Laserfiche WebLink
Staff Presentation <br />Assistant Utilities Director Joe Baird reviewed the Breezy <br />Village Rate Review Committee Report (Exhibit "G") <br />TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: November 1, 1984 FILE: <br />The Board of County Commissioners <br />THRU: Terrance G. Pinto SUBJECT: BREEZY VILLAGE RATE REVIEW <br />Utility Service i ctor COMMITTEE REPORT <br />1. <br />FROM: Josep A. Baird REFERENCES: <br />Assistant Utility Director <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: <br />After receiving the Breezy Village rate request, the staff had the <br />following comments: <br />1. The Utility Plant in Service is reasonably stated at a historical <br />cost of $179,016. <br />2. Accumulated Depreciation of $51,038 is properly stated, however <br />if the 1983 depreciation expense changes, the accumulated deprecia- <br />tion will also have to be changed. <br />3. Originally, staff had required the Utility to make -.a "Used and <br />Useful Adjustments" based on water and sewer flows, however, <br />Breezy Village Utilities rate consultant proved that this would <br />not be fair under the circumstances. The Utility constructed a <br />15,000 gpd water and sewer plant when they would have preferred <br />to construct 10,000 gpd plants. However, the larger facilities <br />were required. <br />4. Contributions -In -Aid -of Construction are correctly stated. <br />5. Water and Sewer Income was also correctly stated. A revenue <br />test using consumption records was used to verify the income. <br />6. It is difficult to determine whether or not Contributions -In -Aid - <br />of Construction have been depreciated. Our staff feels that the <br />Contributions -In -Aid -Of -Construction have been depreciated. <br />In prior rate cases, the Board of County Commissioners have <br />disallowed the depreciation of CIAC. To be consistent, it is <br />the feeling of the staff that the same policy be followed. <br />7. Breezy Village originally submitted expenses based on the owner <br />managing and performing various duties. According to the owner, <br />he has decided to contract services instead of performing <br />these duties, therefore, the plant -operator -and -accounting <br />expenses increased substantially. The amounts presented for <br />these contractual services do not seem out of line with costs <br />in the area. <br />8. Extraordinary repairs recommended by BSB Utilities in the amount <br />of $5,639 is justified, however, they could be amortized over a <br />five year period rather than three years. This would bring the <br />repair expense to $3,102 from $3,854. <br />W <br />N OV 8 1994 aooK 58 F,,�F. 83 <br />1. J <br />