The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutResolution 05-97 Water RatesRESOLUTION NO. 5-97 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY TESOUNCIL OF MCCALL, AND PROVIDING AN EFFDECTOIVE DATE. CUSTOMER CLASSES; SETTING WATER WHEREAS, the City of McCall owns and operates a municipal water system to provide potable water for use by citizens and others. WHEREAS, the costs and expenses associated with the operation and maintenance of that system must be paid from fees paid by water users. WHEREAS, on August 31, 1993, the voters of the City of McCall approved the issuance of $9.99 Million in water revenue bonds for the purpose of constructing facilities to improve the treatment and distribution of water and to meet the obligations imposed by unfunded federal mandates. WHEREAS, the bond purchasers have required certain covenants by the city to ensure that system revenues are sufficient to meet the costs of operation, maintenance and to make the annual debt service payments on the bonds. WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council desire to establish rates that are equitable and encourage water conservation. WHEREAS, the current water rates are insufficient to operate and maintain the system, to meet the annual debt service requirements on the voter -approved bonds outstanding and to meet the city's covenants with its bondholders. WHEREAS, the current water rates do not encourage conservation and thereby increase the size and capacity of the facilities needed for water treatment and delivery. WHEREAS, on May 22, 1997, the City Council held a public hearing at which all members of the public were afforded the opportunity to comment on the proposed rates and all persons desiring to comment were heard. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Mayor and Council, as follows: Section 1: That customer classes be defined as follows: Sing/e Family Residence means a structure intended for occupation by a single family and includes the customary cooking, eating, washing and bathroom facilities. Included in this definition are multiple -family residences and manufactured homes where water consumption be separately measured for each unit and the owner and occupant of each unit is required to execute a contract with the city providing for separate billing for each unit. Multiple Family Residence means a collection of residences, including manufactured homes, under single ownership or where the responsibility of paying for water services rests with a single entity such as a homeowner's association. Non-residentia/means all customers not defined above. Mixed Use means an entity where both residential and non-residential customers are served by the same water meter. Section 2: The water rates by customer class are hereby set as shown below: Water Rates Customer Class Monthly Minimum Bill Plus $3.00 for each 1,000 Gallons in excess of: Single Family Residences and Multiple - Family Developments with separate meters including manufactured housing developments $20.00 5,000 Gallons Multiple -Family Developments without separate meters including manufactured housing developments $20.00 per unit 5,000 Gallons per unit Non -metered Residential $29.00 per unit NA All non-residential users -separately metered. $29.00 8,000 Gallons Non-residential units where more than one entity is served by the same meter. $29.00 per entity 8,000 Gallons per entity Non -metered Commercial $65.00 pre unit NA Mixed Use Buildings where both residences and non -residences are served by the same water meter $20.00 per residential unit and $29.00 per commercial unit. 5,000 gallons per residential unit and 8,000 per commercial unit. Section 3: This resolution shall be in full force and effect on and after June 1, 1997. PASSED AND APPROVED this 22d day of May 1997. ATTEST: James H. Henderson, City Clerk 1Nilliam M. Killen, Mayor Publisher's Affidavit of Publication STATE OF IDAHO .SS County of Valley I, Leslie S. Freyer, being duly sworn and say, I am the receptionist of The Central Idaho Star -News, a weekly newspaper published at McCall, in the County of Valley, State of Idaho; that said newspaper is in general circulation in the county of aforesaid and is a legal newspaper; that the NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, a copy of which is enclosed hereto and is a part hereof, was published in said newspaper once alweek for one week in the regular and entire issue of every number there of during the period of time of publication, and was published in the newspaper proper and not in a supplement; and that publication of suph notice began May 8, 1997 and ended May 8, 1997. �• Subscribed a STATE OF HO COUNTY OF VALLEY efora this the 16th day of May, 1997. On this 16th day of April, in the year of 1997, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Leslie S. Freyer, known or identified to me to be the person whose name subscribed to the within instrument, and being by me first duly sworn, declared that the statements therein are true, and acknowl- edged to me that she executed the same. ToGrote Notary Public for Idaho Residing at McCall, Idaho Commission Expires: 1999 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WATER AND GOLF FEE INCREASES NOTICE IS HEREBY given that the McCall I City Council will hold a public hearing on Thursday, May 22, 1997 at 7:15 p.m. for the purpose •of hearing ,public testimony on the following proposed fee increases that exceed' one hundred five percent (105%) of that previ- ously charged to some users and to explain the reasons for such increase: Golf Course Green Fees are proposed to be increased for the purpose of paying the annual! debt service on a loan obtained to install irriga, tion improvements. Water User Fees are proposed to be in- creased to accommodate the costs of operating' the water treatment plant and to meet the annual i debt service costs on the Water Revenue Bonds approved by the voters in 1993. Copies of the proposed fees and supporting documents are available for inspection at City; Hall during regular business hours. The above public hearing will be held in the' City Council Chambers, lower level of City Hall, 216 East Park Street, McCall. Dated: This 6th Day of May 1997. James H. Henderson, City Clerk, 2t5/15 w A=1:21 CI, 0-4P-w au° CL, rialmw Cro AP Cr, City of McCall Municipal Water System Rate Analysis Table of Contents Introduction Background -Water Master Plan - Water Revenue Bonds -Project Status Water Consumption Analysis - Objectives of the Analysis -Methodology -Data Collection -Analysis Financial Analysis - General -Objectives Development of Water Rate Alternatives -Findings - Recommendation Table of Figures and Tables Page 1 1 1 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 7 7 8 8 9 12 Pate Figure 1 - Mean Residential Consumption Distribution 6 Figure 2 - Mean Monthly Commercial 7 Water Use Table 1 - Residential Water Usage Frequency Distribution Statistics 6 Table 2 - Commercial Water Usage Frequency Distribution Statistics 7 Alternative 1 10 Alternative 2 11 l INTRODUCTION - The City of McCall is empowered to own and operate a domestic water system and impliedly to charge rates for the benefits of the system. The system's only -" source of income is the user fees charged for water consumption and connection fees. Therefore, .the rate structure must provide sufficient funds to pay the costs of the system. While user`fees are collected after a connection is made, the system must be constructed before there can be any users. Consequently, some sort of debt fi- nancing is virtually inevitable. User fees are used to pay off this debt as well as to pay the operating costs of the system. In addition, the owners of property connected to or near municipal water systems enjoy increased value and utility of that property even before any consumption takes place. As previously reported to the council, the city did not meet its rate covenants to its water revenue bond holders in that the revenue generated by the system was less than the 120% debt coverage target in covenants. This report will examine user behavior, operating and debt service costs and other factors in order to de- termine an appropriate and equitable rate. First, a review of events over the last ten years will illustrate just how far we have come with the water system. Secondly, the recent installation of meters for most residential and commercial customers now enables us to analyze more closely customer behavior. Third, the projection of costs, particularly with respect to the water treatment plant presents a challenge since we have no historical informa- tion. Fourth, allocating costs by function enables us to analyze not only the sys- tem as a whole, but to examine the various facilities that make up the system. Finally, these discussions will lead to a recommended rate structure whereby the revenue and other objectives can be met. BACKGROUND Water Master Plan In 1987,J-U-B Engineers, Inc. was commissioned to prepare a Water Master Plan which would address mounting pressure problems and fireflow shortfalls. A preliminary plan was presented to the city council late in 1988. This preliminary plan basically consisted of an assessment of the current system, a list of project ' Section 50-323, Idaho Code Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 1 priorities and a mention of an upcoming federal regulation respecting the treat- ment of surface water. The council gave direction to proceed and to address the question of treatment. There were several concepts discussed. Eventually, a plan that provided stor- age at elevation on both the east and west sides of the city, a 350 gpm well near the airport as well as sizing enhancements was approved in concept. The cost of a treatment plant was estimated to be $1.3 Million. The council directed staff to address the financial options and the rate implica- tions of each option. At the same time, rates were increased from $6.00 per month to`$9.50 to deal with existing funding deficiencies. A water rate study was completed and presented in March 1990 and a recommendation was made to issue long term debt (bonds). Because accurate cost estimates were still being developed, the council elected to pursue short term financing to deal with the more urgent system problems. No rate change was made at that time. The council used a competitive process to select engineers to design the com- plete project. A consortium of James M. Montgomery (now Montgomery Wat- son) and Toothman Orton was selected. The question of whether or not suffi- cient ground water was available was addressed. While the engineers noted the existence of a single 350 gpm well in Mile High Estates, they determined that the likelihood of drilling a sufficient number of productive wells which could pro- duce the necessary 4,000 gpm purely from groundwater was very poor and would be more costly than treating the water from Payette Lake. In 1991 as more information became available, council directed staff to again address finances and rates. A second rate study was completed and presented in November 1991. Again, the recommended option was to issue a $4 million bond and to raise the rates to around $24 per commercial customer and $22 per residential customer. As more detailed study and design work were completed, it became clear that the earlier estimates were far short of what the actual project costs would be. Toothman-Orton presented its "Recommended Plan" with an estimated price tag of $17 Million. A the same time T-O presented a "Priority Plan" that contained what was felt to be the most important elements at an estimated cost of $13.6 Million. Upon hearing this, council directed T-O to return with a plan that cost less than $10 million. This plan was called the "Minimum Project" and was esti- mated to cost $9.5 Million. It should also be noted that the estimated cost of the treatment plant portion of the minimum project was $4.7 Million. Considering this report, the council elected to ask the voters to approve the issuance of $9.99 Mil- lion in revenue bonds to finance the Minimum Project. Please see Exhibit "A" that is an extract of Section 8 of the Montgomery Watson - Toothman Orton revi- sion of the Water Master Plan. Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 2 Water Revenue Bonds At a special city election on August 31, 1993, voters approved the issuance of $9.99 Million in Water Revenue Bonds by a vote of 267 in favor of the issue and 161 against. Considering these results, the engineers began design work in preparation for calling for bids on the various aspects of the Minimum Project. At the same time the city staff began preparations to advertise and sell the bonds. Further study indicated that the projects would take some time to com- plete. Therefore the council decided to issue the bonds in two phases, thereby avoiding the interest charges on funds that could not yet be used. The first increment of Water Revenue Bonds in the face amount of $5 Million was sold to Seattle -Northwest Securities Corporation on September 9, 1995 with a net effective interest rate of 6.21 % over twenty years. The bond proceeds were invested in various short-term securities to maximize interest earnings until needed to pay project costs. Funds were expended as needed and in 1996 the council decided to sell the last increment of bonds. The last increment of Water Revenue Bonds in the face amount of $4.99 Million were also sold to Seattle -Northwest Securities Corporation of Idaho on August 1, 1996 with a net effective interest rate of 5.77% over twenty years. These funds were also invested in short-term securities until needed. Please see Exhibit "B" for a repayment schedule for both bond issues. Project Status Projects were designed in three major parts: (1) Water distribution improve- ments; (2) Pump station modifications; and (3) Water Treatment Plant. The water distribution project contract was awarded to MASCO, Inc., which bid $2.1 Million and was the low bidder. This project began in the spring of 1995 and was completed during the summer of 1996. The Pump station modification contract was awarded to Ross Enterprises of Jerome, Idaho which bid $410,500. This project is presently about 50% com- plete. The low bidder on the Water Treatment Plant was Contractors Northwest, Inc., which bid $6.7 Million. Montgomery Watson estimated the cost as designed would be about $4.2 Million. The lowest bid amount was significantly above both the engineer's estimate and the funds available. Therefore the city was forced to scale back the project. This eventually ended with a contract in the amount of $3.7 Million with Contractors Northwest. The water treatment plant project is Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 3 now more than 97% complete and all bond proceeds are projected to be ex- pended on the remaining project costs. WATER CONSUMPTION ANALYSIS A part of the project design and bond funding estimates included the installation of water meters on all services. This project has proceeded for the past two years. At this point approximately 75% of all residences have meters installed. This has permitted a more detailed analysis of usage patterns than has been possible in the past. Objectives of the Analysis Information respecting overall system demands has been collected for more than 15 years. This information has been used extensively by the city's engineers to assess the adequacy of the system and to develop plans for. future improve- ments. This information has also been used by staff to analyze individual cus- tomer usage patterns by making inferences from the overall demand patterns. First Objective -- Assess Overall System Demand Patterns The first objective of this undertaking was to assess the overall demand factors and how they change overtime. Exhibit "C" illustrates the large differences in demand among the various months of the year. The reader will note that de- mand in August is nearly four times the demand in April. Since it is the heaviest demand that must be used for planning the size of the system, the city's engi- neers recommended the installation of meters to help contain the demand during the summer months. The number of customers has increased over the years; however, there are other factors that influence total system demand. While the demand trend has increased steadily over the years, from 380 million gallons in 1990 to 420 million gallons in 1996, there are years where the demand falls as much as 15% above or below the smoothed trend line. In 1994, for example the consumption was 478 million gallons. Clearly growth in the customer base is not the only factor influencing demand. Second Objective -- Assess Customer Demand Patterns The city has lacked detailed information respective individual (particularly resi- dential) customer usage. In 1990, there were few residences that had meters and those were atypical homes since meters were only installed in newly build homes. The 1990 rate study basically, determined the usage by commercial customers who had meters installed, subtracting that and other known usage, such as the golf course irrigation, from the total water demand. The result was then divided by the number of customers. This led to an assumed residential Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 4 r usage of 14,500 gallons per customer per month. Later analysis has shown that this figure to be remarkably accurate given the lack of account measurement data. The objective of this analysis is to determine residential usage from metered us- age and to determine not only the average consumption but also how the usage varies from customer -to -customer and from month -to -month. Methodology Data Collection Data concerning the system -wide demand patterns has been collected for some 15 years. Data from the last five years was used to determine the average con- sumption for each calendar month as well as to confirm the assumed system growth. Residential Usage Data. The residential usage pattern was derived from some 213 single family residences. The criteria used to select these accounts was: (1) that the account must have a meter reading history, (2) the accounts selected be representative of the different geographic areas of the city, and (3) the accounts be representative of older and newer developments. The selected sample of 213 represents approximately 10% of the entire customer base. Not all of the residences under study had meter reading data for the entire two year study period of January 1995 through December 1996. Where no reading was available, the variable was treated as a missing value and ignored in any computation of summary data. In cases where a meter reading was taken and no usage observed the usage was recorded as zero. In other instances where the water to a given residence had been turned off, the usage for that month was given as a missing value and ignored. Said another way, if the customer re- ceived a bill for that month, the usage (or lack of usage) was recorded and used in the analysis. If there was no bill for that month, the lack of usage was ignored. Summary statistical data was computed during the course of data input to de- termine if the summary data changed significantly as additional cases were added. The summary data remained fairly constant after the first sixty cases were entered. A second test of sampling adequacy was conducted by compar- ing the average usage per calendar month with the overall system delivery pat- tern described above. The month by month usage patterns of the sample group replicated, on a smaller scale of course, the usage pattern of the entire system. This again indicated that the sample of 213 was a microcosm of the entire cus- tomer base. Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 5 Commercial Usage Data A much higher percentage of the system's 197 com- mercial users have had meters install for a much longer period of time. Pres- ently, only commercial users are charged on the basis of consumption. There was much more manual selection of the commercial users because there is a wide variation in consumption rates among the various consumers and we wanted to be sure that the selections were representative. We also validated this representation by the averages computed by dividing the total consumption of this class by the number of commercial accounts. Analysis The analysis quickly extracted a mean residential usage of just under 12,000 gallons per customer per month and mean commercial usage of just approxi- mately 47,000 per customer per month. As is often the case, the mean only pre- sents part of the picture. As illustrated in Figure 1, when one examines the fre- quency distribution, that is, the number of observations of each value arranged on a scale, lowest to highest, one finds a significant skewness to the left. This indicates that the distribution tends to be concentrated lower than the mean. In fact the statistics show that 25% of the users in the sample use less than 5,000 and fully 50% use less than 8,000 gallons. Figure 1 Mean Residential Consumption Distribution 40 30 20 10 0 nl�i# ,4 t ktt S�N V.p. 'Z t` ., s t r .S 0 O Std. Dev =11.68 Mean =11.8 N = 208.00 2S dO ,PS. PD FS. SO S,y. 6`O 6'S •O •O •O •O •O •O •O •O •O •O •O •O MEAN1996 The vertical axis reflects the number of customers — The horizontal axis reflects water consumption in thou- sands of gallons Mean Table 1 Residential Water Usage Frequency Distribution Statistics Std Deviation 11,796 11,681 First Quartile 4,350 Median Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 6 7,914 Third Quartile 14,998 Figure 2 illustrates that the same skewness exists with commercial customers as well. The statistical information in Table 2 shows that 25% of the sample use less than 8,000 gallons and 50% less than 20,000. It is important to take this information into consideration when determining an appropriate rate, especially the minimum monthly rate. 50 40 30 20 10 0 Figure 2 Mean Monthly Commercial Water Use Std. Dev = 109.06 Mean = 47.5 N = 73.00 00 `r 0 '00 <I' 200 DSO 000 OSO A00 VSO S00 SSO S00 sS0 "00 DSO SOO OSO '900 •0 •0 •0 •0 •O. •0 •O •0 •0 •0 •0 •0 •0 •0 O •0 O COM96MEA The vertical axis reflects the number of customers - The horizontal axis reflects water consumption in thou- sands of gallons Mean Table 2 Commercial Water Usage Frequency Distribution Statistics Std Deviation f First Quartile 4I 47,72 Median 109,055 7,741 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 19,083 Third Quartile 50,667 General McCall's water utility is a proprietary element of the city government. From a fi- nancial standpoint is a separate entity (as are the sewer system, golf course and airport). The costs of operation, maintenance, and capital improvement are paid by various kinds of user fees. The most common and the largest source is the monthly rate charged to daily water users. Current Rate The current water rate was established in 1992 based on revenue and cost projections through 1997. Those projections were based on servicing a $4 million in Water Revenue Bonds. The monthly rates are as follows: Residential Rate: $22.00 per Equivalent Domestic Unit Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 7 Commercial Rate: $24.00 per customer plus $0.60/1,000 gallons used (over 3,000 gallons) One exception to the above is that manufactured housing developments are treated as commercial customers. Other types of multiple -unit housing are charged the residential rate times the number of units. Projections and Assumptions One important element in establishing an equita- ble rate is to consider that the system will grow in terms of the number of cus- tomers. Therefore both the revenue potential and the incremental costs will in- crease. Unit prices of cost elements will rise over time. The cost elements will increase at different rates. The system growth rate and the incremental costs are projected to generally in- crease at a rate of 3%. Elements related to salaries and water treatment chemi- cals are expected to increase at a rate of 5% per year. These are based on past experience as well as the fact that water treatment now requires more chemicals. Debt Service Our bond covenants require that we set and maintain rates that will generate sufficient revenue to (1) pay the operating costs of the system, (2) pay the annual debt service costs of the system plus an additional 20% of the annual debt service. This "extra" 20% may be used for capital improvements. Objectives The rate established should meet a number of objectives that are: First, to produce sufficient revenues to operate the system and to meet the city's revenue covenants to the bond holders. Second, to equitably distribute the costs to the users through rates. The rate structure established should be equitable in that each of the classes as a whole pays it fair share of the costs. Also each member of a given customer class should be treat the same as all other members of that class. Third, to encourage conservation by charging more for the use of more water. One can assume that the greater the portion of the charge that is based on consumption, the greater the propensity to conserve. DEVELOPMENT OF WATER RATE ALTERNATIVES The usage information, historicalcost information and the estimate of water treatmentplant operating costs were entering into a professional rate setting Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 8 mode1.2 The projection rates and assumptions were also a part of the model. Further the replacement value of existing facilities were also included. The model divides costs between those that relate to the amount of water deliv- ered, such as the size and capacity of the system and its operation and those that relate to the number of users of the system. The customer -related costs are allocated to each user as a flat rate and the remaining costs are allocated to us- ers on the basis of consumption. Findings Considering the forgoing, I recommend that council adopt the following findings: 1. That the current water rates are insufficient to operate and maintain the system, to pay the annual debt service on the voter -approved bonds outstanding and to meet the city's covenants to its bondholders. 2. That the current water rates do not encourage conservation and thereby increase the size and capacity of the facilities needed for water treatment and delivery. 3. That the current costs to operate the system, allocated as recommended by the RateMod ProTm Model are as follows: a. Costs allocated on the basis of customers: $5 per Equivalent User b. Costs allocated on the basis of consumption: $3.00 per 1,000 gal - Ions. '- RateMod Prom' by Michael L. Siegel developed in cooperation with the American Waterworks Associa- tion and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 9 Alternatives Alternative 1 Customer Class Minimum Bill Included in Minimum Single Family Residences and Multiple - Family Developments with separate me- ters including manufactured housing de- velopments $20.00 5,000 Gallons Multiple -Family Developments without separate meters including manufactured housing developments $20.00 per unit 5,000 Gallons per unit Non -metered Residential $29.00 NA All non-residential users -separately me- tered including mixed residential $29.00 8,000 Gallons Non-residential units where more than one entity is served by the same meter. $29.00 per entity 8,000 Gallons per entity Non -metered Commercial $65.00 NA Mixed Use Buildings where both resi- dences and non -residences are served by the same water meter $20.00 per residential Unit and $29.00 per commercial unit. 5,000 gallons per residential unit and 8,000 per commer- cial unit. This alternative will encourage conservation a great deal more than the second one. The minimum rate is set at $5 plus $3.00 per 1,000 gallons for the first 5,000 gallons. This means that 25% of the residential customers will receive a minimum bill. All other customers will be encouraged to conserve since con- sumption at their present levels will lead to a higher water bill. The minimum residential rate is based on the first quartile of 5,000 gallons at the suggested rate of $3 per 1000 gallons, plus the customer allocated charge of $5. This is actually a reduction in the minimum bill for about 25% of the systems us- ers, but will be an increase to some degree for the other 75%. Commercial us- ers will be affected the most due to the substantial increase in the unit of con- sumption rate. While this structure will theoretically produce the necessary revenues to meet the objectives, it depends a great deal on the assumptions and projections proving to be valid. Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 10 r Alternative 2 Customer Class Minimum Bill Included in Minimum Single Family Residences and Multiple - Family Developments with separate me- ters including manufactured housing de- velopments $29.00 8,000 Gallons Multiple -Family Developments without separate meters including manufactured housing developments $29.00 per unit 8,000 Gallons per unit Non -metered Residential $29.00 NA All non-residential users -separately me- tered including mixed residential $65.00 20,000 Gallons Non-residential units where more than one entity is served by the same meter. $65.00 per entity 20,000 Gallons per entity Non -metered Commercial $65.00 NA Mixed Use Buildings where both resi- dences and non -residences are served by the same water meter $29.00 per residential Unit and $29.00 per commercial unit. 8,000 gallons per residential unit and 20,000 per commer- cial unit. This structure will provide more revenue than the first alternative. It is therefore the "safest" in the sense that it is less sensitive to the assumptions and projec- tions. In this alternative, the minimum charge is based on the median of the dis- tribution. This means that the rate given is what will be paid by 50% of the cus- tomers of the class. Non -metered accounts are a bit troublesome. Presently some are not metered because: (1) of difficulty in locating the service, (2) the main water line to which the customer is connected is scheduled for replacement this summer, or (3) be- cause more than one premises is served by the same water connection contrary to the city code. One must make some assumption about how much water is used by the customer no matter what the rate is. In both alternatives this rate is set at the median consumption. Setting the non -metered rate to be the same as the minimum charge puts less pressure on the city to get a meter installed. In the case of a nonconforming connection it is a disincentive for the owner to correct the multiple connection problem. Setting the non -metered rate at a higher than minimum rate will put pressure on the city to locate and install a meter. It will also provide an incentive for a customer to correct the nonconforming connection situation. Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 11 r Recommendation Alternative 1 comes more closely to achieving the objectives stated above if the assumptions and projects are valid. Alternative 2 is a pretty good match to the objectives except that it is a bit weak in the area of conservation. Alternative 1 is also the most palatable at least from the residential users perspectives. With either alternative, heavy water users will see water bills that are not just signifi- cantly higher, but may be several times their existing bill. Accordingly, my recommendation is to set the rate as shown in Alternative 1. EXHIBITS: "A" Extract from Water Master Plan - 1993 "B" Bond Repayment Schedule "C" Average Monthly Water Delivery "D" Detailed Reports from RateMod ProTm Water Rate Analysis April 2, 1997 Page 12 SECTION 8 - SYSTEM COST ESTIMATES METHODOLOGY The opinions of probable cost presented in this chapter summarize construction and non - construction costs for each of the three projects described in the previous chapter. Appendix D includes detailed cost analyses for the three improvement projects, including itemized construction components, contingency, mobilization, design, inspection and administrative costs. These opinions are based on experience and recent construction costs incurred in the McCall area for the distribution system, and in the region for the water treatment plants. In order to produce these opinions, a number of site specific assumptions were made, including the expected methods of construction, the cost and extent of labor, equipment and materials expected, pricing techniques, land costs, administrative cost and contingencies. The various water main improvements were first broken into segments with similar construction and sizing characteristics. Essential water line components, such as pipe materials, flow control devices and connections, were estimated to formulate a segment cost. Special features like river crossings, road crossings and surface restoration were also estimated and added to the segment cost. Any remaining construction elements were then itemized, unit prices applied to them, then added to the segment cost. The total reach cost was expressed as a nominal linear, foot price. These unit prices vary according to special features. The various reach costs were then added for geographically distinct project elements . The elements were then selectively added after appropriate project priorities were selected Water meter costs were developed from information previously presented in the Water Metering Study for the City of McCall, June 1993, Toothman-Orton Engineering Company. Appendix A of that study includes a detailed breakdown of the construction cost for water meters. That breakdown included materials and labor costs for installation of automatic readout meters installed in the house where possible. Because water meters are recommended to be installed concurrently with other system improvements, inspection and administrative costs were added to the construction cost (see Appendix D of this report) and the total metering costs are included in the summaries shown below: MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS • 1993 REVISION The Master Plan Improvements satisfy community goals and regulatory requirements set forth previously. The probable cost to implement these improvements is approximately $17,135,000. The major elements of the project and their respective costs are summarized 8-1 in Table 8-1 below. A detailed breakdown of the project elements is given in Appendix D. TABLE 8-1 OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS -1993 REVISION Item Project Element Element Cost 1 Planning and Study 2 Water Treatment Cost 3 Base Distribution Improvements -East Components 4 Base Distribution Improvements West Components 5 Distribution System -Northeast Expansion 6 Distribution System -Internal Improvements 7 Water Meter Installation -Existing Services 8 Golf Course Irrigation System Improvements TOTAL $ 366,000 $ 4,665,800 $ 5,917,100 $1,313,000 $1,996,600 $1,064,500 $ 669,900 $ 1,142,000 $17,134,90.0 PRIORITY IMPROVEMENTS - The recommended Priority Improvement project satisfies the highest priority community goals and regulatory requirements described previously. The probable cost is estimated at approximately $13,606,000. The major elements of the project and their associated costs are shown in Table 8-2 along with notes addressing changes from the Master Plan Improvements. A breakdown of the element costs is presented in Appendix D. 8-2 TABLE 8-2 1, _ OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS i r,7 _ n� 1 PRIORITY IMPROVEMENTS Item Project Element Element Cost Notes 1 Planning and Study $ 366,000 2 Water Treatment Plant $ 4,665,800 3 Base distribution Improvements -East $ 5,449,200 a Components 4 Base Distribution Improvements -West $ 1,313,000 Components 5 Distribution System -Northeast Expansion $ 0 b 6 Distribution System-Intemal Improvements $ 0 b 7 Water Meter Installation -Existing Services $ 669,900 8 Golf Course Irrigation System Improvements $ 1,142,000 TOTAL $13,605,900 a Base Distribution System Improvements - East Components cost reflects deletion of selected 8" and 12" lines in Spring Mountain Ranch and the southwest sector. b Items are deleted in their entirety in the Priority Improvements. MINIMUM PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS The Minimum Project Improvements fulfill regulatory requirements for surface water treatment and addresses essential goals and criteria. The Minimum Project Improvements were selected such that the project cost was below ten million dollars, the limit requested by the City Council. The Minimum Project Improvements are estimated to cost approximately $9,511,000. The elements of the project, their associated costs and changes from the Master Plan Improvements are shown in Table 8-3. A detailed breakdown of the elements is provided in Appendix D. 8-3 TABLE 8-3 OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS MINIMUM PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS Item Project Element Element Cost Notes 1 Planning and Study $ 366,000 d 2 Water Treatment Plant $ 4,665,800 d 3 Base Distribution Improvements -East Components $ 3,141,400 a, d 4 Base Distribution Improvements -West $ 0 b Components 5 Distribution System -Northeast Expansion $ 0 b 6. Distribution System -Internal Improvements $ 237,900 c,d 7 Water Meter Installation -Existing Services $ 669,900 8 Golf Course Irrigation System Improvements $ 430,000 d,e TOTAL $ 9,511,000 a Base Distribution Improvements -East Components cost reflects deletion of recommended redundant raw water supply line and recommended treated water distribution lines. b Recommended items are deleted in their entirety in the Minimum Project Improvements. c Recommended Internal Improvements consist of the City of McCall 1993 Water Projects. d Surplus funds that may be realized from these line items will be reallocated to other high priority improvements recommended in the Priority Improvements and deleted from the Minimum Project Improvements. e Golf Course Irrigation System Improvements include isolation from the existing distribution system and a treated water line bypassing the eastern perimeter of the golf course and a pond and pump station. 8-4 Exhibit "B" T Payment Schedule for Water Revenue Bonds I Payment D6te T Total 1 Series 1994 Bonds Series 1996 Bonds for this Total i Principal Interest Total Principal Interest Total Pa 1-Mar-95i 1-Sep-95j 1-Mar-961 ment for Year , $ $ 149,001.25 $ 149,001.25 $ - $ 149,001.25 $ 150,000 $ 149,001.25 $ 299,001.25 $ - $ 299,001.25 $ 448,002.50 $ $ 146,001.25 $ 146,001.25 $ - $ 146,001.25 1-Sep-96• $ 100,000 $ 146,001.25 $ 246,001.25 $ - $ 246,001.25 $ 392,002.50 1-Mar-97 $ 143,876.25 $ 143,876.25 $ 25,000 $ 166,594.17 $ 191,594.17 $ 335,470.42 1-Sep-97 1-Mar-981 1-Sep-981 1-Mar-99T 1-Sep-99 1-Mar-00 1-Sep-00 1-Mar-01 1-Sep-01�$ $ 115,000 $ 143,876.25 $ 258,876.25 $ 142,091.88 $ 142,091.88 $ 400,968.13 $ 736,438.55 $ $ 141,288.75 $ 141,288.75 $ 95,000 $ 142,091.88 $ 237,091.88 $ 378,380.63 $ 130,000 $ 141,288.75 $ 271,288.75 $ 139,420.00 $ 139,420.00 $ 410,708.75 $ 789,089.38 _ $ $ 138,201.25 $ 138,201.25 $ 150,000 $ 139,420.00 $ 289,420.00 $ 427,621.25 $ 145,000 $ 138,201.30 $ 283,201.30 $ 135,201.25 $ 135,201.25 $ 418,402.55 $ 846,023.80 $ $ 134,576.25 $ 134,576.25 $ 160,000 $ 135,201.25 $ 295,201.25 $ 429,777.50 $ 155,000 $ 134,576.25 $ 289,576.25 $ 130,701.25 $ 130,701.25 $ 420,277.50 $ 850,055.00 $ $ 130,546.25 $ 130,546.25 $ 160,000 $ 130,701.25 $ 290,701.25 $ 421,247.50 170,000 $ 130,546.25 $ 300,546.25 $ 126,701.25 $ 126,701.25 $ 427,247.50 $ 848,495.00 1-Mar-02 $ $ 125,956.25 $ 125,956.25 $ 170,000 $ 126,301.25 $ 296,301.25 $ 422,257.50 1-Sep-02 $ 180,000 $ 125,956.30 $ 305,956.30 $ 121,626.25 $ 121,626.25 $ 427,582.55 $ 849,840.05 1-Mar-03 1-Sep-03 1-Mar-04' 1-Sep-05 1-Mar-06 1-Sep-06- 1-Mar-07 1-Sep-07 1-Mar-08+ 1-Sep- 8 1-Mar-09I 1-Sep-09r$ 1-Mar-10fi 1-Sep-101 1-Rilr-1_0_1 1-Sep-10+ 1-Mar-11' 1-Sep-11 1-Mar-12 $ $ 120,916.25 $ 120,916.25 $ 180,000 $ 121,626.25 $ 301,626.25 $ 422,542.50 $ 190,000 $ 120,916.25 $ 310,916.25 $ 116,676.25 $ 116,676.25 $ 427,592.50 $ 850,135.00 _ _ $ 205,000 $ $ 115,453.75 $ 115,453.75 $ 185,000 $ 116,676.25 $ 301,676.25 $ 417,130.00 $ 115,453.75 $ 320,453.75 $ 111,588.75 $ 111,588.75 $ 432,042.50 $ 849,172.50 $ 220,000 _ $ 235,000 $ 109,406.25 t $ 109,406.25 $ 195,000 $ 111,588.75 $ 306,588.75 $ 415,995.00 $ 109,406.25 .$ $ 329,406.25 $ 106,226.25 $ 106,226.25 $ 435,632.50 _ $ 851,627.50 $_ 102,806.25 $ 102,806.25 $ 205,000 $ 106,226.25 $ 311,226.25 $ 414,032.50 $ 102,806.25 $ 337,806.25 $ 100,332.50 $ 100,332.50 $ 438,138.75 $ 852,171.25 _ $ $ 95,462.50 $ 95,462.50 $ 215,000 $ 100,322.50 $ 315,322.50 $ 410,785.00 $ 250,000 $ 95,462.50 $ 345,462.50 $ 94,151.25 $ 94,151.25 $ 439,613.75 _ $ 850,398.75 $ $ 87,650.00 $ 87,650.00 $ 225,000 $ 94,151.25 $ 319,151.25 $ 406,801.25 265,000 $ 87,650.00 $ 352,650.00 $ 87,907.50 $ 87,907.50 $ 440,557.50 $ 847,358.75 $ $ 79,368.75 $ 79,368.75 $ 245,000 $ 87,907.50 $ 332,907.50 $ 412,276.25 $ 280,000 $ 79,368.75 $ 359,368.75 $ 80,986.25 $ 80,986.25 $ 440,355.00 $ 852,631.25 $ $ 70,443.75 $ 70,443.75 $ 255,000 $ 80,986.25 $ 335,986.25 $ 406,430.00 $ 300,000 $ 70,443.75 $ 370,443.75 $ 73,718.75 $ 73,718.75 $ 444,162.50 $ 850,592.50 $ 320,000 $ 60,881.25 $ 60,881.25 $ 275,000 $ 73,718.75 $ 348,718.75 $ 409,600.00 $ 60,881.25 $ 380,881.25 $ 65,812.50 $ 65,812.50 $ 446,693.75 $ 856,293.75 $ $ 50,681.25 $ 50,681.25 $ 295,000 $ 65,812.50 $ 360,812.50 $ 411,493.75 1-Sep-121 17Mar713, 1-Sep-131 1-Mar-14t 1-Sep-141 1-Mar-15; 1-Sep-15I 1-Mar-16i. ! $ 340,000 $ 50,681.25 $ 390,681.25 $ 57,183.75 $ 57,183.75 $ 447,865.00 $ 859,358.75 $ 39,843.75 $ 39,843.75 $ 305,000 $ 57,183.75 $ 362,183.75 $ 402,027.50 $ 370,000 $ 39,843.75 $ 409,843.75 $ 48,262.50 $ 48,262.50 $ 458,106.25 $ 860,133.75 _ $ 28,050.00 $ 28,050.00 $ 340,000 $ 48,262.50 $ 388,262.50 $ 416,312.50 $ 880,000 $ 28,050.00 $ 908,050.00 $ 38,317.50 $ 38,317.50 $ 946,367.50 $ 1,362,680.00 $ 640,000 $ 38,317.50 $ 678,317.50 $ 678,317.50 $ 19,597.50 $ 19,597.50 $ 19,597.50 $ 697,915.00 $ 5,000,000.00 $ 670,000 $ 19,597.50 $ 689,597.50 $ 689,597.50 $ 4,140,822.60 $ 9,140,822.60 $ 4,990,000.00 $ 3,759,190.43 $ 8,749,190.43 $ 17,890,013.03 $ 17,200,415.53 - + 1 Average Debt Service $ 819,067.41 Page 1 Exhibit "C" Average Monthly Water Delivery 1992-1996 80,000,000 -- 70,000,000 — 60,000,000 — 60,000,000 — 40,000,000 — 30,000,000 — 20,000,000 — 10,000,000 — I 1 I I ! I I I I I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun . Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Item Customer Accounts Report Meters and Equivalents Report Equivalent Dwelling Units Report Average Daily Flow Report Maximum Day (or Equiv) Report Maximum Hour (or Equiv) Report Annual Flow Report Water Capital Facilities Report Inflators, Rates and Terms Report Capital Borrowing Report Optg and Debt Repayment Budget Report. Non -Rate Revenue and Coverage Budget Report EXHIBIT "D" Detailed Reports from RateMode ProTm TABLE OF CONTENTS Explanation Number of Accounts by class including projections from base year through 2001 This is an inventory of meters by size that are installed. These are then converted to "equivalent" meters to help establish a value called "Equivalent Dwelling Unit." This entity is useful in describing the size of the system. It is not used in establishing rates. A report of the EDU as discussed above The average of the daily consumption, by customer class in millions of gallons The average daily consumption at the peak daily demand level. Again it is by class and in millions of gallons The average daily consumption at the peak hourly demand rate. The full annual water delivery by customer class. This report is to report the replacement costs of capital facilities (in millions of dollars) This report shows the inflation factors building into the model. This report is intended to show future debts and repayment schedules. We are projecting none of these. The individual lines items in our financial records and the model differ somewhat. The classifications are correct however. Please not the Existing Debt Amortization. Also, depreciation is not included here. We can either use depreciation or use the principal repayment but not both! This report shows that the model considers revenues from sources other than rates. It also factors in the debt service covenants and a working capital margin. Page 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 I This is an EPA guideline. The EPA prohibits the use of both depreciation and principal repayment on any of its construction grant programs. Revenue Requirement by Facility. Water Flat Rate Report Water Minimum Plus Volume Rate Report This report divides the operating and debt service costs by facility This report shows the flat rate that would be required to achieve revenue goals. The amounts given are per EDU This is where the recommend rate was derived. Note that the "minimum charge per account" is just under $5 and that the charge per 1,000 gallons to be just under $3. 14 15 16 11 Date:4/7/1997 Customer Accounts Report Page: i TOTAL ACCOUNTS —{Y CUSTOMER CLASS Acct ID Base Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 RESIDENTIAL - RESIDENTIAL - RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - COMMERCIAL - rwOMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL M SINGLE FAMILY MULTI FAMILY OTHER - TYPE A - TYPE B - TYPE C - TYPE D - TYPE E -TYPE F - TYPE G - TYPE H -TYPEI TYPE J TYPE K TYPE L TYPE M TYPE N TYPE 0 TYPE P TYPE Q . TYPE R TYPE S TYPE T TYPE U TYPE V TYPE W ETERED - TYPE A INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B TOTAL ACCOUNTS NON -INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL CONTRACTUAL/OTHER Res - ID ID Comm ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID ID RateMod Pro TM v3.0 2,137 2,201 2,267 2,333 2,401 2,471 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 191 197 203 209 215 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,328 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 2,328 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 101.5% 103.0% 104.6% 106.2% 107.8% 2,137 2,201 2,267 2,333 2,401 2,471 191 197 203 209 215 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Meters and Equivalents Report Page: 2 _ METERS & EQUIVALENTS Base Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 INSIDE METERS Note: Number of meters must equal number of accounts in each year. NUMBER OF METERS by SIZE:. 0.625 INCH 2,256 2,306 2,374 2,441 2,511 2,583 0.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.00 26 26 27 28 29 30 1.50 19 19 20 21 22 23 2.00 43 44 46 48 50 52 3.00 2 2 2 3 3 3 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL INSIDE METERS 2,347 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 TOTAL INSIDE ACCOUNTS 2,328 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 Over/(Under) 19 0 0 0 0 0 OUTSIDE METERS NUMBER OF METERS by SIZE: 0.625 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rio 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL OUTSIDE METERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL OUTSIDE ACCOUNTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 Over/(Under) 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL METERS 2,347 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 TOTAL ACCOUNTS 2,328 2,398 2,470 2,542 2,616 2,692 Over/(Under) 19 0 0 0 0 0 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Meters and Equivalents Report Page: 3 I mETERS & EQUIVALENTS Base Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 EQUIVALENT METERS BY SIZE 1—..:SIDE 0.625 INCH 2,256 2,306 2,374 2,441 2,511 2,583 0.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.00 36 36 38 39 41 42 1.50 34 34 36 38 40 41 2.00 125 128 133 139 145 151 3.00 22 22 22 33 33 33 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL INSIDE EQUIV METERS 2,474 2,527 2,604 2,691 2,770 2,851 OUTSIDE EQUIVALENT METERS BY SIZE 0.625 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 OTAL OUTSIDE EQUIV METERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL EQUIVALENT METERS .t RateMod Pro TM 2,474 2,527 2,604 2,691 2,770 2,851 v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Equivalent Dwelling Units Report Page: 4 TOTAL EDU'S ---„9Y CUSTOMER CLASS Acct Base Year ID 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 �'i=cESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY ID 2,137 2,201 2,267 2,333 2,401 2,471 RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm 700 722 744 765 787 809 COMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID 0_ 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE H ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE J ID 0. 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 _. COMMERCIAL - TYPE N ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE 0 ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE P ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPES ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 OMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMERCIAL - TYPE W IDMilli0 0 0 0 0 0 NDUSTRIAL METERED TYPE A IDill 0 0 0 0 0 0 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 - TOTAL 2,837 2,923 3,011 3,098 3,188 3,280 NON -INDUSTRIAL EDU'S 2,837 2,923 3,011 3,098 3,188 3,280 SUBTOTALS: RESIDENTIAL 2,137 2,201 2,267 2,333 2,401 2,471 COMMERCIAL 700 722 744 765 787 809 _ INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 CONTRACTUAL/OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Average Daily Flow Report Page:'5 AVERAGE DAILY CONSUMPTION BY CLASS, MILLIONS OF Acct Base Year ;ALLONS ID 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY Res - RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm COMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE H ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE J ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE N ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE 0 ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE P ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE S ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID CCOMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID OMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID OMMERCIAL - TYPE W ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE A ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A ID SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B ID ' LOSS/LEAKAGE/FIRE FLOWS (Water) INFLOW/INFILTRATION (Sewer) FIRE FLOWS (Water, incl above) TOTAL CONSUMPTION TOTAL FLOW 0.892 0.000 0.000 0.292 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.919 0.000 0.000 0.301 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.946 0.974 1.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.310 0.320 0.329 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.031 0.000 0.000 0.338 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.184 1.220 1.257 1.293 1.331 1.369 1.184 1.220 1.257 1.293 1.331 1.369 1.030 1.061 1.092 1.124 1.156 SUBTOTALS: RESIDENTIAL 0.892 0.919 0.946 0.974 1.002 1.031 COMMERCIAL 0.292 0.301 0.310 0.320 0.329 0.338 INDUSTRIAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - CONTRACTUAUOTHER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 UNBILLED 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Maximum Day (or Equiv) Report Page: 6 MAXIMUM PERIOD CONSUMPTION,Day MILLIONS OF Acct Base Year `3ALLONS ID 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY Res - RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm COMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE H 1D COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE J ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE N ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE 0 ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE P ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE S ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID hpCOMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID OMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID OMMERCIAL - TYPE W ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE A. ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A ID SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B ID LOSS/LEAKAGE/FIRE FLOWS (Water) INFLOW/INFILTRATION (Sewer) TOTAL CONSUMPTION TOTAL FLOW 2.816 0.000 0.000 0.384 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.900 0.000 0.000 0.396 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 . 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.987 3.074 3.164 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.408 0.420 0.432 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.256 0.000 0.000 0.444 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.200 3.296 3.395 3.494 3.596 3.700 3.200 3.296 3.395 3.494 3.596 3.700 1.030 1.061 1.092 1.124 1.156 SUBTOTALS: RESIDENTIAL 2.816 2.900 2.987 3.074 3.164 3.256 COMMERCIAL 0.384 0.396 0.408 0.420 0.432 0.444 INDUSTRIAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CONTRACTUAL/OTHER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 UNBILLED 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 • RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Maximum Hour (or Equiv) Report Page:7 MAXIMUM PERIOD CONSUMPTION,Hour _ MILLIONS OF Acct Base Year 3ALLONS ID 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 i RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY Res- 4.664 4.804 4.948 5.092 5.240 5.393 RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm 0.636 0.656 0.676 0.696 0.716 0.736 COMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE H ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE J 1D 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE N ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE 0 ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE P ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 j , COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1__ j COMMERCIAL - TYPE S ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CCOMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 OMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE W ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 LOSS/LEAKAGE/FIRE FLOWS (Water) INFLOW/INFILTRATION (Sewer) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TOTAL CONSUMPTION 5.300 TOTAL FLOW 5.300 5.460 5.460 1.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.624 5.624 1.061 5.788 5.788 1.092 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.956 5.956 1.124 6.129 6.129 1.156 SUBTOTALS: RESIDENTIAL 4.664 4.804 4.948 5.092 5.240 5.393 COMMERCIAL 0.636 0.656 0.676 0.696 0.716 0.736 INDUSTRIAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CONTRACTUAUOTHER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 UNBILLED 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 • RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Annual Flow Report Page:B ANNUAL FLOW MILLIONS OF Acct Base Year aALLONS ID 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY Res- 325.580 335.331 345.386 355.441 365.801 376.466 RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm 106.580 109.928 113.276 116.624 119.972 123.320 COMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE H ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE J ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE N. ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE 0 ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE.P ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE S ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CCOMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 OMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 COMMERCIAL -TYPE W ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE A ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SPECIAL, CONTRACT'L - TYPE B ID 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 LOSS/LEAKAGE/FIRE FLOWS (Water) INFLOW/INFILTRATION (Sewer) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TOTAL CONSUMPTION 432.160 445.259 458.662 472.066 485.774 499.786 TOTAL FLOW 432.160 445.259 458.662 472.066 485.774 499.786 SUBTOTALS: RESIDENTIAL 325.580 335.331 345.386 355.441 365.801 376.466 COMMERCIAL 106.580 109.928 113.276 116.624 119.972 123.320 INDUSTRIAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CONTRACTUAL/OTHER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 UNBILLED 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 • RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Water Capital Facilities Report Page:9 IMMARY, WATER FACILITIES Base Year 1996 Millions of Constant Base Year DOLLARS 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 SUM NEW WATER PROJECTS SOURCE OF SUPPLY, PUMPING TREATMENT TRANSMISSION and STORAGE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION CUSTOMER SVC & METERS FIRE PROTECTION & FIRE FLOWS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL PLANT LAND TOTAL COST BASIS SOURCE OF SUPPLY, PUMPING TREATMENT TRANSMISSION and STORAGE LOCAL DISTRIBUTION CUSTOMER SVC & METERS FIRE PROTECTION & FIRE FLOWS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL PLANT LAND RATE BASE (- deprc+own src contr) CAPITAL BASE (+ deprc,contrb,pygo) r RateMod Pro TM 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.200 5.300 0.000 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.700 10.775 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.200 5.300 0.000 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.700 10.850 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.200 5.300 0.000 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.700 10.925 v3.0 City of McCall q 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.200 5.300 0.000 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.700 11.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.200 4.200 5.300 5.300 0.000 0.000 1.200 1.200 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.700 10.700 11.075 11.150 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Date:4/7/1997 Inflators, Rates and Terms Report Page:10 INFLATORS, INTEREST, BORROWINCYrs or Base Year Inflators and Interest Rates (%) TERMS and COSTS (%) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 INFLATORS (Cumulative) GENERAL INFLATION RATE NA 3.00% 6.09% 9.27% 12.55% 15.93% LOCAL WAGE INFLATOR NA 3.00% 6.09% 9.27% 12.55% 15.93% CONSTRUCTION COST INFLATOR NA 4.00% 8.16% 12.49% 16.99% 21.67% FUEL, POWER & CHEM COST INFLATOR NA 6.00% 12.36% 19.10% 26.25% 33.82% RATES & TERMS • DEPOSITED FUNDS INTEREST RATE FIRST BORROWING INTEREST RATE (Overall) AMORTIZATION PERIOD (Years) SECOND BORROWING INTEREST RATE (Overall) AMORTIZATION PERIOD (Years) 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 BORROWING COSTS, , (As % of Borrowing Requirement) 0.0% r RateMod Pro TM 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Capital Borrowing Report Page: / / Millions of CAPITAL PROJECTS, CONTRIBUTIONS, DOLLARS )RROWING RQMT and PAYMENT 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 SUM CAPITAL PROJECTS (Includes Refinancings) WATER 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TOTAL, CAPITAL PROJECTS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CAPITAL REVENUES AND CONTRIBUTIONS OWN SOURCE (Transfers, Equity, Assmts, Arb) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 SOURCE OF SUPPLY, PUMPING 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TREATMENT 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TRANSMISSION and STORAGE 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 LOCAL DISTRIBUTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 CUSTOMER SVC & METERS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 FIRE PROTECTION (hydrants, lines) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ADMINISTRATION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 GENERAL PLANT 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 l LAND 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TOTAL, CONTRIBUTIONS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 NET CAPITAL COSTS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 BORROWING COSTS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 TOTAL BORROWING REQUIREMENT _ BORROWING ALLOCATION, PAYMENT and SCHEDULE BORROWING REQUIREMENT: ALLOCATION (%) AMOUNT BORROWED (Millions) ANNUAL PAYMENT (Millions) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Amount, Millions of First Second Total DOLLARS Borrowing Borrowing Borrowing $0.000 100.0% $0.000 $0.000 0.0% $0.000 $0.000 PAYMENT SCHEDULE DATE OF FIRST PAYMENT YEAR (Use four digits) 1997 1997 QUARTER (1,2,3 or 4) 2 2 100.0% $0.000 $0.000 ANNUAL PAYMENT (Millions) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 FIRST BORROWING INTEREST PORTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PRINCIPAL PORTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 - SECOND BORROWING ' INTEREST PORTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 PRINCIPAL PORTION 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total Payment (Millions) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Optg and Debt Repayment Budget Report Page: l2 Forecast Year Base Year DOLLARS 2ERATING EXPENDITURES (%) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 ADMIN, BILLING and OVERHEAD WAGES and SALARIES (Admin, Billing) BENEFITS (% of Wages and Salaries) 0.0% INSURANCE ACCTNG, BILLING, COLLECTN, OFFICE SUPPL 71,600 METER READING, VEHICLES and EQUIP RENT PAID, OFFICE EXPENSE TRAVEL,QEMBERSHIPS, TRAINING GEN GOUT OVERHEAD CHG, OTHER NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS Subtotal PURCHASED WATER or TREATMENT OPERATIONS, REPAIR and MAINTENANCE WAGES and SALARIES (Operations) 69,000 BENEFITS (% of Wages and Salaries) 32.0% 22,080 PARTS and TOOLS 189,780. - MINOR EQUIPMENT 57,182 CHEMICALS 0 UTILITIES, POWER and FUEL 125,407 I MOTOR VEHICLE SUPPLIES 0 OTHER 0 NFW CAPITAL PROJECTS -r`ROFESSIONAL SVCS (Non-Admin, etc. Share) _ LEGAL ENGINEERING CONTRACTUAL OTHER SVCS and MISC , NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS SUBTOTAL, OPERATING EXPEND DEBT RECOVERY & CAPITAL EXISTING DEBT AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL PMT INTEREST PMT NEW DEBT SERVICE AMORTIZATION PRINCIPAL PMT INTEREST PMT j ; DEPRECIATION EXPENSE `- RETURN (% Rate Base + Int - Deprcn) ROUTINE CAPITAL IMPVTS TRANSFERS TO RESERVES SUBTOTAL, CAPITAL COSTS ' TOTAL, OPTG and CAPITAL COSTS 0.0% 74,857 78,277 81,835 85,571 89,493 535,049 570,494 608,363 648,375 691,110 736,748 365,000 225,000 295,000 315,000 330,000 350,000 596,438 564,090 548,024 535,055 518,095 499,846 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,036,438 864,090 918,024 925,055 923,095 924,846 1,571,487 1,434,584 1,526,387 1,573,430 1,614,205 1,661,594 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall r-, Date:4/7/1997 Non -Rate Revenue and Coverage Budget Report Page: /3 Amt or Base Year JN-RATE REVENUE & COVERAGE (%) 1996 IMPACT FEES (Amt Per New Eqv Mete $0 0 HOOK-UP FEES (Per New Acct) $4,400 279,500 ENG'G SVCS AND PLAN REVIEW 0 WATER TURN/OFF FEES 0 PENALTIES and OVERDUE ACCTS 7,000 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 0 SALE OF. ASSETS, OTHER 0 FUND BAL AVAIL FOR RATE REDUCTION-160,000 INTEREST INCOME 54,950 OUTSIDE USER RETURN SURCHARGE SUB -TOTAL (excl outside user return schg) 181,450 INITIAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT 1997 408,459 Forecast Year DOLLARS 1998 1999 424,219 429,852 2000 443,892 2001 458,473 1,390,037 1,026,125 1,102,168 1,143,578 1,170, 313 1,203,121 PLUS: COVERAGE, WORKING CAPITAL, TAXES and PILT WORKING CAP MARGIN (% Op Cost) 10.0% 53,505 DEBT SVC COVER FACTOR 1.20 192,288 PILT, FRANCHISE FEES (% Rev Rqmt; 0.0% 0 _ TAXES (% of Return [Profit]) 0.0% 0 RATE SUPPORTED REV RQMT (incl fire chgs) 1,635,830 57,049 60,836 64,838 69,111 73,675 157,818 1,240,993 168,605 170,011 169,619 1,331,609 1,378,427 1,409,043 RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall 169,969 1,446,765 Date:4/7/1997 Revenue Requirement by Facility Page: Z4 Forecast Year REVENUE RQMT by FACILITY, Base Year DOLLARS ATER 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 NET OUTLAYS BY FACILITY: - SOURCE OF SUPPLY, PUMPING 0 0 0 0 0 0 TREATMENT 680,100 507,016 544,927 563,735 575,423 590,118 TRANSMISSION and STORAGE 884,130 659,120 708,405 732,856 748,049 767,154 LOCAL DISTRIBUTION 0 0 0 0 0 0 CUSTOMER SERVICE and METERS 71,600 74,857 78,277 81,835 85,571 89,493 - FIRE PROTECTION and FLOWS 0 0 0 0 0 0 ADMINISTRATION 71,600 74,857 78,277 81,835 85,571 89,493 GENERAL PLANT 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAND 0 0 0 0 0 0 RATE SUPPORTED REV RQMT 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 r RateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Water Flat Rate Report Page: I5 WATER, FLAT RATE ONTHLY Surcharge or Rate of Return PER ACCOUNT Cash Basis - INSIDE RATE N/A 61.12 45.73 47.57 47.87 47.61 OUTSIDE RATE 100.0% 61.12 45.73 47.57 47.87 47.61 OUTSIDE RATE AS % OF INSIDE 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% PER EDU Cash Basis INSIDE RATE N/A 50.16 37.52 39.03 39.27 39.06 39.03 OUTSIDE RATE 100.0% 50.16 37.52 39.03 39.27 39.06 39.03 OUTSIDE RATE AS % OF INSIDE 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION CHG, INSIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION'CHG, OUTSIDE 0 0 0 0 0 Base Year 1996 Forecast Year DOLLARS 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 47.56 47.56 100.0% 0 Revenue Check, Flat Rate From Non -Industrial Accts: 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 From Non -Industrial EDU's: 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 From Industrial Metered Industrial - Type A 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial - Type B 0 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial - Type C 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total From Direct Fire Protection Charges 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total From Rates and Fire Protection (Accts) 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 Total From Rates and Fire Protection (EDU'S) 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 Rate -Supported Revenue Requirement 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 Over/(Under) Rev Rqmt (PerAcct) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Over/(Under) Rev Rqmt (Per EDU) 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Over/(Under) Total Revenue Rqmt Accts 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% lb % Over/(Under) Total Revenue Rqmt EDU's 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% rateMod Pro TM v3.0 City of McCall Date:4/7/1997 Water Minimum Plus Volume Rate Report Page: 16 i WATER MINIMUM + VOLUME CHARGE IONTHLY 0 jn►mn um Surcharge or Rate Base Year of Return 1996 1997 Forecast Year DOLLARS 1998 1999 2000 MINIMUM CHARGE, PER ACCOUNT Cash Basis INSIDE RATE OUTSIDE RATE 100.0% OUTSIDE RATE AS % OF INSIDE MINIMUM CHARGE, PER EQUIV METER INSIDE RATE OUTSIDE RATE 100.0% OUTSIDE RATE AS % OF INSIDE ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION CHG, INSIDE ANNUAL FIRE PROTECTION' CHG, OUTSIDE Revenue Check, Minimum + Fire Protection Total from Direct Fire Protection Chgs Total From Minimum Subtotal Rate Supported Minimum + Fire Chgs Rqmt Over/Under Minimum Rqmt % Over/(Under) Minimum + Fire Revenue Rqmt UNIFO N/A N/A 4.61 4.61 100.0% 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 128,880 128,880 128,880 0 0.00% 4.68 4.68 100.0% 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 134,742 134,742 134,742 0 0.00% 4.75 4.75 100.0% Plus: 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 140,899 140,899 140,899 0 0.00% 4.83 4.83 100.0% 4.91 4.91 100.0% 2001 �'?,-'t, 4.99 4.99 100.0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 147,303 147,303 147,303 0 0.00% 0 0 154,028 161,088 154,028 161,088 154,028 161,088 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% .1,000 GALLONS 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 INSIDE UNIFORM RATE RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY Res - RESIDENTIAL - MULTI FAMILY ID RESIDENTIAL - OTHER ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE A Comm DMMERCIAL - TYPE B ID -- DMMERCIAL - TYPE C ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE D ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE E ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE F ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE G ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE H ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE I ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE J ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE K ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE L ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE M ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE N ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE O ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE P ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE Q ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE R ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE S ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE T ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE U ID COMMERCIAL - TYPE V ID ' COMMERCIAL - TYPE W ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE A ID INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE B ID ' _ , INDUSTRIAL METERED - TYPE C ID irECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE A ID ECIAL, PUBLIC/INSTL - TYPE B ID teMod Pro TM v3.0 t 3.970 0.000 0.000 2.683 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.883 0.000 0.000 1.951 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 City of McCall 3.007 0.000 0.000 2.035 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.023 0.000 0.000 2.046 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.999 0.000 0.000 2.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.990 0.000 0.000 2.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 | Date:4/7/1997 Water Minimum Plus Volume Rate Report ' VvATsn ' MINIMUM + VOLUME CHARGE IONTHLY / Surcharge or Rate Base Year of Return 1996 SPECIAL, COwTRACTL-TYPE x |o 0.000 SPECIAL, oowTnAoTL'TYPE o |o 0.000 Forecast Year DOLLARS 0.000 0.000 0.000 "1 0.000 0.000 OUTSIDE SURCHARGE Umumpxo, Cash Revenue Check: Uniform Volume Chgs, Inside Rate Residential Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential 'Other Commercial Type Commercial 'Type B Commercial Type Commercial ' Type o Commercial ' Type s Commercial ' Type F Commercial Type Commercial ' Type H Commercial ' Type | Commercial ' Type J Commercial ' Type K Commercial ' Type L Commercial ' Type M Commercial ' Type N Commercial ' Type O Commercial Type ',ommemia| Type �ommemia| Type Commercial ' Type G Commercial ' Type T Commercial ' Type U Commercial ' Type v Commercial ' Type VY Industrial Metered ' Type A Industrial Metered 'Typa B Industrial Metered ' Type C Special, Pub||d|nsU-Type A Special, Puu|ic/|nstl ' Type B Special, Contractual ' Type A Special, Contractual ' Type B Res - ID |o Comm /o ID |o |o |o m 0 |D |D 0 0 m 0 |o /D |D |O |o |D |D |o 0 0 |D |D 0 m 0 |o Total, Uniform Vol Charges, Inside +Outside Total, Minimum + Fire Protection Charges Subtotal, Metered Industrial Subtotal, Minimum ChQFrom Indus 8cca / Total Revenue From Charges Total Revenue Requirement � Overl(Under)Rev Rqnu % Over/(Under) Rev Rqmt R'ateMod Pro TM 1,292,566 e66,604 1,038,469 1,074,3ee 1.097022 1.125,542 V O U O U O X, 1,578,550 128,880 V 1,181,107 134,742 O 0 1,268,988 140,899 V 1,312,959 147,303 V 1,340,586 154,028 O U 1,375,170 161,088 O O 1.707,430 1,315,849 1,40e887 1,460,2e2 1,494,614 1.536,258 V 4 1 U City of McCall / Date:4/7/1997 Water Minimum Plus Volume Rate Report Page:18 WATER MINIMUM + VOLUME CHARGE )NTHLY Surcharge or Rate Base Year of Return 1996 1997 Forecast Year DOLLARS 1998 1999 2000 2001 vi h;murn Charge Per c Am + (P r B iu WATER RATE BLOCKS (Avg Usage Per Billing Period) ON IIHLIf�3 i �� {xJ..a:F 'uw'.E.a-41ViN:i. FIRST (BLOCK 1) • NEXT (BLOCK 2) OVER (BLOCK 3) BLOCK VOLUME CHG, PER: 5%VAT,ER BL( INSIDE RATE BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3 WHOLESALE (Pub/Inst'I, Contract/Other) OUTSIDE RATE BLOCK 1 BLOCK 2 BLOCK 3 OUTSIDE RATE (Multiplier) Cash Block Rate Revenue Check From All Customers Block 1 block 2 lock 3 Wholesale (Pub/Inst'I, Contract/Other) Subtotal , From Outside Rate Surcharge (Util Method Only) Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Subtotal F;�Eq�u 1996 1997 GALLONS 1998 i bdtin 1999 2000 2001 12,696 45,443 0 12,696 45,443 45,443 45,443 0 12,696 0 12,696 12,696 12,696 45,443 45,443 0 0 0 Base Year 1,000GALLONS 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 3.864 3.819 2.683 0.000 1.00 2.806 2.773 1.951 0.000 1.00 2.927 2.892 2.035 0.000 1.00 2.942 2.907 2.046 0.000 1.00 2.919 2.885 2.030 0.000 1.00 2.910 2.876 2.024 0.000 1.00 dovi ltrptir 647,747 484,479 520,508 538,512 549,863 564,123 743,220 555,931 597,278 617,945 630,965 647,311 187,582 140,697 151,202 156,502 159,758 163,737 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,578,550 1,181,107 1,268, 988 1,312,959 1,340,586 1,375,170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total from Wholesale 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Total from Block Volume Chgs 1,578,550 1,181,107 1,268,988 1,312,959 1,340,586 1,375,170 From Fire Chgs 0 0 0 0 0 0 From Minimum 128,880 134,742 140,899 147,303 154,028 161,088 Total Chgs 1,707,430 1,315,849 1,409,887 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 Rev Rqmt 1,707,430 1,315,850 1,409,886 1,460,262 1,494,614 1,536,258 Over/(Under) Revenue Requirement % Over/(Under) Rev Requirement I IRateMod Pro TM 0 -1 1 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% v3.0 City of McCall