4/4/1984 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

APR 4 1984 BOOK 5&1 PAGE M three consultants before deciding on Arthur Young and the only instruction given the consultant was that what we wanted was the most equitable rate for each customer throughout the county. The consultant, therefore, did not focus on anyone in specific or any area in specific, and every type of rate setting methodology throughout the country was given consideration. Director Pinto noted that the County does have some unique situations, however; i.e., we have 5,730 water customers and only 3,266 water meters and 3,006 wastewater customers with 893 meters taking care of those customers. These figures will become significant in relation to consideration of the methodology of charging people on a meter basis. Chairman Scurlock informed those present that the ordinance in the backup packet is not the one we will be discussing; another one has been distributed, and we also have a black book where water and sewer charges are broken down by gallonage for the different areas. George Raftelis of Arthur Young & Company came before the Board to make the presentation. Mr. Raftelis wished to impress on those present that a lot of time and effort has been spent by both the consultants and staff in gathering the data to come up with the most responsive rate structure. Mr. Raftelis then reviewed the cost of service and rate setting study (complete copy of which is on file in Office of the Clerk), explaining that the whole purpose of the study was to determine the cost of providing water and wastewater services to customers served by County operations and to calculate charges to recover the costs of those services based upon appropriate rate setting considerations. He noted that there are many factors that must be taken into consideration to -arrive at an appropriate rate structure, and they include: financial sufficiency equity impact of customer classes 4 M M M