old, and plant staff recently experienced significant operational
difficulties when one of the key headworks processes failed during an April 2009 wet
weather event. The headworks facility is comprised of four major processes including the
following: screenings removal, grit removal, screenings and grit washing and
classification, and HVAC. Carollo Engineers is in the process of completing a
comprehensive headworks evaluation to identify various individual process upgrades as
an alternative to the new facility identified in the 2015/2016 funding. Based on the
completed headworks analysis, city staff will incorporate potential headworks
improvements projects into the 2011 CIP.
4. Funding for the Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation projects has been reduced to $530,000 in
the 2010 CIP. Utilities funded the sanitary sewer rehabilitation line item at $300,000,
$625,000 and $720,000 in 2006, 2007, and 2008 respectively. Utilities staff has
addressed a significant number of the sanitary sewer collection system's highest priority
problems through this effort. The 2009 sanitary sewer rehabilitation CIP funding is
$800,000. Based on a recent analysis evaluating the sewer collection system facilities
"useful life", city staff will be reducing the sanitary sewer rehabilitation line item budget
to $500,000 (in 2008 value, escalated at 3% annually) for the CIP as being adequate for
the rehabilitation projects.
5. Funding for the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (WWCSMP) projects has
been deferred in the Wastewater Utility Fund CIP. The WWCSMP identified numerous
potential collection system projects based on hydraulic deficiency. The WWCSMP
identified four Tier 1 (highest priority) projects and seven Tier 2 (second highest priority)
projects for recommended collection system improvements. The estimated cost (in 2009
dollars) for the Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects was $5,000,000 and $23,000,000 respectively.
Additionally, the Master Plan identified ten Tier 3 (lowest priority) projects with an
estimated cost of $4,000,000. The recommended collection system projects do not
represent the equivalent high priority of the WWTF projects, therefore, the collection
system projects have been moved outside of the six-year (2010-2015) CIP.
Stormwater and Flood Management Utility
1. It is recommended that money be budgeted and allocated for flood mitigation work along
Fourmile Canyon Creek and Wonderland Creek. The flood mitigation planning process is
nearing an end and a decision regarding the flood mitigation approach for these two
streams should be made by city council in 2009. The proposed work is comprised of
multiple individual projects that allow funding to be spread out over the next 20-30 years.
The city will prioritize those projects that have the most significant benefit from either a
4
life safety or property damage mitigation perspective and are within the incorporated city
limits. Projects that provide multiple benefits and allow the city to leverage funding with
private developers or other agencies such as the Denver Regional Council of
Governments (DRCOG) Transportation Improvement Project (TIP) funding will also be
prioritized. One of these projects is envisioned to be a new culvert and pedestrian
underpass at the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad and Boulder White Rocks
Ditch just upstream of Foothills Parkway on Wonderland Creek. The city applied for TIP
funding for this project and although the project did not make the first funding cut it is
still possible the city will receive matching funds. All projects will be closely coordinated
with the city's Greenways Program and Transportation Division. Land acquisition will be
required to support this project.
2. Money has been allocated for future flood mitigation design and construction for South
Boulder Creek. Funding for flood mitigation planning has already been appropriated and
the planning work will begin in 2009.
On March 25, 2009, FEMA notified the city of Boulder that it intends to officially adopt
(effective January 2010) the revised floodplain mapping that resulted from the South
Boulder Creek flood mapping study. The new floodplain mapping will be used as the
basis for the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that establishes minimum regulatory
floodplain boundaries under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and federal
mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements. The adoption process for the study
results will coincide with the adoption of the related Digital FIRM for Boulder County.
It is anticipated that the focus of the mitigation work will be to mitigate the impacts of
flooding in the West Valley, where flood impacts were previously not identified and
substantial urban development has since occurred. It is also important that flood
mitigation planning be coordinated with the U.S. 36 Corridor Improvements-
Environmental Impact Statement. The city is also pursuing Federal funding for this
project. It is recommended that money be budgeted in 2009-2011 to support this work.
3. It is recommended that money be budgeted for flood mitigation design and construction
for Gregory Canyon Creek. A recent analysis indicates that several structures could be
removed from the high hazard zone based on drainageway and culvert improvements
near Pennsylvania Ave.
FINANCING
Each of the city's utility funds is established as a separate enterprise fund designed to finance
and account for each utility's facilities and services. Funding for the Utilities Division capital
improvement program is derived primarily from monthly utility fees. In addition to the monthly
utility fees, significant revenue sources include Plant Investment Fees (PIFs), from new
development or redevelopment and hydroelectric sales to Xcel Energy. Sales from monthly
utility fees can be variable and reflect the overall growth of the service area and yearly weather
fluctuations.
5
Other revenue sources include reimbursements from the Urban Drainage & Flood Control
District (for stormwater/ flood management projects), Colorado Department of Transportation
(CDOT) state and federal grants, and revolving loans from the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment (none anticipated at this time). These revenues are project specific and
are highly variable depending on the external agency's funding situation and priorities.
Currently, the following projects are anticipated to qualify for such revenues:
• Preflood Acquisition
• Wonderland Creek
• Fourmile Canyon Creek
• South Boulder Creek
If the above mentioned funds are insufficient, projects will be funded by issuing revenue bonds
with the debt service financed by general utility charges. For the years 2010-2015, it is
anticipated that new bonds will be issued for the following projects:
Wastewater:
• Biosolids Digester Improvements ($4.0 million, 2010)
• Ultraviolet Disinfection System ($4.4 million, 2010)
Stormwater/Flood Management:
South Boulder Creek Floodplain Improvements ($3 million, 2012)
Construction Cost Inflation
Construction cost inflation is tracked using the Engineering News Record (ENR) Cost Index for
Denver and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Colorado Construction Cost
Index. The ENR index is a composite index based on costs for: 1) local portland cement, 2) local
2x4 lumber, 3) national structural steel, and 4) local union wages plus fringes for carpenters,
bricklayers and iron workers. The CDOT index is a composite index based on costs for 1)
unclassified excavation, 2) hot bituminous pavement 3) concrete pavement, 4) structural steel
and 5) reinforcing steel.
The ENR index indicates construction costs have increased 18 percent during the past five years;
the CDOT index indicates an increase of over 110% percent during the same period of time.
These cost increases are greater than the 25 year average 3 percent construction cost inflation
rate based on the ENR index (comparable data for the CDOT index is not available) and have
had a dramatic affect on the ability of the city to accomplish needed project work.
The ENR index is more reflective of equipment and building construction such as at the
treatment plants. The Colorado cost index is more reflective of heavy civil construction such as
roadway and major drainageway work. Construction cost inflation has a dramatic affect on the
cost of future project work and has been accounted for in the cost of future projects under the
assumption of a future 3 percent yearly construction cost inflation rate.
6
Cummulative Percent Change in ENR Cost Index for Denver
20.00°ra
18.00°ro 18.35°/o I
16.00°0
14.59%
14.00%
c
m
r
12.00°'.
m 10.69°..-0
E 10.90%
E
67°io
8.00%0
c
a
u
m
a Uo%
4.00%
2.00°/.
0.00°fu
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Cummulative Percent Change in CDOT Colorado Construction Cost Index
120.009'0
114.05°6
l OD.OOorO
m
c 8D.00°f.
r 75.58%
U
v
-48%
F 60.00°.'.
F_
U
C
d
U
40.00%
a
20.00°'.
8.81 %
000%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
7
RELATIONSHIP TO THE OPERATING BUDGET/ REVENUE INCREASES
Utilities Division staff will complete the evaluation of the proposed CIP on rates in conjunction
with the development of the 2010 operating budget. The large expenditures associated with the
CIP are a major factor that leads to staff recommended rate increases in the future. Various rate
increase scenarios are being evaluated as part of the development of the 2010 operating budget
in accordance with the city's business plan methodology. For the staff recommended plan, the
associated rate increases are currently projected as follows:
• Water Utility: 2010 - 3 percent
• Wastewater Utility: 2010 - 2 percent
• Stormwater and Flood Management Utility: 2010 - 1 percent
The proposed 2010 revenue increases would increase a typical residential customer's annual
utility bill by approximately $17.00, or an increase of approximately $1.40 per month.
BUSINESS PLAN
The business plan is intended to be a link between the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
(BVCP), master plans/strategic plans, subcommunity and area plans, and annual budgets. Master
and strategic plans are developed consistent with the policies, plans, and population and
employment projections outlined in the BVCP. They provide a common city framework for
planning the delivery and funding of services, facilities, and programs. The facility and service
priorities and funding plan strategies established through the master and strategic planning
process provide the basis for operational budgeting and capital improvement programming.
Master Planning is an element of the decision making process for proposed CIP projects.
Historically, master plans focused on service area growth and its impact on related utility
infrastructure needs. At this point in time, growth is not as important an issue as the need to
rehabilitate and address deficiencies in the existing infrastructure. Identification of these issues
occurs on an on-going basis and is documented in the Utilities Division Annual Reports as well
as on-going studies and reports.
Master plan summaries are provided in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and were
recently updated. At this point in time existing master plans provide an adequate basis from
which to formulate the CIP in conjunction with other information. The Treated Water Master
Plan was updated in 2000 and the Source Water Master Plan was accepted by City Council in
early 2009. The updated Wastewater Collection System Master Plan and Wastewater Utility
Master Plan were recommended for acceptance by the WRAB in early 2009 and it is anticipated
these will be accepted by City Council in late 2009. The Comprehensive Flood and Stormwater
(CFS) Master Plan was updated in 2004 and the Stormwater Master Plan was completed in 2007.
The relationship of each CIP project to the master plans and studies is presented in the detailed
project descriptions. The Utilities Division will update these master plans consistent with the
city's Business Plan over the next several years. The Business Plan calls for a separate master
plan for each of the Utilities Division three restricted funds.
Recent changes to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan including land use designations are
8
not extensive and so no major changes to existing Utilities Division master plans are required.
Aspects that are more important to the Utilities Division CIP planning include the rate of
deterioration of existing infrastructure as well as changes in water related regulations and
technologies.
The city's business plan methodology calls for the formulation of the following scenarios:
1. Fiscally Constrained Plan
2. Action Plan
3. Vision Plan
ADVISORY BOARD ACTION
The preliminary CIP was discussed at the Water Resource Advisory Board (WRAB) on May 18,
2009, during which the WRAB requested that an additional revenue option be explored by City
staff. At the June 15 meeting, WRAB is considering a final recommendation on the proposed
2010-2015 CIP.
9
Attachment G
2009 COMPARISON OF WATER AND WASTEWATER
BILLS IN FRONT RANGE COMMUNITIES
(sorted by Total Annual Bill)
Total
Annual Bill Annual Bill Bill
Community Water Wastewater Annual
Erie 650.55 414.48 1,065.03
Colorado Springs 572.03 359.17 931.20
Aurora 724.68 188.40 913.08
Westminster 477.30 231.60 708.90
Fort Collins 409.13 288.12 697.25
Greeley 426.60 244.20 670.80
Broomfield 440.88 196.80 637.68
Thornton 431.40 195.12 626.52
Boulder - 2010 374.32 244.56 618.88
Arvada 387.88 216.24 604.12
Boulder -2009 363.85 239.52 603.37
Northglenn 384.05 171.00 555.05
Longmont 333.48 221.04 554.52
Lafayette 361.88 138.84 500.72
Louisville 311.07 172.08 483.15
Denver 333.69 128.16 461.85
These figures are based on a survey of water and wastewater rates of Front Range
Communities conducted in April of 2009. They represent the annual water and wastewater
bills for a typical single-family, inside-city, residential customer with an average winter
consumption of 5,000 gallons, total annual water consumption of 120,000 gallons and
irrigable area of 5,200 square feet.