1993-073 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Water and Sewer Customers The number of County water and sewer customers, expressed as the number of equivalent residential units ("ERUs"), for the years 1986-92 is set forth below. 1986 9,827 8,824 1987 11,193 9,339 1988 12,005 9,552 1989 15,187 13,618 1990 17,615 16,874 1991 21,886 22,574 1992 23,136 24,172 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES HIGH VOLUME CUSTOMERS CUSTOMERS WATER•ES WER• General Development Utility 100,079 33,164 Village Green 33,164 9,719 Indian River County Jail 9,719 7,940 Holiday Inn 7,940 7,661 Indian River Village Care Center 7,146 7,146 Inn Vero 6,577 6,577 • Volume in Million Gallons Rate Structure Historically, the County's rates for water and sewer service have been sufficient to meet the applicable rate covenants, with respect to the County's obligations under the Master Bond Resolution. The rates for the System are projected to be sufficient through 1993 to comply with the rate covenant for the Series 1993 Bonds. The System has rates for both residential and commercial classes of customers. In September 1991, the County passed a rate resolution (Resolution No. 91-145), adopted pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 91-9, which put into effect new incremental water and wastewater rates through the Fiscal Year 1993. The basis for Resolution 91-145 was a "Water and Waste Water Pee & Rate Study" (the 'Study"), dated September 1991, prepared by the County's Consulting Engineer. The Study investigated the annual cost of operating and maintaining the water and wastewater systems and recommended rates, charges and policies which are both sufficient to recover these costs and equitable to the allocation of these costs to the different user classes. The analysis also included anticipated capital improvements for the period covered by the Study. All rates and charges developed in the Study were based upon what is generally referred to as a cost of service approach to utility rate design. Under this approach, customers of each class are assessed rates and charges for units of service which are equal to the cost of providing water and wastewater service to the average customer of each class. Thus, all customers pay their fair share of the System cost and no customer class subsidizes any other customer class. The Study was conducted on the assumption that the System will continue to operate as a separate enterprise, neither subsidizing any other branch of County government nor receiving 18