Urban Water & Sewer Service Providers MSR (2007)

Economic & Planning Systems Real Estate Economics Regional Economics Public Finance Land Use Policy FINAL REPORT COUNTY OF MERCED WATER AND SEWER SERVICE PROVIDERS MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW Prepared for: Merced County Local Agency Formation Commission Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 EPS #15029 B E R K E L E Y S A C R A M E N T O D E N V E R 2501 Ninth St., Suite 200 Phone: 510-841-9190 Phone: 916-649-8010 Phone: 303-623-3557 Berkeley, CA 94710-2515 Fax: 510-841-9208 Fax: 916-649-2070 Fax: 303-623-9049 www.epsys.com Economic & Planning Systems Real Estate Economics Regional Economics Public Finance Land Use Policy Note: A version of this report titled “Draft” was approved by LAFCO on May 24, 2007. The changes that have been made to this version are limited to updating the report’s title to “Final Report” and including information discussed by the Commission at the hearing regarding the Ballico Community Services District, Midway Community Services District, North Dos Palos Water District, South Dos Palos County Water District, Volta Community Services District. B E R K E L E Y S A C R A M E N T O D E N V E R 2501 Ninth St., Suite 200 Phone: 510-841-9190 Phone: 916-649-8010 Phone: 303-623-3557 Berkeley, CA 94710-2515 Fax: 510-841-9208 Fax: 916-649-2070 Fax: 303-623-9049 www.epsys.com TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1 Summary of Districts.......................................................................................................2 II. WATER AND WASTEWATER DISTRICTS.............................................................................8 Ballico Community Services District.............................................................................8 Celeste County Water District......................................................................................10 Country Club County Water District..........................................................................12 Delhi County Water District.........................................................................................14 Franklin County Water District....................................................................................18 Hilmar County Water District......................................................................................21 Le Grand Community Services District......................................................................26 Midway Community Services District........................................................................29 North Dos Palos Water District....................................................................................32 Planada Community Services District.........................................................................35 Santa Nella County Water District...............................................................................38 Snelling Community Services District.........................................................................48 South Dos Palos County Water District......................................................................51 Volta Community Services District..............................................................................54 Winton Water and Sanitary District............................................................................56 III. DETERMINATIONS............................................................................................................59 Explanation of Determinations.....................................................................................59 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Summary of Water Service Providers.....................................................................3 Table 2: Summary of Wastewater Service Providers..........................................................4 Table 3: Average Monthly Water Service Rates for Typical Single‐Family Homes...............................................................................................5 Table 4: Average Monthly Wastewater Service Rates for Typical Single‐Family Homes...............................................................................................6 Figure 1: Ballico Community Services District......................................................................9 Figure 2: Celeste County Water District...............................................................................11 Figure 3: Country Club County Water District...................................................................13 Figure 4: Delhi County Water District..................................................................................15 Figure 5: Franklin County Water District............................................................................19 Figure 6: Hilmar County Water District...............................................................................22 Figure 7: Le Grand Community Services District...............................................................27 Figure 8: Midway Community Services District.................................................................30 Figure 9: North Dos Palos Water District.............................................................................33 Figure 10: Planada Community Services District.................................................................36 Figure 11: Santa Nella County Water District.......................................................................39 Figure 12: Snelling Community Services District.................................................................49 Figure 13: South Dos Palos County Water District...............................................................52 Figure 14: Volta Community Services District......................................................................55 Figure 15: Winton Water and Sanitary District.....................................................................57 I. INTRODUCTION In 1997, the State Legislature convened a special commission to study and make recommendations to address California’s rapidly accelerating growth. The Commission on Local Governance for the 21st Century focused energies on ways to empower the already existing County Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs). The Commission’s final report, Growth within Bounds, recommended various changes to local land use laws and LAFCO statutes. The Commission’s recommendations were encompassed in Assembly Bill 2838 (2000), which amended the Cortese‐Knox‐Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (“Reorganization Act”). One of LAFCO’s new responsibilities requires regional studies of municipal services (Municipal Service Reviews, or MSRs) every five years, in conjunction with reviews of city and district spheres of influence (SOIs). Government Code Section 56425 directs LAFCOs to review and update agencies’ SOIs, as necessary, every five years. Section 56430 requires MSRs to be conducted before or in conjunction with the sphere updates. MSRs must address at least the following nine factors: 1. Infrastructure needs or deficiencies 2. Growth and population projections for the affected area 3. Financing constraints and opportunities 4. Cost avoidance opportunities 5. Opportunities for rate restructuring 6. Opportunities for shared facilities 7. Government structure options, including advantages and disadvantages or consolidation or reorganization of service providers 8. Evaluation of management efficiencies 9. Local accountability and governance Merced LAFCO retained Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) to develop the MSRs for water and sewer service providers in Merced County. Each provider was contacted to request information and documents such as master plans, budgets, and maps. EPS used the information obtained from the jurisdictions to write provider profiles and the nine determinations required by law for each provider. The profiles and determinations were submitted to each service provider for its review. The districts’ comments were incorporated into the report. In six cases, EPS was unable to contact a representative of the district or obtain information about the district. As a result, in order to complete the MSR for those entities, EPS relied on information from Sphere Reports which were adopted by LAFCO when the spheres of influence of those districts were established and any subsequent sphere amendments. It is recommended that LAFCO continue its efforts to update those service reviews as certain districts no longer providing adequate services would 1 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 be candidates for dissolution or consolidation with a larger service provider. In accordance with state law, those entities will not be allowed to obtain LAFCO approval for various actions unless or until their MSRs are completed. SUMMARY OF DISTRICTS GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS Merced County has a total of fifteen independent water and/or sewer districts, each of which is governed by its own Board of Directors. Of the fifteen districts, eight provide both water and wastewater services, two provide wastewater services only, four provide water services only, and one exists only to pay back a general obligation bond and provides no services. District service areas and population, connections, and capacity are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. As shown, the districts vary widely in size and service population, with the total number of connections among responding districts ranging from 115 to nearly 3,000. With the exception of the Celeste County Water District, districts receive the majority of their operations funding from water and/or wastewater service fees. As shown in Table 3, water rates are typically charged on a tiered basis, with a flat base rate charged for water usage up to a certain level and additional per‐gallon fees for water usage above that level. In most cases, wastewater service customers pay only a monthly flat fee (see Table 4). INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Almost all of the districts that provide water services rely exclusively on groundwater wells for their water supply. The exception is Santa Nella Community Services District (SNCSD). SNCSD purchases the majority of its raw water supply from the San Luis Water District, which diverts surface water from the Delta Mendota Canal and the San Luis Canal under a contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. With the exception of Winton Water and Sanitary District (WWSD) and Midway Community Services District (MCSD), all districts that provide wastewater services operate their own wastewater treatment plants. WWSD collects wastewater and transports it to the Atwater Wastewater Treatment Plant for treatment and MCSD’s waste is treated by the City of Dos Palos’ treatment plant. District staff report that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand. Generally, however, the districts have limited water and wastewater capacity to serve future growth. 2 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Table 1 Summary of Water Service Providers Merced County LAFCO Municipal Service Reviews; EPS #15029 Name Area Population Number of Production Usage Served Served Connections Capacity (annual or daily) Ballico Community Services District* 143 acres* 176* 50 dwellings* N/A N/A Celeste County Water District (1) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Country Club County Water District* 10.4 acres - south of Fowler N/A N/A N/A N/A Avenue and 850 feet west of Golf Link Road in the Hilmar area Delhi County Water District* N/A N/A 2,197 (2) 7.4 mgd N/A Hilmar County Water District 1,000 acres - Hilmar 5,000 1,500 2.3 mgd 1.7 mgd; usage peaks at 2.3 mgd during the summer Le Grand Community Services District (2) 384 acres - Le Grand 1,760 485 1.8 mgd 0.30 mgd (yearly average) Midway Community Services District* 684 acres- Midway* N/A 186 customers* N/A N/A North Dos Palos Water District* 143 acres - north of City of 100* 41* N/A N/A Dos Palos* Planada Community Services District 924 acres - Planada and a 5,500 1,227 4.32 mgd 1.1 mgd; 400 million small number of locations gallons per year outside the District Santa Nella County Water District 2,446 acres - Santa Nella 1,200 497 1.8 mgd N/A South Dos Palos County Water District* 285 acres - South Dos N/A 220 N/A N/A Palos Volta Community Services District* 12 square blocks - Volta 100 30 N/A N/A Winton Water and Sanitary District Winton area 8,832 2,982 6.05 mgd 1.56 mgd (1) Celeste County Water District exists in order to pay off a bond and does not provide water services. (2) Residential equivalent units served. (3) There is no storage in the water supply system, so the wells must be able to meet peak domestic demand and fire flow simultaneously. As a result, direct comparison of the well capacity with average daily demand is misleading. * District's information obtained from Sphere of Influence Reports and Executive Officer Reports issued between 1982 and 1995. "gpm" = gallons per minute "mgd" = million gallons per day "gpd" = gallons per day Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/18/2007 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Data\WaterSewerRates 3 Table 2 Summary of Wastewater Service Providers Merced County LAFCO Municipal Service Reviews; EPS #15029 Name Area Population Operating Wastewater Capacity Served Served Budget Connections Flow Celeste County Water District (1) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Delhi County Water District* N/A N/A N/A 2,048 .56 mgd 0.80 mgd Franklin County Water District The district's service area 4,000 $910,100 651 .371 mgd 0.60 mgd stretches north to Santa Fe Drive, east to El Capitan Canal, west to Franklin with two developments west of Franklin, and South to Ashby R d Hilmar County Water District 1000 acres 5,000 $910,612 1,490 0.45 mgd .55 mgd Le Grand Community Services District 384 acres - Le Grand 1,760 $162,753 485 1.54 mgd 0.35 mgd Midway Community Services District* 684 acres - Midway* N/A N/A N/A N/A .09 mgd* Planada Community Services District 924 acres - serves Planada 5,500 $445,985 1,411 0.50 mgd 0.53 mgd and a small number of locations outside the district Santa Nella County Water District 2,446 acres - Santa Nella 1,200 $638,000 497 0.30 mgd 0.40 mgd Snelling Community Services District 480 acres - centered on 200 $69,300 115 0.03 mgd 0.06 mgd (2) community of Snelling South Dos Palos County Water District* 285 acres - South Dos Palos* N/A N/A 218* .035 mgd* 0.08 mgd* Winton Water and Sanitary District Winton area 8,832 $598,073 2,969 0.71 mgd 1.0 mgd (1) Celeste County Water District exists in order to pay off a bond and does not provide wastewater services. (2) The Snelling Community Services District has established a policy that it will not exceed 75% of its maximum capacity (45,000 gpd). * District's information obtained from Sphere of Influence Reports and Executive Officer Reports issued between 1982 and 1995. "mgd" = million gallons per day "gpd" = gallons per day "ESD" = Equivalent Single Family Dwelling Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/18/2007 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Data\WaterSewerRates 4 Table 3 Average Monthly Water Service Rates for Typical Single-Family Homes Merced County LAFCO Municipal Service Reviews; EPS #15029 Monthly Charges Water Service Provider Base Rate Commodity Charge Ballico Community Services District* No information available Celeste County Water District (1) N/A N/A Country Club County Water District* No information available 5150 gpm Delhi County Water District* No information available Hilmar County Water District $18.50 for the first 30,000 gallons $1 per gallon from 30,000 to 40,000 gallons, $2 per 1,000 gallons thereafter Le Grand Community Services District Flat charge of $33.00 per month -- Midway Community Services District* No information available North Dos Palos Water District* No information available Planada Community Services District $33.00 for 3/4 inch to 1 inch service $44 for 1.5 inch services, $70 for 2 inch service Santa Nella County Water District $2.07 per 100 cubic feet (2) -- South Dos Palos County Water District* No information available Volta Community Services District* No information available Winton Water and Sanitary District $10.95 for first 1,000 cf $12.15 for 1,001-2,000 cf; $13.50 for 2,001-3,000 cf (3) (1) Celeste County Water District exists in order to pay off a bond and does not provide water services. (2) Rate for domestic metered service. (3) $15.00 for 3,001-4,000 cf; $1.00 per 100 cf for 10,001-30,000 cf; $2.00 per 100 cf for 30,001 and thereafter. * Current water service rates were not provided. Includes publicly-owned water providers only. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/18/2007 5 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Data\WaterSewerRates Table 4 Average Monthly Wastewater Service Rates for Typical Single-Family Homes Merced County LAFCO Municipal Service Reviews; EPS#15029 Typical Service Charges Sewer Service Provider Annual Monthly Celeste County Water District (1) N/A N/A Country Club County Water District* No information available Delhi County Water District* No information available Franklin County Water District $228.00-$276.00 $19.00-$23.00 Hilmar County Water District $204 $17.00 Le Grand Community Services District $408 $34.00 Midway Community Services District* No information available Planada Community Services District $336 $28.00 Santa Nella County Water District $120 $10.00 Snelling Community Services District $116 $9.69 South Dos Palos County Water District* No information available Winton Water and Sanitary District $348 $29.00 (1) Celeste County Water District exists in order to pay off a bond and does not provide wastewater services. * Current sewer service rates were not provided. Includes publicly-owned wastewater providers only. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/18/2007 6 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Data\WaterSewerRates Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 DEMAND AND CAPACITY With rapid growth occurring throughout Merced County, several districts anticipate significant future residential development within their service areas. The County has completed or is in the process of completing community/specific plans for the Delhi, Hilmar, Planada, and Santa Nella areas. Each of these plans projects population growth of between 3 and 7 percent annually over the next 10 to 15 years. In addition, a number of districts, including Franklin, Le Grand, and Winton, contain planned residential development that is currently awaiting annexation approval. In all cases, future development is contingent upon the construction of additional facilities, as outlined in the individual district profiles. Most districts plan to pay for new facilities through development fees, connection fees, and/or service agreements under which developers are required to construct and dedicate wells, lift stations, and other needed facilities. Snelling Community Services District staff report that growth in that district is constrained to infill development due to geographic limitations on wastewater treatment facility expansion. 7 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc II. WATER AND WASTEWATER DISTRICTS BALLICO COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Ballico Community Services District Formation, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the Ballico Community Services District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Ballico Community Services District was formed in 1983 to provide the community’s inhabitants with a public domestic water system. Prior to the District’s formation, the ground water in the Ballico area was polluted with nitrates and DBCP.1 Proponents of formation intended for the District to improve water quality.2 At the time of formation, the district encompassed approximately 143 acres and provided domestic water service to 176 people in 50 dwellings. It was bounded approximately by Ballico Avenue and Santa Fe Drive on the West; Lombardy Avenue on the north; a line one‐quarter mile east of and parallel to Broadway on the east; and Stockman Avenue on the south. The boundaries of the Ballico Community Services District are identified in Figure 1. It was proposed that the district’s governing body be composed of a three‐ or five‐member board of directors and that maintenance of the water system be funded by monthly user’s fees of $10 or more.3 1 Dibromochloropropane (DBCP). 2 Local Agency Formation Commission Executive Officer’s Report: Ballico Community Services District Formation, June 1986. 3 Local Agency Formation Commission Executive Officer’s Report: Ballico Community Services District Formation, June 1986. 8 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Ballico Community Services District Sphere of Influence LOMBARDY Y D H E C C S A R R N TA FE P A R T M E GREGG O P W E N GROVE PARK BALLICO Y A W D A O R B BRADBURY O EAST STOCKMAN C LI R A L P E B P T E R S A P O N P TA F E E W N BRADBURY BALLICO Z NORTH E T R EL CAPITAN NORTH O C SOUTH CRESSEY ² EUCALYPTUS LIVINGSTON 0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet LAFCO RESOLUTION 1004 ON 01/26/1984 SEVLA Figure 1 L L A H HARDING LOMBARDY LOMBARDY SECOND MERCEDES of Merced County 9 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 CELESTE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Celeste County Water District (CCWD) was formed to pay for sewer and water infrastructure on two residential streets located just north of the Yosemite Parkway (State Route 140), east of the City of Merced. It currently exists only to fund payments on a general obligation bond that was paid off in April 2007, which is ten years earlier than its expected maturity date of 2017. All of the District’s services are provided by the City. Before the bond was paid off funding came from a special tax, which was based on assessed value and is set each year at a rate sufficient to pay bond debt for that year as well as property taxes. CCWD has no Board of Directors and does not provide services or bill customers. District finances are administered by the County Auditor’s Office. The District also receives a share of property tax that goes into its General Fund.4 The District’s boundaries are identified in Figure 2. 4 Interview with Ron Kinchloe, Merced County Auditor’s Office, 12 July 2005. 10 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Celeste Water District Sphere of Influence OLIVE Y B B KI CELESTE 140 CHILDS MERCED ² GERARD 9 9 MISSION EEFFOC REWOT Figure 2 IDA NELLIE Y S A E CELESTE L L E D 140 F A E L SOUTH BEAR CREEK BEAR CREEK D R A H STRETCH C R O Y B B BODIE KI D R A H C Y R E O L L A H D R 9 A 9 H C R O 0 245 490 980 Feet of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 1066 ON 9/27/1984 11 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 COUNTRY CLUB COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Formation of the Country Club County Water District, which was issued in 1982, provides the only information available on the Country Club Water District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The County Club County Water District was formed in 1982 in order to provide domestic water service at reduced costs. The property proposed to be included in the District consisted of a 15‐lot residential subdivision on 10.4 acres of land. These properties are located south of Fowler Avenue and 850 feet west of Golf Link Road in the Hilmar area.5 The District’s boundaries are identified in Figure 3. 5 Local Agency Formation Commission Executive Officer’s Report: Formation of Country Club Water District, August 1982. 12 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Figure 3 Country Club Water District Sphere of Influence FOWLER Y A B O R R O M FAIRWAY L A N Country Club Water District A FOWLER FOWLER Country Club JOHNSON OSLO K N LI F 1 6 5 O L AUGUST G H T FI F TIFFANY RI G AMERICAN FOURTH D ² L FIRST E FI HILMAR N BLOSS WI ECHO 0 125 250 500 Feet of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 0352 13 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 DELHI COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study revised in 2004, the Delhi Community Plan issued in 2005 and the LAFCO Executive Officer’s Report: Sphere of Influence Revision No. 4 issued in 1995 provide the only information available on the Delhi County Water District (DCWD). The Delhi County Water District water distribution and wastewater collection systems were established in 1962. At this time, the bulk of the systems’ infrastructure was constructed although additions and upgrades have been made to accommodate new and growing areas. The District currently services approximately 2,060 customers.6 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water In September 2004, the water system included water mains and four wells. It was anticipated that an additional well would be installed within the next month.7 According to the May 2005 Delhi Community Plan, existing water mains and wells are adequate to meet current demands and fire flows.8 Figure 4 identifies the current boundaries of the District. Wastewater DCWD uses gravity collection supported by lift stations to convey sewage to its wastewater treatment plant, located southeast of the Delhi Community Plan Area. It has seven trunk lines and six lift stations. The system has capacity to process 0.8 mgd. It currently processes 0.56 mgd. The May 2005 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft states that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand, but there are ongoing problems with the operation of the plant requiring coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Board.9 DEMAND AND CAPACITY Significant growth has occurred in Delhi in recent years and is expected to continue into the future. According to the Updated Delhi Community Plan, adopted in July 2006, growth projections for the Delhi area range from 3 percent to 7.5 percent annually through 2020, depending on the source used. MCAG 2004 population projections 6 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study for the Delhi County Water District, September 2004, P. 8. 7 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study, revised September 2004, P. 8. 8 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft, May 2005, 8‐1. 9 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft, May 2005, 8‐1. 14 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Delhi County Water District Figure 4 Sphere of Influence BRADBURY RD D R T N E E V C A N D VI E C R E M LETTEAU AVE S T E P H E N S S T DELHI COUNTY WATER DISTRICT SCHENDEL RD SCHENDEL AVE D E R V N K S O N A H A N T S HI AUGUST RD 9 9 D R R E LI OL DELHI C BLOSS AVE 9 9 ² 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County LAFCO RES. NO. 1057E 04-25-96 15 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 estimate that Delhi will grow from 8,022 people in 2000 to 17,500 in 2020 (average annual growth of 4.0 percent) and to 21,300 by 2030 (average annual growth of 3.3 percent).10 Future water distribution and wastewater collection needs are assessed based on the flow levels projected when the area is at build out. The District is considered to be at build out when the empty lots within the developed portion of the planning area are filled. Depending on the population growth rate assumed, build out of this area is expected to occur between 2020 and 2025.11 Water In 2003, the DCWD provided water service connections to 2,197 residential equivalent housing units and three of the area’s schools. The peak hour flow per residential unit was evaluated and found to be 1.43 gpm based on 2003 data. Based on expected growth in the area and future increases in school enrollment, future peak hour demand is projected to increase to 11,322 gpm. Existing well capacity was 5,150 gpm. Based on the projected future peak hour demand of 11,322 gpm, pumping capacity must be expanded by 6,172 gpm in order to accommodate anticipated growth within the District.12 The Community Plan details the additional facilities that will be necessary to meet projected demand at build out population of approximately 21,000. Anticipated water facility requirements include additional wells connected to a system of 12‐inch pipes, located primarily in the northern section of the Delhi Community Plan Area. An additional well may be constructed in the southeast section of the Plan Area; however, past groundwater test results in this section have not met California Title 22 (water quality monitoring) regulations, and further studies and well tests will be necessary to determine suitable sites.13 Wastewater In 2003, the DCWD provided wastewater service to 2,048 connections. A total of 2,263 units received wastewater service. 14 This is equivalent to 2,168 single family residential (SFR) units.15 Average daily flow, not including the flow generated by local schools, 10 Merced County Population Forecast 2000‐2030. March 2004. 11 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study for the Delhi County Water District, revised September 2004, P. 8. 12 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study for the Delhi County Water District, revised September 2004, Appendix C. 13 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft, May 2005, 8‐1. 14 There are fewer connections than units served, because one connection may serve multiple apartment or mobile home units. 15 This assumes that one apartment unit equals two thirds of an equivalent residential connection, one mobile home unit equals two thirds of an equivalent residential connection, and one mobile care unit equals one third of an equivalent residential connection. 16 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 was approximately 560,000 gpd. Based on this number of SFR units within the District, the average wastewater flow rate per SFR connection was calculated to be approximately 258 gpd.16 It is estimated that existing plus projected demand will require a wastewater treatment plant capable of processing 2.0 mgd. Projected demand includes that of local schools at build out as well as developed empty lots within the developed portion of the planning area.17 The current plant has a capacity of 0.8 mgd and acreage available to expand its capacity to 1.2 mgd. In order to accommodate future growth a new wastewater treatment plant or a change in technology and a physical expansion of the plant at its present site may be necessary.18 New and upgraded wastewater facilities will also be required in order to deal with projected growth. Existing sewer trunk lines, force mains, lift stations, and the District’s wastewater treatment plant will need to be upgraded. Specific improvements described in the Delhi Community Plan include lift station upgrades that will increase the pumping capacity of stations 1, 4, and 5. In addition, the Community Plan projects that DCWD will need to construct three new lift stations (one east of Flower Street and north of Letteau Avenue, one in the vicinity of Vincent Road and North Avenue, and one in the vicinity of August Road and Corner Street); four new trunk lines (north of Letteau Avenue, north of North Avenue, near the intersection of North Avenue and Vincent Road, and east of Highway 99 and north of 2nd Avenue); and a new force main.19 16 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study for the Delhi County Water District, revised September 2004, Appendix A. 17 Wastewater Collection System and Water Distribution System Study for the Delhi County Water District, revised September 2004, Appendix B. 18 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft, May 2005, 8‐3. 19 Delhi Community Plan Public Review Draft, May 2005, 8‐3. 17 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 FRANKLIN COUNTY WATER DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Franklin County Water District (FCWD) was formed in 1962 and is empowered to provide wastewater service to the unincorporated community of Franklin‐ Beachwood. It is governed by a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the second Monday of each month. The district’s service area reaches north to Santa Fe Drive, east to El Capitan Canal, south to Ashby Road, and West to Franklin. The district also provides service to one strip on the north side of Dan Ward and to two developments west of Franklin. A map of these boundaries is shown in Figure 5. The District has a staff of three.20 The District’s total operating budget for FY 2006‐2007 is $910,100, including $8,500 in debt service.21 The District’s reserve funds total $210,000.22 FCWD charges a flat monthly rate ranging from $19 to $23, depending on location, with areas that depend on lift stations paying a higher rate. Hook‐up fees are $3,150 per unit.23 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES FCWD provides sewer service to 651 connections, including residential units, three mobile home parks, and two schools. Its total system capacity is 600,000 gallons per day (gpd), and it has an average wastewater flow of .371 mgd. The District’s facilities include a wastewater treatment plant and two lift stations. It is preparing to install an additional regional lift station to serve the western portion of the District. District staff stated that these facilities are adequate to serve current demand.24 DEMAND AND CAPACITY The Housing Element of the Merced County General Plan, adopted in 2003, cited Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) projections that the population of the Franklin Beachwood area would grow by 858 people (from 4,110 to 4,698) between 2000 and 2010; this represents an increase of 14 percent, or 1.4 percent annually.25 20 Interview with District Secretary Virginia Chase, 20 Sep. 2006. 21 Franklin County Water District Budget FY 06‐07. 22 Franklin County Water District Budget FY 06‐07. 23 Interview with District Secretary Virginia Chase, 20 Sep. 2006. 24 Interview with District Secretary Virginia Chase, 20 Sep. 2006. 25 Merced County Year 2000 General Plan Housing Element, 2003. 18 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Franklin County Water District Sphere of Influence BELCHER PA N D IT N O O R SOHAN DAN WARD TUPELO E G A E POPLAR L L L M P VI L A BEA O E M LUCICH R E FIR H C B & B R A N O W D E N FRANKLIN COUNTY WATER DISTRIC S T A N TA FE C LOBO R E W O L F L A N C E F E R N W O O D O O K H O E M A K SOLIS H B R S C W 99 E A O B D A E E K M A R D CABOT ASHBY COOPER SOUTHERN PACIFIC ON RAMP N LI K 1 N 6 T A H R F Y O E S N A T E S A S D Y S V S A N P RI M A FULTZ IT 140 LAFCO RESOLUTION 1050C ON 2-28-2002 ESIRNUS LITTLE SANDY GRANITE CREEK APACHE N A R S E M O R M U H T BOR Figure 5 BELCHER S A N TA FE M N K S A LI A R L K P A N S BN O T L F R A SI N E S O U C WHITE BIRCH B 99 LADINO NEVADA N BREEZE A X LI O K BELLEVUE F N A S R TAHOE A N TA F E F CARDELLA HEITZ 16TH BELCHER LEHIGH MERCED ATWATER ASHBY BEA FIR MERCED M FRANKLIN ELLIOTT OLIVE R 9999 5 9 U R 16TH U 23RD G 140 Y E V TQ K I WARDROBE N D Y S X U T R O 13 K TH G H I ² BAILEY S N D T P 5 9CONE 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County 19 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 The most recent MCAG projections are somewhat higher, showing a population increase of approximately 2.4 percent annually between 2000 and 2010, and between 2000 and 2030, for a total population of 7,100 people by 2030.26 There are approximately 250 acres of prospective residential development (currently farmland) waiting to be annexed to the District, including 100 acres outside the District’s Specific Urban Development Plan (SUDP). These areas will not be able to develop until the FCWD wastewater capacity increases. The District is in the planning process to upgrade its plant by building two additional pumps; it is currently waiting to get a permit through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to increase its capacity from 600,000 gpd to 1.25 million gpd. Once this permit process is complete, hook‐up fees will be increased in order to cover the cost of these planned upgrades.27 The District’s Five Year Capital Improvement Budget Review for 2005‐2010 includes plans for treatment plant upgrades, six pond transfer structures, three monitoring wells, new collection lines, and new manholes, among other infrastructure.28 26 MCAG Merced County Population Forecast 2000‐2030, March 2004. 27 Interview with District Secretary Virginia Chase, 20 Sep. 2006. 28 Franklin County Water District Five Year Capital Improvement Budget Review for 2005‐2010. 20 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 HILMAR COUNTY WATER DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Hilmar County Water District (HCWD) was formed in 1963 and is empowered to provide, water, sewer and stormwater disposal services to the unincorporated community of Hilmar. Its service area encompasses just under 1,000 acres and approximately 5,000 people. Figure 6 identifies the current boundaries of the District. The District has a staff of five and a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the first Tuesday of each month.29 The District’s total proposed operating expenses for FY 2006‐2007 are $910,612.30 Revenues come primarily from water and sewer charges. HCWD uses a two‐tiered rate system. Domestic water rates are $18.50 for the first 30,000 gallons, $1 per 1,000 gallons from 30,000 to 40,000 gallons, and $2 per 1,000 gallons thereafter, on a 30‐day billing cycle. Commercial rates are the same, except that any usage over 80,000 gallons is charged at a rate of $1.10 per 1,000 gallons.31 Sewer rates consist of a $17 flat fee for residential customers and a $17 per unit flat fee, plus $1.50 per 1,000 gallons of measured water in excess of 10,000 gallons for commercial customers. Additional funding sources include Merced County taxes, late charges, and on/off charges.32 The District’s reserves, including operational savings and development fees, currently amount to approximately $2.3 million.33 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water HCWD provides water to approximately 1,500 connections. All of its water comes from ground wells. The District currently operates three active wells and has a total capacity of 2.3 million gallons per day (mgd). Water usage has summertime peaks of up to 2 mgd but generally averages 1.7 mgd. The District reports that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand.34 29 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 30 Hilmar County Water District Budget,2006‐2007. 31 Hilmar County Proposed Charges & Fees. (Personal communication from Dale Wickstrom, 28 Sep. 2006.) 32 Hilmar County Water District Budget, 2005‐2006. Personal Communication from Dale Wickstrom, 28 Sep. 2006. 33 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 34 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 21 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc SCHENDEL K N LI F L O O L G S O AUGUST H T FI F RI AMETHYST G TIFFANY AMERICAN N S FOURTH E S D E THIRD M R A P C D C Y FIRST L E N FI ACACIA WI BLOSS RI A D A R D E R T N IL A E N K M C A L ECHO DAYTON GEER N W O T S G N U O WILLIAMS Y CRANE 5 6 1 N O E S D R R A V E L RIVER TURNER RALOHCS RHINESTONE OPAL SOMERS ARLON J A D E NIWRI Figure 6 Hilmar County Water District Sphere of Influence 5 6 1 K N LI F L O G T R O P E G D RI B K N LI F IR L W O G IN L R A E P DELHI HILMAR LIVINGSTON Legend ² H STEVINSON T SOI FI F RI G 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 1003F ON 5/22/2003 22 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Wastewater The District provides wastewater service to approximately 1,490 connections. HCWD sewer facilities include five lift stations and a wastewater treatment plant that began operation in 2003. The wastewater treatment system has a permit for the discharge of up to 0.55 mgd; the District experiences average daily wastewater flow of 0.45 mgd.35 The district has a total wastewater capacity of .55 mgd. The District reports that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand.36 Storm Drainage The east and west sides of sides of the Hilmar community are each served by one booster lift station. Each of the community’s lift stations are connected with storage basins by an underground pipe system. Irwin, the southern area of the community, has no drainage system for storage, collection, or discharge, and the rest of the community disposes of its storm drainage water to the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) Lateral Number 7. The HCWD has an agreement with TID, which defines the areas allowed to drain to their facility. Currently, the agreement permits 429 acres of land within the HCWD to drain to the TID facility. This area discharges storm drainage water at a rate of 17,500 gpm. DEMAND AND CAPACITY The 2003 Housing Element of the Merced County General Plan cites MCAG figures which project that Hilmar’s population will grow from 4,807 to 5,031 between 2000 and 2010, an increase of 5 percent overall, or 0.5 percent annually.37 Updated figures from MCAG’s March 2004 population forecast project a slightly greater increase during this period. Between 2000 and 2030, MCAG projects total growth for Hilmar of 4,693, or 3.3 percent annually for a total of about 9,500.38 Merced County is currently in the process of preparing an updated Community Plan for Hilmar to serve as a tool to guide future community growth and development. A facilities overview was prepared by the District in response to growth proposed in preliminary versions of this Plan. The growth population considered for the community in the Plan and facilities overview included a maximum of 15,000 people. (This anticipated maximum has since been reduced to 11,000 based on development capacity, but the change has not affected facilities needs.39) According to the District, the added growth would require the development and installation of two new wells with a minimum production level of 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) each, as well as the 35 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 36 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 16 Oct. 2006. 37 Merced County Year 2000 General Plan Housing Element, 2003. 38 MCAG Merced County Population Forecast 2000‐2030, March 2004. 39 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 23 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 installation of a 1 million‐gallon storage tank. HCWD owns a site for storage tank installation. Research and testing of potential well sites will be required to evaluate the quality and quantity of available water and determine whether these sites meet the requirements of HCWD, the State of California, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).40 In addition, proposed growth would require a wastewater treatment capacity of 1.4 mgd, requiring a new wastewater discharge permit from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The SWRCB is presently evaluating the use of percolation beds, which are used for disposal at the existing treatment facility, and may require that any new discharge be placed instead on agricultural land to cultivate non‐food crops. If this process were required, effluent flow would be stored in ponds during the winter and discharged to agricultural lands during the growing season. This disposal process would require a larger area of land than the area necessary for disposal through percolation basins.41 SWRCB action relating to HCWD is currently on hold, pending administrative processes required for the official closure of the District’s old wastewater treatment plant.42 The expansion of the wastewater treatment facility will require the acquisition of additional land for treatment and for the construction of additional disposal and storage basins. County Health Code requires that any land used in ponds or basins have a ten‐ foot separation from groundwater level to the bottom of the basin; lands surrounding the existing wastewater treatment plant have not been studied for groundwater level.43 Capital facilities fees are currently in place to fund infrastructure required by new development. Each new single‐family residence in the District is charged a $2,500 sewer facilities fee, a $3,500 water facilities fee, and a $2,000 drainage impact fee. Fees are payable prior to District approval of any Subdivision Improvement Plan or Final Subdivision Map. These fees are updated annually based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index. In addition, the District charges sewer and water connection fees of $2,500 and $2,000, respectively, per single‐family residence, as well as a $200 sewer/water inspection fee. These fees are payable when the District issues a Can and Will Serve Commitment Notice prior to issuance of a County building permit.44 The storm water collection system will require expansion to accommodate the growth anticipated in Hilmar. At the current level of development, Lateral Number 7 is over the available flow capacity. In a study prepared by the District in support of the ongoing Hilmar Community Plan Update, the District estimates that approximately 18 acre feet of new stormwater retention ponds will be required. These retention ponds will 40 Hilmar County Water District Facilities Overview. 41 Hilmar County Water District Facilities Overview. 42 Interview with District Manager Dale Wickstrom, 20 Sep. 2006. 43 Hilmar County Water District Facilities Overview. 44 Hilmar County Water District Facility Fees/Connection Fees 2006. 24 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 typically be designed as dual use park/retention pond areas. To discharge this stormwater, improvements are required to TID Lateral Number 7, which winds through the community. It will be necessary to conduct a study identifying the system improvements that are required in order to handle the future increases in storm drainage flows. The two districts must reach an agreement regarding future design and construction as well as implement a new development fee structure to fund it. 25 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 LE GRAND COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Le Grand Community Services District (LGCSD) was formed as a sanitary district in 1955 and was reorganized into a CSD which was approved by LAFCO in 1980. Shortly after 1984 the district took over ownership of the former private water company assets and full responsibility for water services. It currently provides both water and wastewater services to an area of approximately 384 acres in the unincorporated community of Le Grand (see Figure 7). Its service population is around 1,760, based on the 2000 Census figure for the Le Grand Census Designated Place (CDP). Its staff includes two full‐time and two part‐time employees. A 5‐member District Board of Directors meets on the first Thursday of each month.45 A number of annexations currently being contemplated could expand LGCSD’s service area. These include an annexation of 30 acres on the District’s west side and a “housekeeping” annexation of 10 acres acquired by the local high school and already accommodated by an amendment to the County’s Urban Growth Boundary for the area. These annexations may occur as part of a single process.46 The District’s total operating expenses for FY 2006‐2007 are $349,425. The total operating expenses include $186,672 in the water fund and $162,753 in the sewer fund. Non‐operating expenses for sewer service include $19,000 in interest on long‐term debt. Most of the District’s residential customers are unmetered and pay a flat rate of $33 per month for water and $34 per month for wastewater services. These rates may be adjusted January 1, 2007 by $1 to $2 per month. Metered customers pay based on a two‐ tiered system. The base rate for water service is $33 per month for the first 16,500 gallons and $2.57 per 1,000 gallons thereafter. Residential customers pay $34.00 per dwelling unit per month for wastewater service. Metered customers pay a base rate of $34.00, which covers wastewater treatment for the first 12,000 gallons of water. The charge is $2.77 for every 1,000 gallons thereafter. These rates are currently under review and may be subject to change January 2007.47 45 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 20 Sep. 2006. 46 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 20 Sep. 2006. 47 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 24 Oct. 2006. 26 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Le Grand Comunity Services District Sphere of Influence LE GRAND COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT LE GRAND COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ² LAFCO RESOLUTION 1056A ON 12-1-94 NRUTNIM ONSERF JORDAN M A H G N NI N U SAVANA C HAINLINE M F C IL D L O M W O E R L E L W A S H IN G S A N T A F ER S O N T O F E NF E J LE GRAND MARSHALL BRICE K OGLEL O P FORD S A N T A F E K O O C E E K C O M N S E R LE GRAND F 0 495 990 1,980 Feet NRUTNIM S A N T E L L A F E H C R USAVANA B N E S P I BUCHANAN HOLLOW NESUALC Figure 7 M A H G N NI C U N JORDAN E E K C M L R A E of Merced County 27 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water LGCWD provides water service to 485 connections. All water comes from groundwater wells. The District has two primary wells and one standby. Its maximum production capacity is 1.8 mgd. Yearly average usage is 0.30 mgd, indicating that current facilities are adequate to meet current demand.48 Wastewater LGCWD provides wastewater service to approximately 485 connections. It maintains one lift station and a treatment plant with a permitted capacity of 350,000 gpd. The 12‐ month average wastewater flow for 2004‐2005 was 154,000 gpd. The District states that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand.49 DEMAND AND CAPACITY According to MCAG’s March 2004 Population Forecast for Merced County, the population of the Le Grand area is projected to grow by 1.2 percent annually between 2000 and 2030, increasing from 1,760 to 2,400 during that period.50 Currently a total of 513 residential lots in various stages of planning are located within the District or seeking eventual annexation to the District. Of these, 194 have approved tentative maps; the District has conditional service agreements with the remaining 319. Under some of these service agreements, developers will be required to build wells and related wellhead treatment facilities in lieu of paying development fees. Such dedications could potentially be subject to reimbursement arrangements whereby developers who build water infrastructure are later reimbursed by future developers for any excess capacity.51 Water facilities may also be paid for through development fees, currently set at $3,886 per residential connection for water.52 The District has sufficient wastewater capacity to serve the proposed subdivisions, though it anticipates that additional planning may become necessary in the near future. One to two additional lift stations may be built by developers and dedicated to the District. Developer fees for sewer infrastructure are currently set at $2,190 per residential connection.53 48 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 16 Oct. 2006. 49 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 16 Oct. 2006. 50 MCAG Merced County Population Forecast 2000‐2030, March 2004. 51 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 20 Sep. 2006. 52 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 30 Oct. 2005. 53 Interview with District Engineer Jerry Herman (Giersch and Associates), 20 Sep. 2006. 28 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 MIDWAY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, which was issued in 1984, provides the primary information available on the Midway Community Services District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Midway Community Services District (MCSD) was established in 1967 to provide domestic water and sewage disposal services to the Midway community. According to the District’s Sphere Report issued in 1984, the district is approximately 684 acres in size. It encompasses the community of Midway, which is an unincorporated community located in the southwestern portion of Merced County between the City of Dos Palos and the unincorporated community of South Dos Palos. The boundaries of the Midway Community Services District are identified in Figure 8. The District is governed by a 5‐ member Board of Directors, which is elected by the voters residing within the District.54 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water As of 1984, the District served 186 customers with water, which it obtained from the City of Dos Palos.55 For the provision of potable water supplies, the Midway Community Services District has entered into a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) involving the City of Dos Palos; Merced County; the North Dos Palos Water District; and the South Dos Palos County Water District. Due to local groundwater quality limitations, the JPA now obtains surface water from the California Aqueduct. The water is provided through a surface delivery system using Central California Irrigation District canals, and is treated at a plant owned by the JPA and operated under contract with a private firm. The district has an allotment of capacity from the system as part of the JPA agreement, but landowners within the district boundary must receive approval directly from the district for water connections. Monthly billing is paid directly to the City of Dos Palos, which in turn reimburses the firm operating and maintaining the treatment plant and water distribution system. Any funds remaining are returned to the Midway Community Services District. 56 54 Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, October 1984. 55 Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, October 1984. 56 Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration, Merced County and Fresno County Minor Boundary Change, January 2007. 29 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Midway Comunity Services District Sphere of Influence LINDEN K N OLIVE A R F BLOSSOM ALMOND VALERIA OAK A O N D S D E R N G T N O L M A XI Y E E L R CHRISTIAN 3 3 SHAIN H X TJ SI K H T N LE V E S H N T F FI P M Q O ² LAFCO RESOLUTION 1059 ON 10/25/1984 NREFDER T T R E E N R N N E N L FI O B E L D C H MARGUERITE A O T O D MI T C K N M E S N E R A L A R F R E N PALO ALTO E G A U M E R O L GI NI H A R C VI WILLOW E E G C T M U N L A W STEARMAN W O SKINNER O D GLOBE HI R D R T H T U O F H T O U R H T H F G EI H T N AQUA VISTA O N NI T G N XI E L KNARF Figure 8 L O R ALMOND A C Y E R B U S A L D R L M T O N Y N O H 3 3 FI R N T E P A G ET E D XI N R FI F VALER C IAIDA R E HI L TSAN MIDWAY TA FE SHAIN O ML P N H T N E V E S 0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet of Merced County 30 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Wastewater As of 1984, the District’s sewage was handled by the City of Dos Palos’ sewage treatment plant. Approximately 90,000 gallons per day of the plant’s 400,000 gallons per day capacity were allocated to the Midway District. The number of gallons per day allocated to the Midway District is an estimate based on the District’s population and the assumption that 150 gallons of wastewater are generated per person per day. Dos Palos’ wastewater treatment plant, treated approximately 300,000 gallons of wastewater per day which is about 75 percent of the plant’s 400,000 gallon per day capacity.57 The District has entered into a JPA involving the City of Dos Palos and South Dos Palos County Water District for the provision of sewer service within the districtʹs boundary. The JPA‐funded sewer plant provides wastewater treatment, and a private firm is retained by the JPA to operate and maintain the treatment plant and sewer collection lines within the district territory. The District has an allotment of connections for remaining capacity, and landowners within the district boundary must receive approval directly from the District for connections. All monthly billing is paid to the City of Dos Palos. Through the JPA, the City reimburses the private firm for operations and maintenance. Any remaining funds are returned to the Midway Community Services District. DEMAND AND CAPACITY In 1984, it was reported that based on the community’s slow rate of population growth the District’s sewer and water facilities were adequate.58 57 Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, October 1984. 58 Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, October 1984. 31 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 NORTH DOS PALOS WATER DISTRICT The North Dos Palos Water District Sphere Report, which was issued in 1984, provides the primary information available on the North Dos Palos Water District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The North Dos Palos Water District was established in 1976 in order to provide domestic water service to residences, businesses, and industries within the District. In 1984, approximately 100 people lived in the District. It consisted of approximately 143 acres surrounding the intersection of Elgin (Highway 33) and Carmellia Avenue, immediately north of the City of Dos Palos. Land use within the District is mainly agricultural, and residents are scattered along the two roads which traverse the District. The boundaries of the North Palos Water District are identified in Figure 9. It is governed by a 5‐ member Board of Directors, which is elected by residents within the District.59 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES The District’s Sphere Report reports that the District obtains its water from the City of Dos Palos and serves approximately 41 water hookups. In 1984, the District’s water supply was considered adequate, although the water quality was not considered satisfactory.60 For the provision of potable water supplies, the North Dos Palos Water District has entered into a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) agreement involving the City of Dos Palos; Merced County; the Midway Community Services District; and the South Dos Palos County Water District. Due to local groundwater quality limitations, the JPA now obtains surface water from the California Aqueduct. The water is provided through a surface delivery system using Central California Irrigation District canals, and is treated at a plant owned by the JPA and operated under contract with a private firm. The district has an allotment of capacity from the system as part of the JPA agreement, but landowners within the district boundary must receive approval directly from the district for water connections. Monthly billing is paid directly to the City of Dos Palos which in turn reimburses the firm operating and maintaining the treatment plant and water distribution system. Any funds remaining are returned to the North Dos Palos Water District. 61 59 North Dos Palos Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 60 Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, October 1984. 61 Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration, Merced County and Fresno County Minor Boundary Change, January 2007. 32 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc North Dos Palos Water District Sphere of Influnce 3 3 NORTH DOS PALOS WATER DISTRICT M L A P ² LAFCO RESOLUTION 1062 ON 10/24/1984 RETNEC CARMELLIA IONE R FI LORAINE E T A G N N T O A E R LINDEN K NI L D N O N R O OLIVER A O G OLIVE R F F LI A C BLOSSOM S D L E D O N R N R A Y E N E C PALO ALTO O R U E L L IDA VALERIA OAK A R E D A M CHRISTIAN NREFDER CORNELIA GEORGE SHARON SANTOS MERCED THOMAS R E N N O C ALMOND A L R E N E G L E N L B N O A Y R M L A C T U N L A W STEARMAN NOSLLIW STOCKING S O L A P S O D DORA E M U H WILLOW MCKENZIE GEIS MCINTYRE SKINNER SIRRAH R E V E D IN N O Y G L A V E TI E N A T S T E N N L E E L N B E T O D D IK S R E MI T C H ALMOND Y H T A K A NI GI R VI MCGINTY PLUM COLE MCCURDY W O O D KNARF Figure 9 CARMELLIA N N Y L OLIVER R FI BLOSSOM ANDREWS L O Y A R O A A R R B R E Y EUCALYPTUS P A L M DI A N A C U N A N R I T O NORTH DOS PALOS H E GCARMELLIA T N S XI RR E L E D S FI T E L N O 3 EIDA N 3 C Y SAN R E TA FE ML Q 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County 33 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 DEMAND AND CAPACITY The North Dos Palos Water District is relatively small in size and population. The District is mostly rural and semirural in character with a low population density. Given these conditions, the District’s supply of water, which it obtained from the City of Dos Palos was considered adequate.62 62 North Dos Palos Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 34 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 PLANADA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Planada Community Services District (PCSD) was formed in 1967 and serves the community of Planada and a small number of locations outside the District, covering a total area of 924 acres (see Figure 10). It has a total service population of 5,500 people. It has a six‐person staff and a five‐member Board of Directors, which meets the second Tuesday of each month at 103 Live Oak Street in Planada.63 Total operating expenses for FY 2006‐2007 are $888,970. This includes $442,985 for water and $445,985 for sewer. Additional expenses include $27,229 in vehicle payments, $40,800 in long‐term debt payments, and $108,000 in reserve deposits, evenly divided between water and sewer reserves.64 Total loans and reserves amount to $176,029. Monthly water rates are $33 for ¾ inch to 1 inch service, $44 for 1.5 inch services, and $70 for 2 inch service; monthly sewer rates are $28.65 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water PCSD serves 1,227 water connections. Its production capacity is approximately 4.32 mgd. Average usage is around 1.1 million gallons per day and 400 million gallons per year.66 Domestic water is supplied to PCSD customers by six groundwater wells. Water is chlorinated, pumped into the water transmission system, and conveyed to residents through a pressurized water system.67 District facilities include six wells, six pressure tanks, and approximately 14 miles of water main. According to the District, existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand.68 Wastewater The District provides service to 1,411 sewer connections. Its wastewater treatment capacity totals 0.53 mgd; existing average daily wastewater flow is 0.50 mgd. 63 Interview with Martha Mayo, 13 July 2005. Planada CSD website, <http://www.planadacommunitysd.com/cgi‐bin/site/page.cgi> Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. 64 Planada Community Services District Annual Budget FY 2006‐2007. 65 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. 66 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. 67 Planada CSD website, <http://www.planadacommunitysd.com/cgi‐bin/site/page.cgi> 68 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. 35 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc PLANADA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT WY 140 H 140 HWY PLANADA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CHILDS R E HYDE L L MI GERARD TOEWS N A L MISSION A E H W G S A R N U T A B F S E N AI L P TTEVI N E D Y A H Y D O STANFORD C KRAFFT K C E B Y E KADOTA L R O M NOB BIGLER R E E A G T T HASKELL G U S MI L L S H U P P A TOPEKA N A D OLLEUGRA Figure 10 Planada Community Services District Sphere of Influence N N IW G P CHILDS A IC O C O G R E T D E O Z B KRAFFT MERCED TOEWS WY 140 H PLANADA S A N T A F E LEGRAND ² S R 9 9 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 1055B ON 1-28-93 36 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 District facilities include two lift stations and one treatment plant.69 The PCSD wastewater collection facility uses a gravity collection/main‐lift system to move sewage to the wastewater treatment plant, located to the southwest of the community of Planada.70 Although existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand, the District is presently processing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a proposed water treatment facility expansion. In addition to increasing capacity to 1.2 mgd, this facility is planned to include agricultural reuse of secondary effluent.71 DEMAND AND CAPACITY The Planada Community Plan, finalized in December 2003, anticipates a buildout population of 8,500, based on U.S. Census data showing average annual growth of 3.9 percent between 1980 and 2000. Although the time period of the Plan is through 2015, it is noted that the population could reach 8,500 before that point depending on the local economy and housing market.72 The District reports that additional water wells, wastewater treatment capacity, and staff will be needed to meet projected future demand. As noted, the District is currently preparing an EIR for the proposed wastewater treatment facility expansion. This facility will have a capacity of 1.2 mgd, sufficient to meet immediate development needs as well as long‐term demand associated with buildout of the Planada Community Plan. In addition, water and sewer connection fees have recently been substantially increased to meet anticipated capital improvement costs. (In some cases, developers have prepaid their sewer fees to fund the District’s initial purchase of land for the wastewater treatment plant expansion.) Developers may also be required to dedicate community well sites in conjunction with new development.73 The Planada Community Plan also cites grant funds as a potential source of funding for capacity expansion and related studies; Community Development Block Grant funds were used in 2000 to complete a wastewater system study on current capacity, current usage, and planned capacity.74 69 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. 70 Planada CSD website, <http://www.planadacommunitysd.com/cgi‐bin/site/page.cgi> 71 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. Interview with Lee Fremming, 21 Sep. 2006. 72 Planada Community Plan, Dec. 2003, 2‐2. 73 Personal communication from Lee Fremming, 4 Sep. 2006. Interview with Lee Fremming, 21 Sep. 2006. 74 Planada Community Plan, Dec. 2003, 7‐1. 37 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The Santa Nella County Water District (SNCWD) MSR was completed by EPS as part of a separate process (approved March 23, 2006) and is reproduced here. This MSR is presented in a somewhat unique format because the District’s service area overlaps with several other special districts. The next section describes these districts and outlines how the proposed reorganization will affect each of them. DISTRICT BOUNDARY OVERLAP The District currently provides commercial and residential water and wastewater service in the Santa Nella area. Most of the property within the Santa Nella Community Specific Plan area is also located within the District. However, some of the Plan area is outside the boundaries of the District and will require expansion of the SOI and annexation to receive District services. Figure 11 identifies the current boundaries of the District. A majority of the Community Plan area is also within the boundaries of the San Luis Water District, a California Water District (“San Luis”). There is a significant overlap of approximately 1,800 acres between the boundaries of the two districts. San Luis was formed in 1951. It is governed by a five‐member Board of Directors and has a staff of 14 full‐time employees and one part‐time employee. It is legally authorized to provide service to an area of 66,449 acres, though not all of this land is actually served by San Luis facilities. The majority of San Luis’ current population is also within the Santa Nella Water District’s service area; San Luis estimates that it has fewer than 600 current residents who do not live within the Santa Nella District. San Luis has several hundred agricultural connections. Excluding connections served through the District, it has fewer than 100 municipal water connections, though this number is expected to increase over the next several years as evidenced by the 402 new connections pending in the Fox Hills community. It has one water treatment facility serving the San Luis Hills subdivision and adjacent commercial development. A second treatment plant is under construction and will come on line when required by new development of the Fox Hills community. San Luis obtains its water supply through a contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation. The water is diverted by San Luis from the Delta Mendota Canal and the San Luis Canal. San Luis sells a portion of its raw water supply to SNCWD for use within that portion of the District that is also within San Luis. The District operates the water treatment and distribution system which turns this raw water into the potable water serving residents and businesses in Santa Nella. 38 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Figure 11 Santa Nella County Water District Sphere of influence FAHEY H T R O W T HI W MCCABE 3 A 3 Z A L P 3 3 SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT PLUTO HENRY MILLER W BAYVIE M E T I-5 O T C E T MA S O L W E C N E L S A UI N T L N S A O E L E D GUSTINE SANTANELLAVOLTA LOS BANOS E L A 3 D 3 L L HI ² 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 1063 ON 10/25/84 39 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 San Luis and the District recognize that the overlap in the boundaries and service areas of the two Districts is unnecessary and creates administrative difficulties and additional expenses that will be exacerbated as the Plan area urbanizes. Therefore, San Luis and the District have agreed to carry out a reorganization of the two public districts pursuant to the Reorganization Act so that all land within the Plan area will be within the boundaries of the District and no land within the Plan area will be within San Luis. In addition, San Luis will assign that portion of its water supply contract to the District that is related to the lands being detached from San Luis. The District, thereafter, will directly purchase water from the Bureau of Reclamation rather than through San Luis and San Luis will no longer have any role or obligation in the provision of water to lands within the District. Before this reorganization can take all of the Specific Plan area must be included within the District’s SOI. The updated Santa Nella Community Plan boundary also includes territory within the New Del Puerto Water District (“Del Puerto”) and the Central California Irrigation District (CCID). Del Puerto was formed in 1994 through the consolidation of 11 water districts. It encompasses an unincorporated area of around 45,000 acres, located primarily in western Stanislaus County, with some additional territory in Merced and San Joaquin Counties. Under a contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Del Puerto provides over 140,000 acre‐feet of water annually to 175 retail customers who purchase irrigation water for agricultural purposes. The district is governed by a seven‐member Board of Directors and has four full‐time employees. Portions of Del Puerto are located within the City of Patterson’s SOI, resulting in ongoing detachments as territory is annexed to the City.75 The SNCWD currently serves some development within Del Puerto at the northern corner of the Community Planning area, but relies on its own well water as the raw water supply. The portion of Del Puerto that falls within the Santa Nella Specific Plan area has been in the SNCWD SOI since 1984. Therefore, the sphere modification currently being sought will not impact the Del Puerto SOI. However, shortly after the Santa Nella SOI has been amended to include all of the Specific Plan area, a reorganization proposal is expected to be submitted to Merced County LAFCO to detach from Del Puerto the approximately 43 acres within the Specific Plan area and to annex that land to the District. An SOI modification will be proposed at that time. It is anticipated that this future reorganization will not have any impact on the water supply currently available to water users in Del Puerto. The owners of the detached land will not seek to have their allocated share of the Del Puerto water transferred to the District. That water supply will stay with Del Puerto and will, therefore, in a very small way, enhance the water supply for the lands remaining in Del Puerto. The owners of the 75 Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Commission, Resolution No. 2003‐22, LAFCO Service Review – New Del Puerto Water District. 40 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Del Puerto land to be annexed to Santa Nella will need to demonstrate that additional water can be provided to Santa Nella to support its anticipated needs. The CCID provides agricultural irrigation water within a service area of 47,949 acres. When the district has excess water available, it also provides water to 14,584 acres of “Class II ground” located outside its boundaries. Ongoing annexations by surrounding cities such as Los Banos, Mendota, Dos Palos, Gustine, and Newman have resulted in detachments from the CCID.76 The Santa Nella County Water District does not presently serve any land within the CCID boundary. The 180 acres of CCID land that is within the Specific Plan area is not currently within the District’s SOI. Therefore, the expansion of the District’s SOI will include those lands within the Specific Plan area that are currently within CCID, similar to the San Luis and Del Puerto lands. Once the District’s SOI has been amended, a second set of actions can occur. A reorganization proposal is expected to be submitted to Merced County LAFCO to detach all lands within the Specific Plan area that are also within CCID and to annex these lands to the District. The owners of the land detached from CCID will not seek to have their allocated share of CCID water transferred to the District. That water supply will stay with CCID and, therefore, will, in a very small way, enhance the water supply available to the lands remaining in CCID. The water supply needed to support development of the land detached from CCID will be supplied by water that has already been purchased by the owners of that land from the Mercy Springs Water District in Fresno County. The Mercy Springs supply will be transferred to the District through a partial assignment of the Mercy Springs’ U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Contract. That assignment will be carried out through a separate transaction from the partial assignment of the San Luis contract to the District. PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY This MSR is being prepared to facilitate amendment of the District’s SOI, preparatory to completing the reorganizations described above. The District’s SOI boundary was approved by Merced County LAFCO Resolution No. 1063 on October 25, 1984. It is not required that the San Luis and CCID SOIs be amended prior to the reorganizations described. Once the SOI boundaries of the District are expanded San Luis and the District intend to complete their reorganization to facilitate the Plan’s goal that the District act as the retail water and wastewater provider to the Plan area. The District will also need to receive a partial assignment of the existing contract with the Bureau of Reclamation to receive this federal water supply directly. The Del Puerto/District and CCID/District reorganizations will be the subjects of separate LAFCO applications. 76 Interviews with Maria Segueira and Chris White, CCID, 15 Aug. 2005. 41 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 These reorganizations are intended to enable a single local governmental agency (the District) to carry out a water acquisition plan and implement a water and wastewater infrastructure plan, both of which are prerequisites to build‐out of the Specific Plan area. The current situation, with the Specific Plan lands being located within four overlapping agencies hampers area‐wide planning, is cumbersome, and may lead to delays and significant governmental inefficiencies. The District retained Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) to develop the MSR for the District. EPS met with District staff and obtained documents detailing the District’s current resource policies, as well as future plans. EPS has also obtained relevant information directly from San Luis, Del Puerto, and CCID, and communicated with Merced County LAFCO staff regarding the proposed reorganization. EPS used the information obtained from documents and interviews to write this report, which makes the nine determinations required by law for each provider. The report has been submitted to the District, San Luis, and LAFCO for their review. Comments from the District, San Luis, and LAFCO have been incorporated into the report. From the standpoint of this MSR, the facilities and the past and future operations of the District will be emphasized. It is the only one of the four local water agencies whose municipal service operations will be significantly impacted through the SOI amendments and subsequent reorganizations. Del Puerto and CCID do not currently provide any municipal services. That status will remain unchanged after the reorganizations are completed. San Luis does propose to increase its municipal services, but only in areas that are unaffected by the proposed reorganization. From the San Luis perspective, the proposed reorganization is being proposed to implement a decision made by Merced County over six years ago that the Santa Nella County Water District should provide retail water and wastewater service to the Santa Nella Specific Plan area. The reorganization will not affect San Luis’ plans to provide municipal services to the Fox Hills and Villages of Laguna San Luis areas that are within the San Luis boundaries and outside the District boundaries. San Luis would provide retail services to the lands it will detach if those lands were developed and met the requirements of San Luis. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The District was formed in 1965 pursuant to California Water Code Section 30000, et seq., and is empowered to provide services including water and wastewater treatment services. It is governed by a five‐member Board of Directors elected by the registered voters residing within the District boundaries. The Board meets the second Thursday of each month at 12931 South Highway 33, Santa Nella. It has a staff of four operators and two office employees. The District’s day‐to‐day operations are carried out by a District Manager and staff that operate and maintain its existing water and wastewater facilities. Outside contractors provide legal and engineering services when needed.77 77 Personal Communication from District Manager Danny Neville, 9 May 2005. 42 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 District revenues for FY 2004‐2005 were approximately $659,000; total budgeted expenditures were $638,000. The District’s total long‐term debt amounts to approximately $5 million.78 Standard water rates for Commercial Metered services range from $34 for the first 2,000 cubic feet of usage and $1.69 per 100 cubic feet thereafter (for a 5/8” to 1” meter) to $304 for the first 18,000 cubic feet and $1.69 per 100 cubic feet thereafter (for a meter of 3” or greater). Monthly charges for Domestic Metered services are $2.07 per actual 100 cubic feet of use registered on the water meter.79 Domestic services with 5/8” to 1” meters are assessed a $10 monthly flat rate for sewer service. Commercial services with meters larger than 1” are charged $25 for the first 1,000 cubic feet of water use and $2.50 per 100 cubic feet thereafter.80 The SNCWD has Master Plans for both its sewer and water systems. Originally written in 1992, these plans were revised in 1995. In June 2005, the District’s consulting engineer completed pre‐design studies following the recommendations of these Master Plans and modifying them as necessary. These pre‐design studies are the first step towards providing the water and wastewater expansion infrastructure needs of the Santa Nella Specific Plan area. INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES AND SERVICES The District has a current service area of 2,466 acres and a proposed service area of 2,560 acres. Its current service area population is estimated at 1,200. It provides water and sewer services to a total of 497 connections, distributed as follows: 24 commercial, 18 irrigation, 159 metered residential, and 296 unmetered residential.81 Water The District’s water production and distribution facilities include the San Luis Canal Water Treatment Plant (WTP). This plant began operation in 1987 and is designed to accommodate 1.2 mgd maximum flow rate, with a peak capacity of 1.8 mgd. Its major components include a raw water pump station, two treatment units, a filtered water pump station and storage tank, two backwash water reclamation basins, and two sludge drying lagoons. Water is treated using a variety of processes, including chemical flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and chlorination.82 The community’s existing water distribution system is a loop system, with laterals serving a mobile home park, the highway commercial area north of Henry Miller Road, and the single‐family 78 Ibid. 79 Water Service Schedule of Rates and Charges. 80 Ibid. 81 Personal Communication from District Manager Danny Neville, 9 May 2005. 82 Santa Nella County Water District Master Water Plan, May 1995, 18. 43 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 subdivisions west of Highway 33.83 A low‐pressure water transmission pipeline carries water north from the WTP to a distribution point, where additional facilities include two surface water storage tanks and a booster pump station (built in 1988).84 The firm of Stoddard & Associates is currently planning the water infrastructure that will be necessary to serve the Santa Nella Community Plan. Based on the Pre‐Design Study completed in June 2005, this infrastructure will include water distribution improvements (pipelines, special structures such as the crossing of canals and highways, and the installation of two pressure‐reducing valves) with preliminary cost estimates of $9 million.85 A new surface water treatment plant is also planned, for which preliminary estimates of construction costs range from $15.5 million for a membrane plant to $21.1 million for a conventional plant.86 The funding for the facilities to serve the expected development and growth in Santa Nella is planned to come from the sale of bonds under the Mello‐Roos Community Facilities Act.87 The District has one groundwater well that provides additional water blended with its treated water used to service some of its commercial customers located along Highway 33, northeast of Interstate 5. This well provides water to lands that are either short on surface water supplies or are outside the permitted place of use for the San Luis Water District surface water supplies controlled by Santa Nella, including lands within the Del Puerto Water District. With the exception of this one well, the District’s surface water supply is provided by San Luis from San Luis’ Central Valley Project supply. As a parallel action with the proposed reorganization, the District will obtain a contract with the Bureau of Reclamation by assignment of a portion of the San Luis Water District’s Central Valley Project water service contract, through which it will directly receive the surface water it currently receives from San Luis. That contract will also provide the District with all of the pro rata contract water supply that San Luis currently provides to lands within the Plan area that are being detached from San Luis. The District’s maximum surface water supply upon completion of the reorganization and water service contract assignment will be approximately 4,664 acre‐feet, expected to come from San Luis Water District. This is a maximum allowance subject to annual reduction by the Bureau of Reclamation. Additional well water is pumped as necessary to meet the needs of the Del Puerto area, outside of the San Luis District. 83 Personal Communication from District Manager Danny Neville, 24 July 2005. 84 Santa Nella County Water District Master Water Plan, May 1995, 53 and Santa Nella Community Specific Plan, May 2000, 2‐7. 85 Santa Nella County Water District Water Distribution Facilities Pre‐Design Study, June 2005, 10 – 11. 86 Santa Nella County Water District Surface Water Treatment Plant Predesign Report, June 2005, 8‐5. 87 Santa Nella County Water District Wastewater Treatment Plant Predesign Draft Report, June 2005, 1‐2. 44 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SNCWD’s raw water supply totaled 144 million gallons in 2004; its treated water (metered from the distribution center) totaled 97 million gallons in that year. An additional 47 million gallons were pumped from the District well.88 Historically, the District has received, on average, around 75 percent of municipal water supply that is allocated by San Luis to the lands within the District. The percentage available is dependent on drought conditions and varies from year to year.89 In cooperation with the owners of land within the Specific Plan area, the District is currently carrying out investigations to provide the additional firm water supplies needed to serve the area at full buildout. The water supply enhancement projects being considered include firming of existing supplies through conjunctive use and water banking agreements, acquisition of the Mercy Springs Water District supplies, purchases of supplemental supplies from willing sellers within the area, and development of reclaimed wastewater. The District will be unable to complete these transactions and projects until the proposed reorganizations are complete and the District contracts directly with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for water from the Delta‐Mendota Canal of the Central Valley Project. The financing needed to secure these additional supplies will be provided by land owners within the Plan area, in a manner that does not increase otherwise prevailing water rates in the remainder of the District. Wastewater SNCWD’s wastewater collection and treatment facilities consist of an aerated stabilization pond, two combined facultative pond/effluent storage reservoirs, and a pasture irrigation area. Treated effluent is disposed to pasture land on the treatment site. (This land has not been seeded or cultivated; vegetation consists primarily of native grasses.) Stabilized sludge solids accumulate at the bottoms of the facility’s ponds and will eventually be removed (following completion of the planned new treatment plant and abandonment of the existing plant) to on‐site soils or an off‐site sanitary landfill.90 The existing facility has a total capacity of 400,000 gallons per day and treats approximately 300,000 gallons per day on average.91 The current wastewater treatment plant is located on the north side of the San Luis Wasteway (SLWW) opposite the mobile home park. The Bay View Lift Station, the main pumping facility for the existing system, is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of the SLWW and Highway 33. 88 Santa Nella County Water District Water Use Statistics. Some of the District’s raw water is lost in the treatment process, accounting for the difference between total raw water supply and treated/pumped water. 89 Personal Communication from District Manager Danny Neville, 24 July 2005. 90 Santa Nella County Water District Master Sewer Plan, March 1995, 14. 91 Personal Communication from District Manager Danny Neville, 9 May 2005. 45 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Stoddard & Associates is designing the additional infrastructure that will be required for development planned in the Santa Nella Specific Plan. This infrastructure will include an expanded collection system with inverted siphons to be used at the Delta Mendota Canal and the SLWW crossings. In addition, the installation of reclaimed water pipelines (to be expanded as Santa Nella develops) will allow the community to dispose of approximately 1,500 acre‐feet of reclaimed water per year (1.3 mgd), offsetting the same amount of potable water demand. Preliminary cost estimates for improvements to the wastewater collection system and reclaimed water distribution system are $7.6 million and $4.0 million, respectively.92 A new wastewater treatment plant will also be necessary. Initial designs have been planned based on anticipated flows of 2.5 mgd average day flow and 6.25 mgd peak flow. Auxiliary facilities include a 2,400‐square foot administration building. Initial staffing requirements are anticipated to be nine employees. Preliminary cost estimates place construction costs at $26.86 million and annual O&M costs at $910,275. The funding for the capital facilities to serve the expected development and growth in Santa Nella are planned to come from the sale of bonds under the Mello‐Roos Community Facilities Act.93 DEMAND AND CAPACITY The Santa Nella Specific Plan accommodates significant growth, with 6,483 housing units, 18,940 residents, and 5.6 million square feet of nonresidential uses at plan buildout. This represents a major increase from the 1999 Santa Nella population, estimated at 800 residents living in 350 dwelling units.94 The area’s expected ultimate land uses will be 60 percent residential, of which 92 percent will be low‐density, 14 percent will be commercial, and 26 percent will be other uses such as schools and open space.95 At plan buildout, average day water demand is projected to be 4.28 mgd; projected maximum day demand is 9 mgd, and projected peak hour demand is 8,916 gallons per minute (gpm).96 Minimum storage recommended at buildout is approximately 4 million gallons.97 Water supply and water and wastewater infrastructure, described in the preceding sections, will be developed in phases as the area is developed. The Specific Plan projects that reclaimed water will meet approximately 17 percent of total projected water demand. The Specific Plan projected that wastewater flow will increase from 0.21 mgd in 2000 to 2.2 mgd by plan buildout, requiring sewage disposal 92 Santa Nella County Water District Sewage Collections Facilities Pre‐Design Study, June 2005. 93 Santa Nella County Water District Wastewater Treatment Plant Predesign Draft Report, June 2005. 94 Santa Nella Community Specific Plan, May 2000, 1‐3 and 2‐1. 95 Santa Nella County Water District Sewage Collection Facilities Pre‐Design Study, June 2005, 2. 96 Santa Nella County Water District Surface Water Treatment Plant Predesign Report, June 2005, ES‐1. 97 Santa Nella County Water District Surface Water Treatment Plant Predesign Report, June 2005, 2‐23. 46 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 facilities that can accommodate wastewater flows ten times larger than 2000 levels. The 2005 Pre‐Design Study updates projected demand to 2.5 mgd.98 Existing wastewater treatment and disposal facilities do not provide opportunities for expansion. As described above, a predesign study, including a list of potential treatment process alternatives, has been completed for a new wastewater treatment plant. The District will be serving as “lead agency” for an Environmental Impact Report being prepared on this proposed new plant. As with the water supply improvements, the wastewater system expansion to meet the needs of the Plan area will be financed in a manner that does not increase otherwise prevailing wastewater rates in the remainder of the District. 98 Santa Nella County Water District Sewage Collection Facilities Pre‐Design Study, June 2005, 5. 47 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SNELLING COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Snelling Community Services District (SCSD) was formed in 1974 and provides wastewater service only.99 It has a service area of approximately 0.75 square miles (480 acres) centered on the community of Snelling. The District’s boundaries are identified in Figure 12. Its service population is roughly 200 people. The District has a staff of 1.5 full‐time employees (0.5 bookkeeper and two 0.5 operators). Its five‐member Board of Directors holds meetings the second Monday of each month.100 The District has a FY 06‐07 operating expenditure budget of $69,300, including approximately $36,000 in funding for “future maintenance.” The District’s revenues come from wastewater user fees, as well as a small share of property taxes, rents and leases, and interest income.101 Monthly sewer rates vary widely depending on the type of customer. Single‐family residences pay $9.69 per unit per month, while commercial rates range from $4.28 per month for services to a Verizon store to $593 per month for services at the County’s Henderson Park.102 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Wastewater SCSD serves 115 sewer connections. Its wastewater treatment plant has a maximum capacity of 60,000 gpd. The District has established a policy that it will not exceed 75 percent of this maximum capacity (45,000 gpd) to ensure that the plant can continue to function during high spike periods or emergencies. Average usage is 31,000 gpd. In addition to the wastewater treatment plant, District facilities include piping and a 15‐ acre distribution pond for effluent discharge, of which 7 acres is considered usable. According to the District, existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand. 103 99 Water in the area is provided through private wells. 100 Interview with Gordon Gray, City of Merced Public Works Dept., 20 Sep. 2006. 101 Snelling Community Services District Rate History, June 30, 2006. (Snelling Community Services District Sewer Rate Study, July 2006.) 102 Snelling Community Services District Current Utility Rates, June 30, 2006. (Snelling Community Services District Sewer Rate Study, July 2006.) 103 Interview with Gordon Gray, City of Merced Public Works Dept., 20 Sep. 2006. Gordon Gray, Memo to John LeVan Re: Infrastructure Development – Snelling, 17 October 2002. 48 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Figure 12 Snelling Community Services District Sphere of Influence E G N A R G A L KEYES M O N T G O M E R Y T H IR SNELLING MERCED FALLS 59 D N E L L A ROBINSON L A G R OLSEN A N GS EN E FIELDLS L IN G KEYES Y R R E SNELLING F X ROBINSON O C S N YOUD E L L IN M A ² G O 5 9 L A PAL MERCED 0 0.5 1 2Miles of Merced County LAFCO RESOLUTION 1065 ON 9/27/1984 49 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 DEMAND AND CAPACITY Expansion of the SCSD wastewater treatment plant is limited on one side by rock piles left over from past dredging work and on the other side by a sluice that drains into the Merced River. Aside from a small number of new connections in infill areas within existing subdivisions, 35 hook‐ups at the perimeter of existing development represent the only potential growth in the District’s services.104 104 Interview with Gordon Gray, City of Merced Public Works Dept., 20 Sep. 2006. 50 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SOUTH DOS PALOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report issued in 1984 provides the only information available on the South Dos Palos County Water District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The South Dos Palos County Water District was established in 1957 to provide domestic water and sewage disposal services to the South Dos Palos community. The District included approximately 285 acres and encompassed the community of South Dos Palos, an unincorporated community located at the southern edge of Merced County. The boundaries of South Dos Palos Community Services District are identified in Figure 13. The District was governed by a 5‐member Board of Directors, which is elected at large by voters residing in the District.105 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water In 1984, the District obtained its water from the City of Dos Palos through the Midway Community Services District’s water system. South Dos Palos formerly had its own water shortage and delivery system, but the system was closed down due to poor water quality and maintenance. At this time, the water system served approximately 220 hookups. It was designed to accommodate up to 600 hookups, but the water distribution system did not provide enough pressure. In order to improve this, the District was negotiating for a Community Development Block Grant to improve its water system. The District had plans to upgrade its water system by looping its water lines and installing larger diameter water pipes.106 For the provision of potable water supplies, the South Dos Palos County Water District has entered into a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) agreement involving the City of Dos Palos; Merced County; the Midway Community Services District; and the North Dos Palos Water District. Due to local groundwater quality limitations, the JPA now obtains surface water from the California Aqueduct. The water is provided through a surface delivery system using Central California Irrigation District canals, and is treated at a plant owned by the JPA and operated by a private firm. The district has an allotment of capacity from the system as part of the JPA agreement, but landowners within the district boundary must receive approval directly from the district for water connections. Monthly billing is paid directly to the City of Dos Palos which in turn reimburses 105 South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 106 South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 51 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc South Dos Palos County Water District Figure 13 Sphere of Influence CHRISTIAN AVE E V A N V E O A G T S N L D XI O E N L Y E R GLOBE AVE SHAIN AVE T S T T HI R D O U R T H S T H S T K ST J S T F FI F SOUTH DOS PALOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT T T H S M L ST U R ST F O O ST T S H S T X T H S T N ST FI F T P S SI N T H T E Q ST S E V O ST H S T T N AQUA VISTA ST NI E E V V A A N S 3 3 IDA ST A V E SAN TA FE G R DXI N G T O E Y N O L D H W Y N L E R O T SOUTH DOS PALOS G N XI E L ² 0 495 990 1,980 Feet of Merced County LAFCO Res. No. 1060 10-25-84 52 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 the firm operating and maintaining the treatment plant and water distribution system. Any funds remaining are returned to the South Dos Palos County Water District. 107 Wastewater The District’s sewage treatment plant was originally constructed in 1960, and expanded in 1967. 108 Since the 1984 Sphere Report, the District has abandoned its sewage treatment plant and has joined into a JPA with the City of Dos Palos and the Midway Community Services District to receive sewage treatment from a plant operated by the City. The district has entered into a JPA involving the City of Dos Palos and the Midway Community Services District for the provision of sewer service within the districtʹs boundary. The JPA‐funded sewer plant provides wastewater treatment, and a private firm is retained by the JPA to operate and maintain the treatment plant and sewer collection lines within the district territory. The District has an allotment of connections for remaining capacity, and landowners within the district boundary must receive approval directly from the district for connections. All monthly billing is paid to the City of Dos Palos. Through the JPA, the City reimburses the private firm for operations and maintenance. Any remaining funds are returned to the South Dos Palos County Water District. DEMAND AND CAPACITY In 1984, it was reported that based on historic slow rates of population increase, the South Dos Palos County Water District was expected to have sufficient water and wastewater capacity to handle population increases.109 107 Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration, Merced County and Fresno County Minor Boundary Change, January 2007. 108 South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 109 South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report, October 1984. 53 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Formation of the Volta Community Services District, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the Volta Community Services District. GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Volta Community Services District was formed in 1989. The purpose of the District’s formation was to acquire a grant for a community water system and to provide a more predictable water supply. Prior to formation, ground water problems and a high water table in this vicinity limited the type of industrial and commercial development which was permitted.110 The application proposed that the District cover the central twelve square blocks of the Volta Specific Urban Development Plan. A map of these boundaries is shown in Figure 14. In 1988, there were approximately 30 potential existing residential and commercial connections within the proposed area, and the estimated population for this area was under 100. Additional connections which may occur should not exceed 9 without the addition of a community sewage system. It was proposed that the District be funded by services charges for water service and that the Board of Directors consist of five members.111 110 Executive Officer’s Report: Formation of the Volta Community Services District, November 1988. 111 Executive Officer’s Report: Formation of the Volta Community Services District, November 1988. 54 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Volta Community Services District Figure 14 Sphere of Influence IN G O M A R HENRY MILLER A T L O V EXCLUDED ING O M VOLTA AR HENRY MILLER AVE D R NVOLTA D T L R A LI R ING F L A L K A V E S T E O M AR G RD D G E R V O L T A L A D Y B R S A T L ² O V LOS BANOS HWY 152 0 490 980 1,960 Feet of Merced County 55 LAFCO Resolution No. 0437 12-7-88 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 WINTON WATER AND SANITARY DISTRICT GOVERNANCE AND OPERATIONS The Winton Water and Sanitary District (WWSD) was formed in 1952 and provides both water and sanitary services to the Winton area. The District’s boundaries are identified in Figure 15. Winton’s population was 8,990 based on the County Housing Element Data, but this figure is expected to show substantial growth in the next Census. The District is governed by a five‐member Board of Directors that meets the first and third Thursday of each month for its regular Board meeting, with a Maintenance Update meeting held on the second Thursday of each month. The meetings are held at the District office, 6591 N. Winton Way in Winton. District staff consists of four clerical and four maintenance personnel.112 Operating expenditures in FY 2006‐2007 total $598,073 for sanitary services and $381,273 for water services. Water expenditures include $40,220 in interest on long‐term debt.113 WWSD has sewer reserve funds of $1.5 million and $765,000 in water reserve funds.114 Water rates differ depending on customer. For a typical ¾” meter, multifamily units pay $10.95 for the first 1,000 cubic feet (cf) of use, $12.15 for 1,001 to 2,000 cf, $13.50 for 2,001 to 3,000 cf, $15.00 for 3,001 to 4,000 cf, $1.00 per 100 cf for 4,001 to 10,000 cf, $1.50 per 100 cf for 10,001 to 30,000 cf, and $2.00 per 100 cf for 30,001 cf and over. Single‐ family units and duplexes outside the district pay somewhat higher rates. Business, churches, and other public facilities pay $15.50 for the first 4,000 cf and between $1.00 and $2.00 per 100 cf thereafter. All users pay surcharge fees totaling $4.50. Sewer charges consist of a $29.00 flat per‐unit rate.115 INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Water The Winton Water and Sanitary District provides water services to 2,982 connections. Its production capacity is about 1,400 gallons per minute from each of its three wells or a total of 6.05 mgd. Daily average flow is 1.56 million gallons per day. Annual average usage is 569.28 million gallons. Facilities are considered adequate to meet current needs, though future growth will require additional infrastructure. 116 112 Interview with Brenda Wey, Winton Water and Sanitary District, 21 Sep. 2006. 113 Winton Water and Sanitary District, Water Budget FY 2006/2007 and Sanitary Budget FY 2006/2007. 114 Interview with Brenda Wey, Winton Water and Sanitary District, 30 Oct. 2006. 115 Winton Water and Sanitary District, Water Rates/Surcharges: Table A. 28 Sep 2006. 116 Personal Communication from Winton Water and Sanitary District, 28 July 2005. 56 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc OLIVE S E N O J A N O N MYRTLE D E N T WI E SI R U E S T N E WALNUT E G C A T T O C WINTON WATER AND SANITARY DISTRICT C IN D NI A T N U T YR S O E F H CRAWFORD LI C A C S S ALMONDE R S A P N Y TA C FE GERTRUDE CAMELLIA K E R N A VI D P R A H C R O T A A O NI K GI D A VI R FRUITLAND BELLEVUE FAY SPPE ARLENE R A E P TOKAY PAIGE EDEN DORIS MANOR LIBERTY H A E L W O B N AI R PALORA D O O W D E R SPRUCE A L M P BUREHC Winton Water and Sanitary District Figure 15 Sphere of Influence OLIVE A S R N MINNIES A L C T WI O L A O T AMANDA E BETH C H RI D Y X MEGHAN N E T H NI P E O N N Y MYRTLE E T T E A E D A N E E R A E R N E T R O PI E B R ROYALTY RI I F L HALL P A A B R E G N VI EGRETE ANTONIO FAIRLANE RUBI TOUCAN TOLUCA ZORARACHEL LINDSEY RIDGE HASTINGS Y E L E K LOUISE E R BRIDGET B IRVINE GOLDEN RULE A C NI BOBBIE O M REECE WADE N E E R L L E A C A A E C P K R O TI MI L Y K E R CRESSEY O B OREGON R L A EI L H FRUITL W AN IN D TON NE M P O L N U N O N P A R O S S T A C E Y M S C O T T ICHIGAN C E L E S TI A C H A B LI S H A R D O N N A Y M MI T A T IN A Z N A M L A R C H C U BIDWELL S ATWATER FRUITLAND KOEHN FIESTA MAGNOLIA FRANKLIN RAINS FALC ON L C R E S T W A T H E N FI F T H ² LOS ALTOS BRODALSKI L HI BELLEVUE CRESTVIEW E D A R A P S IX T H L IN D E N 0 0.25 0.5 1Miles LAFCO RESOLUTION 1053A ON 1/26/95 of Merced County 57 Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Wastewater The District provides wastewater collection services to 2,969 connections; wastewater is then transported to the City of Atwater Wastewater Treatment Plant for treatment. WWSD has a wastewater capacity of 1 mgd reserved in the Atwater Wastewater Treatment Plant and a the District’s actual sewer flow was .71 mgd in September 2006. As in the case of water, sewer facilities are adequate to meet current needs, but may not be adequate to serve anticipated future growth.117 DEMAND AND CAPACITY According to MCAG’s Merced County Population Forecast of March 2004, Winton is projected to grow from 8,832 in 2000 to 13,900 in 2030, for a total increase of 5,068 (1.9 percent annually).118 Significant housing growth is anticipated in the Winton area, with plans for 261 residential units pending at LAFCO and an additional 87 units likely to come up for approval in the near future. A new school planned in Winton will also require approximately 20 connections. The District’s existing water and sanitary facilities, staff, funding, and water sources are not expected to adequately meet demand associated with future development. Plans for one new well have already gone through the EIR and test well stages and a second well is in early planning. Potential expansion of wastewater service capacity will depend on the outcome of Atwater’s ongoing Sewer Master Plan. The District is also considering establishing its own wastewater treatment plant. Facilities expansion will be paid for through District reserve funds. Development fees may also be considered to help accommodate future growth.119 The Atwater Wastewater Treatment Plant has approximately 2 mgd of capacity remaining and Winton would be able to purchase some of this capacity if needed. The City of Atwater is also studying concepts for future plant expansion which may also provide capacity for Winton. 117 Personal Communication from Winton Water and Sanitary District, 28 July 2005. 118 MCAG Merced County Population Forecast 2000‐2030, March 2004. 119 Personal Communication from Winton Water and Sanitary District, 28 July 2005. Interview with Brenda Wey, Winton Water and Sanitary District, 21 Sep. 2006. 58 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc III. DETERMINATIONS EXPLANATION OF DETERMINATIONS The Cortese‐Knox‐Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 requires LAFCOs to make nine written determinations for municipal service providers. The following factors120 provide examples of how Merced LAFCO will fulfill the determination requirement. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies This determination refers to the adequacy of existing and planned public facilities in relation to how public services are, and will be, provided to citizens. Infrastructure can be evaluated in terms of capacity, condition, availability and quality. Growth and Population Projections Efficient provision of public services is linked to the ability of service providers to plan for future need. For example, a water purveyor must be prepared to supply water for existing and future levels of demand and also be able to determine where future demand will occur. Municipal service reviews will give LAFCO, affected agencies, and the public the means to examine both the existing and future need for public services and will evaluate whether projections for future growth and population patterns are integrated into an agency’s planning function. Financing Constraints and Opportunities LAFCO must weigh a community’s public service needs against the resources available to fund the services. Service reviews may also suggest innovations for contending with financing constraints, which may be of considerable value to numerous agencies. Cost Avoidance Opportunities The municipal service review will explore cost avoidance opportunities including, but not limited to, (1) eliminating duplicative services; (2) reducing high administration to operation cost ratios; (3) replacing outdated or deteriorating infrastructure and equipment; (4) reducing inventories of underutilized equipment, buildings, or facilities; (5) redrawing overlapping or inefficient service boundaries; (6) replacing inefficient purchasing or budgeting practices; (7) implementing economies of scale; and (8) increasing profitable outsourcing. 120 Excerpted from North County Inland Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update Study, San Diego LAFCO, September 2003. 59 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Opportunities for Rate Restructuring When applicable, the MSR will review varying agency rates, fees, taxes, charges, etc. within an agency and region to examine opportunities for rate restructuring without impairing the quality of service. Opportunities for Shared Facilities Public service costs may be reduced and service efficiencies increased, if service providers develop strategies for sharing resources. Sharing facilities and excess system capacity decreases duplicative efforts, may lower costs, and minimizes unnecessary resource consumption. Options for plans for future shared facilities and services will also be considered. Government Structure Options The MSR provides a tool to comprehensively study existing and future public service conditions and to evaluate organizational options for accommodating growth, preventing urban sprawl, and ensuring that critical services are efficiently and cost‐ effectively provided. LAFCO may examine efficiencies that could be gained through (1) functional reorganizations within existing agencies, (2) amending or updating SOIs, (3) annexations or detachments from cities or special districts, (4) formation of new special districts, (5) special district dissolutions, (6) mergers of special districts with cities, (7) establishment of subsidiary districts, or (8) any additional reorganization options found in Government Code § 56000 et. seq. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies Management efficiency refers to the effectiveness of internal and external characteristics of agencies to provide efficient, quality public services. Efficiently managed agencies consistently implement plans to improve service delivery, reduce waste, eliminate duplications of effort, contain costs, maintain qualified employees, build and maintain adequate contingency reserves, and encourage and maintain open dialogues with the public and other public and private agencies. The service review will evaluate management efficiency by analyzing agency functions, operations, and practices—as well as the agency’s ability to meet current and future service demands. Local Accountability and Governance Local accountability and governance refers to public agency decision making and operational and management processes that (1) include an accessible and accountable elected or appointed decision making body and agency staff; (2) encourage and value public participation; (3) disclose budgets, programs, and plans; (4) solicit public input when considering rate changes and work and infrastructure plans; and (5) evaluate outcomes of plans, programs, and operations, and disclose results to the public. 60 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 BALLICO COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Ballico Community Services District Formation, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the Ballico Community Services District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified, but a reserve existed at the time this MSR was adopted. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. The District has experienced ongoing difficulty maintaining the minimum required three individuals serving on the Board of Directors. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified, but discussions with the County Division of Environmental Health and County Board of Supervisors have been ongoing. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified, although the County has assisted district efforts to maintain a quorum on the Board of Directors. 61 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 CELESTE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies CCWD was formed to pay for sewer and water infrastructure on two residential streets. This infrastructure is adequate to meet demand. Growth and Population Projections CCWD includes two residential streets east of the City of Merced. No growth is anticipated within the District. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District’s payments on a general obligation bond are funded through a special tax, based on assessed value and set each year at a rate sufficient to pay bond debt for that year. The District also receives a share of property tax that accrues to its General Fund. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring The District’s payments on a general obligation bond are funded through a special tax, based on assessed value and set each year at a rate sufficient to pay bond debt for that year. The District also receives a share of property tax that accrues to its General Fund. Opportunities for Shared Facilities District finances are administered by the County Auditor’s office. Government Structure Options No changes in CCWD’s governance are pending or proposed. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The district does not provide services or bill customers. Administrative functions are provided by the County Auditor’s office. Local Accountability and Governance CCWD has no Board of Directors and does not provide services or bill customers. 62 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 COUNTRY CLUB COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Formation of the Country Club County Water District, which was issued in 1982, provides the only information available on the Country Club Water District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified. 63 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 DELHI COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies Water The water system infrastructure including the water mains and well sites that were in place in 2004 were not considered sufficient to serve future demand. In order to accommodate growth, the system required construction of four new wells and a grid of 12‐inch pipes spaced at about a ½ mile. Wastewater In 2004, system improvements required upgrades of existing sewer trunk lines, force mains, lift stations, and upgrades to the District’s wastewater treatment plant. Specifically, lift station upgrades that would increase the pumping capacity of stations 1, 4, and 5 were necessary. Also, three new lift stations, four new trunk lines, and a new force main needed to be constructed. Growth and Population Projections MCAG 2004 population projections estimate that Delhi will grow from 8,022 people in 2000 to 17,500 in 2020 (average annual growth of 4.0 percent) and to 21,300 by 2030 (average annual growth of 3.3 percent). Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. 64 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified. 65 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 FRANKLIN COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies FCWD operates a wastewater treatment plant and two lift stations. It is in the planning process to upgrade its plant and is preparing to install an additional regional lift station. District staff state that facilities are adequate to serve current demand; planned upgrades will help meet serve anticipated growth and may be paid for through development fees. Growth and Population Projections Recent MCAG population forecasts project that the Franklin Beachwood area will experience a population increase of approximately 2.4 percent annually between 2000 and 2010, and between 2000 and 2030, for a total population of 7,100 people by 2030. There are approximately 250 acres of prospective residential development waiting to be annexed to the District. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District’s total operating budget in FY 2006‐2007 is $910,000, including $8,500 in debt service. Reserves total $210,000. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring FCWD charges a flat monthly rate ranging from $19 to $23 depending on location. Once the cost of planned capital improvements has been determined, the District may establish development fees to cover the cost of upgrades. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No changes in FCWD’s governance are pending or proposed. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. Local Accountability and Governance FCWD has a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the second Monday of each month. 66 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 HILMAR COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies HCWD has both water and wastewater treatment and distribution infrastructure. The Community Plan currently being prepared for Hilmar anticipates that future growth will require the construction of two new wells and an additional storage tank, as well as expansion of the wastewater treatment facility. Capital facilities fees are currently in place to fund infrastructure required by new development. Growth and Population Projections MCAG projects that the Hilmar community will grow from 4,807 in 2000 to 9,500 in 2030, a total increase of nearly 4,700, or 3.3 percent annually. The District has prepared a facilities overview for the growth proposed in the County’s ongoing Community Plan update for Hilmar. The growth population considered in the facilities overview is a maximum of 12,000. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District’s total proposed operating expenses for FY 2006‐2007 are $911,000. Reserves total $2.3 million and come primarily from development fees. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring HCWD uses a two‐tiered rate system. Domestic water rates are $18.50 for the first 30,000 gallons, $1 per 1,000 gallons from 30,000 to 40,000 gallons, and $2 per 1,000 gallons thereafter, on a 30‐day billing cycle. Commercial rates are the same, except that any usage over 80,000 gallons is charged at a rate of $1.10 per 1,000 gallons. Sewer rates consist of a $17 flat fee for residential customers and a $17 per unit flat fee, plus $1.50 per 1,000 gallons of measured water in excess of 10,000 gallons for commercial customers. Capital facilities fees are charged to cover infrastructure required by new development and are updated annually. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No changes in FCWD’s governance are pending or proposed. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. 67 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Local Accountability and Governance HCWD has a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the first Tuesday of each month. 68 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 LE GRAND COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies LGCSD provides water from groundwater wells and maintains wastewater facilities including a lift station and a treatment plant. The District states that existing facilities are adequate to meet current demand. Two additional wells will be necessary to serve anticipated development in six subdivisions; it is expected that these wells, along with one to two possible lift stations, will be built by developers and dedicated to the District. Other facilities improvements may be paid for through developer fees. Growth and Population Projections According to MCAG’s March 2004 Population Forecast for Merced County, the population of the Le Grand area is projected to grow by 1.2 percent annually between 2000 and 2030, increasing from 1,760 to 2,400 during that period. The District has issued “can and will serve” commitments on 358 lots in a total of six subdivisions; development of these subdivisions would increase the demand for LGCSD services and require additional infrastructure. In addition, annexations to the District totaling 50 acres are currently being contemplated and could expand LGCSD’s service area. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District’s total operating expenses for FY 2006‐2007 are $349,425. The total operating expenses include $186,672 in the water fund and $162,753 in the sewer fund. Non‐operating expenses for sewer service include $19,000 in interest on long‐term debt. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring The District should consider metering if customers are currently unmetered to encourage conservation. Current rates are under review. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options Various annexations to the District are currently being contemplated. These include an annexation of 30 acres on the District’s west side, an annexation of 10 acres in support of a development proposal for “Yosemite Ranch Estates” on the southeast side of the District, and a “housekeeping” annexation of 10 acres acquired by the local high school and already accommodated by an amendment to the County’s Urban Growth Boundary for the area. These annexations may occur as part of a single process. 69 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. Local Accountability and Governance LGCSD has a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the first Thursday of each month. 70 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 MIDWAY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The Midway Community Services District Sphere Report, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the Midway Community Services District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities The District shares sewer and water facilities as part of a Joint Powers Authority with the City of Dos Palos, the North Dos Palos Water District, and South Dos Palos County Water District. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified. 71 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 NORTH DOS PALOS WATER DISTRICT The North Dos Palos Water District Sphere Report, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the North Dos Palos Water District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities The District shares water treatment and delivery services through a Joint Powers Authority with the City of Dos Palos, Midway Community Services District, and South Dos Palos County Water District. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified. 72 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 PLANADA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies Water is supplied to PCSD customers from five groundwater wells and is conveyed through a pressurized water system. Wastewater facilities include two lift stations, which use a gravity collection/main lift system to move sewage to the wastewater treatment plant. The District is currently in the CEQA phase of a proposal to expand the treatment facility and increase the capacity of the system. According to the Planada Community Plan, funding for capacity expansion will come from connection fees or the requirement by PCSD that large developments provide a new community well when necessary; the Community Plan also cites grant funds as a potential funding source. Growth and Population Projections The Planada Community Plan, finalized in December 2003, anticipates a buildout population of 8,500. Although the time period of the Community Plan is through 2015, the Plan text notes that the population could reach 8,500 before that point depending on the local economy and housing market. Financing Constraints and Opportunities Total operating expenses budgeted for FY 2006‐2007 are approximately $888,970. This includes $442,985 for water and $445,985 for sewer. PCSD has $108,000 in reserve deposits, which are evenly divided between water and sewer. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring The District’s rates are currently $33 per month for ¾ inch water service and $28 per month for sewer service. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No changes to the governance of PCSD are pending or proposed. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. 73 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Local Accountability and Governance PCSD has a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the second Tuesday of each month. 74 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SANTA NELLA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies The District will require specific new infrastructure to serve the development anticipated in the Santa Nella Community Plan. Completion of a reorganization to place all Specific Plan lands within its service area is required before such infrastructure can be implemented and development permitted to connect with District facilities. Stoddard & Associates is designing the additional infrastructure that will be required. At plan buildout, average day water demand is projected to be 4.28 mgd, projected maximum day demand is 9 mgd, and projected peak hour demand is 8,916 gpm. Growth and Population Projections As discussed above, the Santa Nella Community Plan is expected to bring significant growth, including approximately 6,500 residential units and over 5 million square feet of nonresidential development. This growth will be served by the planned infrastructure. The time frame anticipated in the Community Specific Plan assumes an approximate 20‐ year period to reach buildout of the Plan. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District obtains funds for water operations and maintenance through rates set annually. Currently the District and developers are working on financing mechanisms for the required infrastructure, which will likely include a combination of special tax assessments to fund bonds and connection charges. This information will be available prior to processing individual annexations into the District. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No opportunities for cost avoidance have been identified at this time. However, the proposed reorganizations may reduce the overhead costs created by the existence of overlapping local water agencies and will ensure that one entity will be capable of planning, owning and operating all water and wastewater facilities needed to serve the Santa Nella Specific Plan area. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring The District’s payment schedule is currently single‐tiered. It should consider adjusting the schedule to one that is multi‐tiered in order to encourage water conservation. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for Shared Facilities have been identified at this time. The MSR recommends that the District take over full supply of the water needed to serve growth outlined in the Santa Nella Community Specific Plan. 75 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Government Structure Options The District and the San Luis Water District have agreed to reorganize the two public districts pursuant to the Reorganization Act so that all land within the Santa Nella Community Plan area will be within the boundaries of Santa Nella and no land within the Plan area will be within San Luis. To implement the reorganization, the District will also need to get a federal contract with the Bureau of Reclamation. Some additional annexations and detachments will occur to avoid the creation of islands and to make other minor changes in the agencies’ boundaries. In addition, Del Puerto and CCID lands that are within the Specific Plan area will be detached from Del Puerto and CCID and annexed to the District. Water for these areas will be provided by water from the Mercy Springs Water District and supplemental supplies acquired by the District. The reorganization will not affect either Del Puerto’s or CCID’s existing water supply, or their operations as agricultural water purveyors. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No changes to the management of the District are pending or proposed. Local Accountability and Governance The District is governed by an elected board, with staggered terms. No changes to the accountability or governance of the District are pending or proposed. 76 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SNELLING COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies District facilities include one wastewater treatment plant with a maximum capacity of 60,000 gpd, as well as a distribution pond for effluent discharge. Expansion of this treatment plant is limited by the surrounding geography. Growth and Population Projections Aside from new connections in infill areas within existing subdivisions, 35 hook‐ups at the perimeter of existing development represent the only growth anticipated by the District. Financing Constraints and Opportunities The District has a FY 06‐07 operating expenditure budget of $69,300, including approximately $36,000 in funding for “future maintenance.” Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring Monthly sewer rates vary widely depending on the type of customer. Single‐family residences pay $9.69 per unit per month, while commercial rates range from $4.28 per month to $593 per month. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No changes to governance are pending or proposed. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. Local Accountability and Governance The District is governed by a 5‐member Board of Directors that holds meetings the second Monday of each month. 77 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 SOUTH DOS PALOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT The South Dos Palos County Water District Sphere Report issued in 1984 provides the only information available on the South Dos Palos County Water District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities The District shares sewer and water facilities as part of a Joint Powers Authority with the City of Dos Palos, Midway Community Services District, and North Dos Palos Water District. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified. 78 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 VOLTA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT The LAFCO Executive Officers Report regarding the Formation of the Volta Community Services District, which was issued in 1984, provides the only information available on the Volta Community Services District. Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies No infrastructure needs or deficiencies have been identified. Growth and Population Projections Insufficient information to project district growth. Financing Constraints and Opportunities No opportunities have been identified. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring No opportunities for rate restructuring have been identified. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No opportunities to improve government structure have been identified. Evaluation of Management Efficiencies No opportunities to improve management efficiency have been identified. Local Accountability and Governance No opportunities to improve local accountability and governance have been identified, although the County has assisted in efforts to maintain a quorum on the District’s Board of Directors. 79 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 WINTON WATER AND SANITARY DISTRICT Infrastructure Needs and Deficiencies WWSD has three wells, from which it provides water services to 2,798 connections. It provides wastewater services to approximately the same number. According to District staff, the District’s existing water and sanitary facilities, staff, funding, and water sources are adequate to meet current demand but are not expected to adequately meet demand associated with future development. Plans for one new well have already gone through the EIR and test well stages, and a second well is in early planning. In the long term, the District hopes to eventually establish its own wastewater treatment plant. Facilities expansion will be paid for through District reserve funds and development fees. Growth and Population Projections According to MCAG’s Merced County Population Forecast of March 2004, Winton is projected to grow from 8,832 in 2000 to 13,900 in 2030, for a total increase of 5,068 (1.9 percent annually). Significant housing growth is anticipated in the Winton area, with plans for 261 residential units pending at LAFCO and an additional 87 units likely to come up for approval in the near future. A new school planned in Winton will also require approximately 20 connections. Financing Constraints and Opportunities Operating expenditures in FY 2006‐2007 total approximately $598,073 for sanitary services and $381,273 for water services. WWSD has sewer reserve funds of $1.5 million and $765,000 in water reserve funds. Cost Avoidance Opportunities No cost avoidance opportunities have been identified. Opportunities for Rate Restructuring Water rates differ depending on customer type. For a typical ¾” meter, multifamily units pay $10.95 for the first 1,000 cubic feet (cf) of use, $12.15 for 1,001 to 2,000 cf, $13.50 for 2,001 to 3,000 cf, $15.00 for 3,001 to 4,000 cf, $1.00 per 100 cf for 4,001 to 10,000 cf, $1.50 per 100 cf for 10,001 to 30,000 cf, and $2.00 per 100 cf for 30,001 cf and over. Sewer charges consist of a $29.00 flat per‐unit rate. Opportunities for Shared Facilities No opportunities for shared facilities have been identified. Government Structure Options No changes to Winton’s governance are pending or proposed. 80 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc Final Report Water and Sewer Service Providers Municipal Service Review As Approved by LAFCO May 24, 2007 Evaluation of Management Efficiencies The District appears to operate efficiently. Local Accountability and Governance WWSD is governed by a five‐member Board of Directors that holds public meetings on the first and third Thursday of each month, with a Maintenance Update meeting held on the second Thursday of each month. 81 P:\15000s\15029mercedlafco\Report\15029_FinalRpt8.doc