Where's the cuts?
Remember last month when the sewer bill was increased to $72 rather than $85? We were told that staff and consultants had really worked hard to cut costs and save that extra $13 a month.
If only...
Sorry, but there were no cuts or cost savings. Here's an analysis of the new revised numbers. The items that were removed from the expenses were the line items for new sewer plant operations. The new sewer plant won't be online for a year so those expenses weren't needed anyway.
The only actual budget reduction was the amount for the delinquency allowance. There was an anticipation of about $257,000 expensed due to non-payment of sewer bills. Now that that new ordinace requires landlords to put the water/sewer bill in their name, the strategy is that if the tenants don't pay their bills, the City can put a lien on the landlord. As a landlord myself, I think it's a bad idea since you can't control how much the tenant uses. Anyway, that expense has been reduced to $51,500.
Actually, there was one increase in the proforma. Salaries - starting in 2010. The 4/4/07 proforma had an annual 3% increase in salaries built in. An update on 4/27/08 bumped it another 3.9%. The new proforma expenses include an additional 8.3% per year! So, in 2010 and at least through 2016, a big jump for a total of 15.5% per year.
Here's the comparision Chart
~Enjoy

15 Comments:
B O R I N G !
Come on Gayle,you and Tommy are smart people, can't you guys engage us in conversation? Maybe Tommy Boy is too much of a smarty pants for this blog or this town for that matter.
Shouldn't our volunteer SWAT Fireman be on paid leave until the investigation is over?
Sorry! I've been out of the office for the past three days. Tomorrow's not looking good either. Did you go to the workshop?
Yes I went to the meeting.Bert as usual looked adorable in his Pee Wee Herman suit.
Hi Gayle! Love the chart, a real eye opener. Everybody in town should see that mess.
GAIL--------------------------------------------------
WILL YOUR PROTEGE BRYAN SIPES BE YOUR RUNNING MATE THIS YEAR FOR C.COUNCIL?MANY INQUIRING MINDS WANT A ANSWER?
YOUR CHARTS ARE PHONEY.TRY BEING HONEST WITH US FOR A CHANGE.
@ anon 5:24, I almost didn't post your comment since you are violating my rules about personal comments. I'll be happy to address issues re: public works projects - but not what anyone wears or how they look or any of their personal business.
@ Dave, thank you.
@ ANON ALL CAPS, Geez, hasn't Brian told you a million times he's not running? Pay attention.
@ ANON ALL CAPS, Don't shoot the messenger. It's all factual data. Send me your email address and I will send you the actual proforma. If you don't like my numbers and conclusions you are welcome to do your own analysis and share it with us.
Hi Gayle, thank you for the information but I have to admit, I got a little lost with all the numbers and so on. What I got out of this was that the city is trying to make it seem as if they are cutting costs, but at the same time, they are just making adjustments to expenses that weren't needed in the first place. Is that correct? Second, I thought that I remember on one of the council meetings that the sewer plant was being constructed ahead of schedule and under budget and that constructions costs were lower than expected because of the lower material costs. Is that correct and can any savings be attributed to this? Do development Impact fees and new homes being developed have anything to do with a lower sewer bill as well? Thanks Gayle.
@ Marc O, Yes, you are correct. The operating expenses were estimated conservatively to have a little room to go up or down.
As far as lower construction costs, I have seen no documentation in that regard. The last council meeting approved WRP change orders for $1.6MM. I don't know if the previous 6 change orders were reductions or increases. If you know what they were, let us know.
Gayle, Are we going to have to move the new gold plated sewer plant because the location is on the flood plain? Will the city have to have flood insurance on it?
What are the chances of the city winning their argument with FEMA?
Does it matter that LAFCO let Fillmore annex the land for the submersible business park? and what does this action mean in real life?
Oh come on Gayle,whats wrong with my questions? Are you practicing ignoring people just in case you get elected?
@ anon 12:08 I don't think the sewer plant will be moved at this point. As far as the insurance, I'm not sure if the City or American Water wil have to provide insurance.
As far as the city winning it's argument with FEMA, the study will be data-based with some corrections to the original study, such as the number of piers on the bridge, etc. The hydrology data that I read shows that from '31 to '69 there were two events over 60,000 cfs. From '69 to '05 there were seven events. So incorporating the last twenty years of data shows a more significant impact than just using the 70 year history.
At the Watershed Protection workshop last week, I heard that the increased flows from the Day fire deforestation and creek sedimentation were not included in the draft data. So, it is possible that the flow rates could be even higher than the draft study.
So as far as the LAFCO approvals the city will just live with the risk at the business park.
thanks Gayle
Gayle, you mentioned the increased flows from the Day fire deforestation and creek sedimentation that were not included in the draft data. Just outside Independence last week the Mt. Whitney Fish Hatchery and 25 homes were destroyed by a mud/debris flow due to the Eastern Sierra fires last year. It was the second oldest hatchery in California. Maybe we shouldn't pray for rain.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home